EVALUATION OF TWO DISPERSIVE RIVER NILE DEPOSITS TREATED WITH LIME

AND GYPSUM FOR USE AS DAM CORE MATERIAL

Ahmed M. Shareef1 and Abd-Elkarim M. Zain2

1
Building and Road Research Centre-University of Khartoum
2
Building and Road Research Centre-University of Khartoum

Received Jan 2013, accepted after revision March 2013

( ML) (CL)
.
%4 %2 .
.
( ) .
( )
, ( )
.
ABSTRACT
This paper addresses the effects of lime and gypsum additives on the plasticity,
compaction, compressibility and shear strength characteristics of two River Nile
deposits namely ML and CL materials according to the USCS. The main geotechnical
aspects considered in the evaluation of the two candidate materials covered the
requirements of dam core material design related to the dispersion behaviour,
flexibility, workability and permeability. A comprehensive experimental program which
involved testing of compacted samples of the two soils in their natural conditions and
after treatment with 2% and 4% of lime and gypsum stabilizers was executed. An
overall effect of the addition of lime and gypsum on workability, compaction, shear
strength and compressibility of the two soil types, is studied and discussed as the basis
of this evaluation. Given the fact that the two chemicals are effective in reducing or
eliminating dispersivity of the two soils, it was concluded that the gypsum treated soils
appear to be favourable and advantageous for use as dam core material since they
proved to be flexible, more workable and less permeable compared to the lime treated
soils which are very rigid and less workable and more permeable.
Keywords:lime, gypsum, River Nile deposits (ML,CL), dam core material, plasticity,
compaction, compressibility, shear strength
1. INTRODUCTION such as dam cores, cut-off walls and are un-
Fine grained soils which include clays and evitably used as road sub-grades. Such soils
silts are generally considered as low-grade naturally possess low strength and are
construction materials in the field of civil highly compressible such that they might
engineering works but are often used in the fail or experience large settlements if
construction of water retaining structures subjected to excessive loads.

Sudan Engineering Society Journal, March 2013, Volume59; No.1 1

 EVALUATION OF TWO DISPERSIVE RIVER NILE DEPOSITS TREATED WITH LIME AND GYPSUM FOR USE AS DAM CORE MATERIAL
The geotechnical properties of fine grained
soils must be improved if they are to be
used as foundation soil to adequately
support engineering structures or to qualify
them to be used as a suitable construction
material for earth dams and road
embankment projects. Soil improvement in
its broadest sense is the alteration of any
property of a soil to enhance its engineering
performance. Several techniques and
methods have been developed for
improving the geotechnical properties and
thus the engineering performance of the
naturally fine grained soils such as surface
compaction, soil reinforcement, grouting
and chemical stabilization.
It has been reported in many previous
studies and research works that soil
stabilization by chemical admixtures
improves the shear strength and therefore
increases the bearing capacity, decreases
the compressibility and thus reduces the
total and differential settlements
anticipated under engineered structures,
reduce the plasticity of highly cohesive soils
and therefore improve the compaction and
workability to expedite construction when
used as earthworks fill materials. The
effectiveness of these additives depends on
the soil treated and the amount of additive
used.
When a chemical stabilizer is added to soil,
a number of chemical reactions take place
including cation exchange, flocculation,
aggregation and cementation [1]. These
reactions occur to some extent with all fine-
grained soils. Flocculation reduces plasticity,
swell potential and dispersivity, whereas the
cementation process increases the strength
of the soil. Several studies have been
undertaken in Sudan and elsewhere to
investigate the degree of lime stabilization
success in increasing the shear strength of
fine grained soils [2], [3],[4], and lime and
2 Sudan Engineering Society Journal,
gypsum for reducing dispersivity and
swelling and shrinkage of clays with high
plasticity [7] [8]. The findings drawn from
the results of these studies indicated that
lime stabilization could produce significant
increase in shear strength of clay soils
explained by gaining high soil cohesion with
curing time due the cementation process.
Little is known about the degree of
improvement that might be achieved in the
strength of inorganic fine grained soils
stabilized with gypsum; but compared to
lime the general consensus is that the
strength gain may not be that high. As a
result of extensive research work carried
out in India and several countries on
chemical stabilization of fine grained soils, it
has been established that all soils do not
respond favourably to lime-gypsum
treatment. Only reactive soils respond
favourably to lime-gypsum treatment to
form chemical compounds of well-
developed crystalline structures under
suitable sets of conditions [6].
This paper presents the results and the
main findings of a comprehensive research
project on the effects of lime and gypsum
addition on the shear strength,
compressibility and dispersivity of two
alluvial soils which were candidates for use
as core material for a major dam on the
River Nile in Northern Sudan. The soils in
their natural state proved to be dispersive
and lime and gypsum were found to be
effective stabilizers for eliminating the
dispersive behaviour of the two soils [5].
However, for the soils to be used as dam
core material other requirements should be
satisfied or achieved such as good strength,
flexibility and low water conductivity. This
paper attempts to study the effects of the
two stabilizers on the shear strength and
compressibility of the two soils and their
March 2013, Volume59; No.1
 Ahmed M. Elshareef and Abd-Elkarim M. Zain
effectiveness as potential stabilizers for
their intended use
2. EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
2.1 Soil Types, Sample Preparation and
Laboratory Testing
Two River Nile deposits of fine grained soil
types which include clay of low plasticity
(CL) and silt of low plasticity (ML) were
considered in this study. The deposits were
obtained from two sites in the vicinity of the
River Nile in Northern Sudan. The CL sample
was deposited in the upper terraces of the
Nile whereas the ML soil was deposited
within the flood plain of the Nile. The soils
are of the same origin, however the CL soil
has been subjected to severe heat and was
baked by the intense summer heat with day
temperature as high as 50 C, whereas the
ML soil experienced periodical wetting
during the flood season of the Nile.
Mineralogical examination has shown that
montmorillonite is the dominant clay type
for the two soils [9]. The two soils represent
the types of deposits often encountered
along the river Nile banks and terraces in
Northern Sudan.
Each of the natural soil sample type was
mixed with 2 and 4% lime based on the
sample dry mass. The mixed natural and
lime treated soil samples were then allowed
to cure before being subjected to laboratory
testing. The laboratory tests performed on
samples from the different soil materials in
their natural and lime treated conditions,
included soil classification tests, standard
compaction, one-dimensional consolidation
compressibility and shear strength tests
following the procedures recommended in
the BS 1377 (1990).
The compaction characteristics of the soil
samples were determined by the standard
Proctor (2.5 kg rammer) test procedure and
the tests were performed after allowing the
soil samples to cure for 24 hours' time.
Sudan Engineering Society Journal,
The compressibility was measured for
specimens compacted at optimum moisture
and allowed to cure for three days whereas
the shear tests were prepared at optimum
moisture and maximum dry density but
allowed to cure for seven days. One
dimensional consolidation tests were
performed in the oedometer in eight
pressuresteps applied on the submerged
compacted sample to a maximum pressure
equals 2240 KN/m2.
The shear strength of the natural and
treated compacted soil samples was
determined in the laboratory by the
consolidated undrained (CU) tri-axial
compression test method. The CU tests
were carried out in the tri-axial apparatus
on samples compacted at optimum
moisture content using standard Proctor
energy. The size of the soil specimens
tested was 76 mm in height and 38 mm in
diameter. The soil specimens were first
back-pressure saturated and subsequently
consolidated by increasing the cell pressure
and adjusting back pressure to give a
difference equals to the required effective
consolidation pressure. The specimens were
finally sheared in compression under lateral
effective confining (cell) pressures of 100,
200, 300 and 400kPa and the pore water
pressure, shear stresses and deformations
were recorded until failure of the test
specimen took place.
2.2 Laboratory Test Results
The classification and compaction test
results obtained for the CL and ML soils are
presented in their natural and lime treated
conditions and are summarized in Table 1.
The main objective of the consolidation
tests is to study the effects of lime and
gypsum on the flexibility/rigidity of the
treated samples. The stress strain
relationship is the best to give quantitative
assessment of rigidity. The constrained
March 2013, Volume59; No.1 3
 EVALUATION OF TWO DISPERSIVE RIVER NILE DEPOSITS TREATED WITH LIME AND GYPSUM FOR USE AS DAM CORE MATERIAL

modulus (Ec) is obtained from the determined for the untreated sample but
consolidation test data and is the ratio of there was a substantial reduction in its
the change in strain to the change in stress value when the lime content is raised to 4%.
(/) for a defined stress increment. The clay fraction of the natural sample
Increase in Ec implies increase in rigidity. dropped from 11% to 7% at 2% lime to
Figures 1&2 and Figures 3 & 4 show the traces only at 4 % of lime. The ML soil
computed Ec values for the untreated and samples mixed with 2 % and 4 % of lime
treated CL and ML soils, determined for four indicated significant reductionin the fines
pressure ranges, namely 0 to 280 KN/m2, content from the value determined for the
280 to 560 KN/m2, 560 to 1120 KN/m2 and untreated sample as well as a substantial
1120 to 2240 KN/m2.. reduction in the clay content upon
treatment. Thus, the treatment with lime
A concise summary of the effective stress
seems to have caused some degree of
shear parameters obtained from the CU tri-
aggregation of fine particles in the two
axial compression tests performed on the
different types of material.
untreated and treated samples of the CL
and ML soil types is presented in Table 2. The liquid limit (LL) of the CL and ML soil
types did not change significantly before
3.ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF
TEST RESULTS and after lime treatment but based on
3.1.Effect of Lime and gypsum on the plasticity index (PI) values, mixing the
Gradation, Index and Compaction samples with 2 and 4 % of lime rendered
Characteristics of Soil Samples the three soil materials non-plastic.
As may be noted from the test results The CL and ML samples mixed with 2% and
summarized in Table 1, the CL samples 4% gypsum did not show any
mixed with 2 % of lime indicated an increase noticeablechange in fines content.
in the fines content from the value
Table 1: Summary of classification and compaction test results for
the untreated and treated CL and ML soils with lime and gypsum
Soil CL ML
Type Nat. Nat. % gypsum
Sample Lime % Gypsum % Lime
Soil Soil
State
0 2% 4% 2 4 0 2% 4% 2 4
FC (%) 57 63 48 55 60 75 62 62 72 70
CC (%) 11 7 1 10 11 12 7 6 0 0
LL (%) 44 39 42 34 36 37 36 37 33 36
PI (%) 17 NP NP 7 7 12 NP NP 7 10
OMC(%) 21 26 30 21 21 21 25 28 22 22
MDD)kN/m3) 16.1 14.2 14.0 16.7 16.8 16.2 14.8 14.7 16.5 16.4

Table 2: Summary of effective shear strength parameters for

untreated and treated CL and ML soils with lime and gypsum
Soil Type ML CL
% Stabilizer 0 2 4 0 2 4
C( kPa) 12 157 158 35 174 210
CU Lime
(deg.) 36 45 46 33 46 47
CU C( kPa) 12 0 8 35 37 29
Gypsum (deg.) 36 35 35 33 35 37

4 Sudan Engineering Society Journal, March 2013, Volume59; No.1

 Ahmed M. Elshareef and Abd-Elkarim M. Zain
The clay content did not change for the CL
samples upon the addition of gypsum
whereas the clay content of the ML clay
decreased from 12% for the untreated
sample to none upon the addition of 2%
and 4% of gypsum (Table 1). The response
of the two soils to the addition of gypsum in
terms of their tendency to aggregate was
different. The ML soil showed aggregation
of the clay fraction whereas the CL soil did
not.
As for the effect of gypsum on Atterberg
limits, the liquid limit of the CL soil
appreciably decreased on the addition of
2% and 4% gypsum whereas the plastic limit
did not change. The plasticity index
decreased whereas from 17% to 7%. On the
other side the liquid limit and plasticity
index showed small reduction upon the
addition of gypsum to the ML soil.
The compaction tests performed on treated
samples after being cured for 24 hours
showed a significant effect of the addition
of lime on the standard Proctor compaction
characteristics of the two soil types
indicating increases in the optimum
moisture content (OMC) and reductions in
the values of the maximum dry density
(MDD). Thus, the addition of 2 and 4 % of
lime produced similar and comparable
compaction results for the two soils.
However, gypsum did not affect the
compaction parameters of the two soils.
The optimum moisture content and
maximum dry density values were almost
identical for the gypsum-treated and
untreated soils. It is evident from the
compaction test results that lime caused
aggregation of the treated soils showing up
in the considerable drop in the dry density
of the two treated soils. Gypsum did not
seem to affect the micro-structure of the
soil (no change in maximum dry density
Sudan Engineering Society Journal,
after addition of lime) and the minor
aggregation shown by the decrease in clay
content of the treated ML samples may be
considered as weak and has been broken by
the compaction energy.
3.2 Compressibility and Rigidity
The rigidity of the treated soils was assessed
by the change in the stress-strain
relationship and the computed Ec values
which were obtained from the results of the
one-dimensional consolidation tests for the
untreated and treated soil conditions. The
computed Ec values are graphically
demonstrated in Figures 1 to 4. It is evident
from the Figures that the untreated ML soil
measured higher Ec values compared to the
untreated CL soil.
The addition of 2% and 4% lime caused
considerable increase in the constrained
modulus Ec values as demonstrated in
Figure 1 and 2. The 2% lime content was
very effective in increasing the elastic
modulus of the two soils whereas the
additional effect caused by increasing lime
content to 4% was not noticeably
significant. The addition of lime rendered
the two soils to become very rigid, a
characteristic that is not favoured for a dam
core material.
The addition of 2% and 4% of gypsum to the
CL and ML soils caused minor change of the
stress-strain relationship. The Ec values of
the stabilized CL soil were comparable to
the untreated ones (Figure 3). However, the
Ec values of the treated ML specimens
decreased upon addition of gypsum for the
specimens subjected to small loading
(Figure 4) and showed no definite trend for
the last stress increments (560-1120 KN/m2
and 1120-2240 KN/m2).
March 2013, Volume59; No.1 5
 EVALUATION OF TWO DISPERSIVE RIVER NILE DEPOSITS TREATED WITH LIME AND GYPSUM FOR USE AS DAM CORE MATERIAL

140000

120000

100000

80000 %0

60000 %2
%4
40000

20000

0
280 - 0 560 - 280 1120 - 560 2240 - 1120

Figure 1: The constrained modulus Ec values for the untreated and lime-treated CL soil

80000

70000

60000

50000
%0
40000
%2
30000 %4
20000

10000

0
280 - 0 560 - 280 1120 - 560 2240 - 1120

Figure 2: The constrained modulus Ec values for the untreated and lime-treated ML soil

30000

25000

20000
%0
15000
%2
10000 %4

5000

0
280 - 0 560 - 280 1120 - 560 2240 - 1120

Figure 3: The constrained modulus Ec values for the untreated and gypsum-treated CL soil

6 Sudan Engineering Society Journal, March 2013, Volume59; No.1

 Ahmed M. Elshareef and Abd-Elkarim M. Zain
35000
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
280 - 0 560 - 280
Figure 4: The constrained modulus Ec values for the untreated and gypsum-treated ML soil
It is concluded from above that the addition
of gypsum to the CL and ML soils did not
affect the constrained modulus and
therefore the rigidity or flexibility of the
natural soils under consideration. On the
contrary, the addition of lime caused
considerable increase in the Ec values
compared to the untreated soils and the
lime-treated specimens became very rigid
compared to the untreated ones.
3.3 Soil Shear Strength Characteristics
It is noted from the above discussion that
the addition of lime caused aggregation of
the tested soils and rendered them non-
plastic, therefore the shear strength of the
treated soils is expected to show an
increase. Comparing the shear parameters
obtained from the CU tests carried out on
the untreated ML and CL soils (Table 2), the
untreated ML soil gave relatively higher
shear strength and shear strength
parameters compared with the untreated
CL soil. This might be attributed to the low
plasticity of the ML soil compared to the CL
soil.
The effect of lime on the shear strength
parameters is shown in Table 3 for the CL
and ML soils. It is shown in the Table that
both the cohesion (C) and effective friction
Sudan Engineering Society Journal,
%0
%2
%4
1120 - 560 2240 - 1120
angle (`) increased upon the addition of
2% lime. Cohesion increased 5-10 times for
the two soils whereas ` increased from 36
to 45 and from 33 to 46 for the ML and CL
soils, respectively. Very small increase in
strength was measured upon increasing the
lime content from 2% to 4%. The increase in
strength is consistent with the increase in
rigidity for the lime treated soils. The large
increase in cohesion justifies the very rigid
lime-treated soils.
The addition of 2% and 4% of gypsum
caused small increase in the friction angle of
the CL soil compared to the untreated soil
(Table 2) and almost no change of the
friction angle for the ML soil. The cohesion
did not change for the two soils (Table 2).
The overall effect of gypsum on the shear
parameters of the two soils was minor.
3.4 Evaluation of the Treated soils for Use
as Dam Core Material
Qualitative assessment for the possible
usage of the lime-treated and gypsum-
treated soils as dam core material is
attempted. A dam core material should be
workable during construction, of low
permeability and flexible with good strength
during the life span of the dam. The
addition of lime to the studied soils caused
March 2013, Volume59; No.1 7
 EVALUATION OF TWO DISPERSIVE RIVER NILE DEPOSITS TREATED WITH LIME AND GYPSUM FOR USE AS DAM CORE MATERIAL
aggregation of the soils, decreased the fines
content and rendered the two soils to be
non-plastic. A decrease in fine content will
imply increase in permeability. Since the
two soils are naturally low plastic with good
workability the addition of lime could be
considered to have negative impact on
workability and permeability. The addition
of gypsum had lesser effects on plasticity
and aggregation therefore smaller impact
on workability; the amount of fines
increased and therefore effect on
permeability is probably positive.
Another important characteristic of a dam
core material is that it should be flexible
and less vulnerable to cracking when
deformed. A cracked core is subjected to
concentrated water flow and hence piping
which could lead to dam failure. This study
has shown that the addition of lime to the
CL and ML soils caused considerable
increase in their constrained modulus Ec
and changed the soils from flexible to semi-
rigid or rigid material. However, the
addition of gypsum did not seem to have
changed the Ec values and the flexibility has
not been adversely affected. The shear
strength parameters (` and C) of the lime
treated CL and ML soils are considerably
higher than those of the untreated soils
whereas the strength parameters of the
gypsum treated soils compared well with
those of the untreated soils.
In the context of the evaluation of the two
soils for use as dam core material and given
the fact that the two additives were
effective in eliminating the dispersive
behaviour of the two soils [5], the effects of
gypsum on flexibility, workability and
permeability could be considered as
positive compared to lime; and since the
strength parameters did not show decrease
on the addition of gypsum the latter could
be considered as more advantageous and
8 Sudan Engineering Society Journal,
preferred for stabilization of the dispersive
fine grained ML and CL soils compared to
lime.
4. CONCLUSIONS
On the basis of the results of the study
presented in this paper the following
conclusions are drawn:
The addition of lime by 2 and 4 %
significantly affected the gradation of the
two soil types considered by reducing their
fines and clay content fractions. The
amount of clay fractions dropped from 12-
14% in the natural samples to traces in the
treated samples suggesting that the
addition of lime caused aggregation of the
clay particles. Although the addition of lime
did not make significant changes in the
liquid limit of the three soils tested but it
rendered the naturally plastic soils to be
non-plastic based on the significant
reductions in the PI values.
The addition of gypsum caused small
increase in the fines content of the two soils
and did not affect the clay content of the CL
soil. However, the clay content of ML soil
considerably decreased upon the addition
of 2 and 4% of gypsum. This implies that the
response of the two soils to the addition of
gypsum in terms of their tendency to
aggregate was different. The ML soil
showed aggregation of the clay fraction
whereas the CL soil did not.
The study showed that lime addition has a
significant effect on the compaction
characteristics of the soil types tested
resulting in higher OMC and lower MDD
values compared to the values pertaining to
the untreated samples of the same soils.
However, the addition of gypsum did not
affect the compaction parameters of the
two samples.
The consolidation test results on the
compacted untreated and lime treated CL
March 2013, Volume59; No.1
 Ahmed M. Elshareef and Abd-Elkarim M. Zain

and ML samples showed that the addition Aggregates Prepared for the Natural Lime
of 2% and 4% lime resulted in significantly Association, Arlington U.S.A
very high Ec values compared to those of
4. Elsharief A. M. And Mohamed S. A. (2000)
the untreated samples. However, the
Technical and Economical Viability of
addition of the same percentages of gypsum
Lime Stabilized Expansive Soils for Road
did not have any significant effect on the
Construction in Sudan , Sudan
rigidity of the treated samples.
Engineering Society Journal (SES Journal)
The addition of lime increased the shear Vol. 47 pp. 5-16
strength parameters of the two soils
5. Zein A.K.M and Elsharief A. M (2011)
particularly the cohesion intercept.
Effects of Lime and Gypsum Additives on
However, the addition of gypsum did not
the Dispersive Behaviour of Two River Nile
have noticeable effect on the shear
Deposits, Sudan Engineering Society
parameters of both soils.
Journal, Vol. 57, No. 1, pp. 29-36
In the context of evaluating the lime and
6. Ameta N. K., Purhoit D. G. M., Wayal A. S.
gypsum treated CL and ML soils for use as
And Sandeep D. Economics of Stabilizing
non-dispersive dam core materials the
Bentonite Soil with Lime and Gypsum
gypsum-treated soils were found to be
EJGE, Vol. 12, 8 pages
more favourable and advantageous since
they are flexible, more workable and less 7. Mahgoub A. A., Hassan M. E. And Hassan
permeable compared to the lime treated S. A. (2005) Stabilization of Expansive
ones. Soils by Gypsum Unpublished Final Year
Project, Civil Engineering Department,
Acknowledgement
Faculty of Engineering , University of
The authors would like to thank Dam
Khartoum.
Implementation Unit, (DIU) Executive
Director for his kind permission to use the 8. Elsharief A. M. And Elhassan A. A. M.
soil data extracted from the results of the (2008) Effects of Lime on the Intrinsic
geotechnical investigations at the two study Swelling and Shrinkage of Clay Soils from
areas referred to in this paper. Sudan, Proceeding of International
Conference on Geotechnical and Highway
References
Engineering ,Geotropica 2008; Kuala
1. Singh A. (2006) Modern Geotechnical
Lumpur, Malaysia
Engineering, Third edition, 1990 CBS
Publishers and Distributors, New Delhi, 9. Building and Road Research Institute
846 pages. (BRRI), Sudan and Division of Embankment
Dams and Landfill Technologies, University
2. Hussey N. L., Cerato A. B., Grasmick J. G.,
of Kalsruhe, Germany Additional
Holder E. S., Miller G. A. And tabet W.
Geotechnical Report on Core material for
(2010) An Assessment of Soil Parameters
Merowe Dam Project Prepared for
Covering Soil Strength Increases with
Merowe Dam Project Implementation
Chemical Additives
Unit, Final Report Vol. 1 to Vol. 5(2005).
3. Little D. N. (2000) Evaluation of Structural
Properties of Lime Stabilized Soils and

Sudan Engineering Society Journal, March 2013, Volume59; No.1 9