CHAPTER-1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1. Soil stabilization is the process of improving the engineering properties of the soil and
thus making it more stable. It is required when the soil available for construction is
not suitable for the intended purpose. In its broadest senses, stabilization includes
compaction, pre- consolidation, drainage and many other such processes. However,
the term stabilization is generally restricted to the processes which alter the soil
material itself for improvement of its properties. Soil stabilization is used to reduce
the permeability and compressibility of the soil mass in earth structures and to
increase its shear strength. Soil stabilization is required to increase the bearing
capacity of foundation soils. However, the main use of stabilization is to improve the
natural soils for the construction of highways and airfields. The principles of soil
stabilization are used for controlling the grading of soil and aggregates in the
construction of bases and sub- bases of the highways and airfields. The term soil
stabilization means the improvement in the properties of poor soils by the use of
controlled compaction; proportioning and the addition of suitable admixtures or
stabilizers. Soil stabilization deals with mechanical, physic-chemical and chemical
methods to make the stabilized soil serve its purpose. The stabilization process,
essentially involve excavation of the in-situ soil, treatment to the in-situ soil and
compacting the treated soil. As the stabilization process involve excavation of the in-
situ soil, this technique is ideal for improvement of soil in shallow depths such as
pavements.

Also with the rise in development of countries the rate of production of wastes has
increased tremendously in almost all parts of the world in the past few decades.
Quarry dust is the waste material producing from aggregate crushing industries. The
quantities of these waste materials imposing hazardous effect on environment and
public health. In order to eliminate the negative effect of these waste materials it can
dispose proper and safe manner. Also it can’t be disposed of properly and its disposal
is not economically viable but it is blended with other construction materials like
clayey soil then it can be used best for various construction purposes like sub grade,

foundation base and embankments. Due to rapid industrialization there is scarcity of

1
 land having desirable soil bearing capacities. Every year many civil engineering
structures like buildings, embankments, roads and dams constructed on expansive
soils got damaged due to highly expansive behavior of such soils. The main reason
behind such behavior of expansive soils is the presence of mineral called
montmorillonite. It has high water content capacity and swells significantly when it
comes in contact with water. In India expansive soils are also known as Black Cotton
Soils as cotton is cultivated in majority of the areas where this black soil is found. It
covers around 20% of total land area of India. It is largely found in southern, western
and central parts of India, covering Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Gujarat and some
parts of Madhya Pradesh. The construction on Black Cotton Soil has always been a
big challenge to geotechnical engineers. They have used waste materials as
admixtures and showed their best results in soil stabilization. Modak et. al [1] studied
the combined effect of lime and fly ash in Black Cotton Soil and concluded that with
increasing the percentage of lime and fly ash in Black Cotton Soil, California bearing
ratio (CBR) and maximum dry density (MDD) values are also increases. Nadgouda
and Hegde [2] found optimum value of CBR and MDD at 3.5 % lime addition in
Black Cotton Soil. Ijimdiya et. al [3] stabilized the Black Cotton Soil by groundnut
shell ash (GSA) and observed that unconfined compressive strength increased from
91 kN/m2 without adding GSA to a maximum value of 211 kN/m2 at 8% GSA,
whereas the optimum value of CBR was found on the addition of 6.3% of GSA. The
maximum dry density (MDD) and optimum moisture content (OMC), California
bearing ratio (CBR) and unconfined compression strength (UCS) characteristics are
the ones to be studied. The present study aims towards showing how the utilization of
stone dust can affect Soil in an optimum way to assure a win-win condition for both
soil stabilization and quarry waste disposal.

2. The main objective of this investigation is to utilize industrial waste such as Quarry
dust in the field of geotechnical engineering. In this investigation an attempt is made
to stabilize black cotton soil using quarry dust. Atterberg's limits, Compaction
Characteristics, California Bearing Ratio and Direct shear tests were conducted on
Expansive soil with different percentage of Quarry dust.

2
 1.1 SCOPE OF THE PROJECT
The soil used in the study is natural clay brought from Shahpura. Pavement sub
grade over there is composed of clayey soil whose bearing capacity is quite low .Due
to this reason the roads require periodic maintenance to take up repeated application
of wheel loads. This proves to be costly and at the same time conditions of roads
during monsoon seasons is extremely poor. Therefore, a thought on how to enhance
the stability of roads by cheaper means demands appraisal.

Also river sand is expensive due to extreme cost of conveyance from natural sources.
Additionally substantial consumption of these sources makes natural issues. As
ecological conveyance and different limitations make the accessibility and less
utilization of river sand, an alternative item for construction industry should be found.
Due to the high requirement for aggregates and rubble for building purposes, stone
quarries and crushers are exceptionally regular. On view of the distinctive quarry
waste, stone dust is one, which is produced in plenty. Quarry dusts are considered as
one of the well acknowledged and in addition practical ground improvement
technique for weak soil deposits. They provide the primary function of strengthening
and thus improve the deformation and strength characteristics of weak soil regions.
Properties of stone dust basically rely on upon the properties of the parent rock such,
such as chemical and mineralogical arrangement, physical and substance steadiness,
specific gravity, hardness, strength, pore structures and color.

1.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT

The major objectives of the project are:

 To determine the liquid limit and plastic limit of the soil.

 To determine the maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of the soil.

 To determine the shrinkage limit of the soil.

 To study the effect of Stone Dust on proctor’s density and OMC of clayey soil.

 To study the changes in CBR of soil by the addition of stone dust.

 To determine the specific gravity of the soil and stone dust.

3
 CHAPTER 2

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

Very little information has been published on the engineering properties of stabilized
soil using stone dust. However, many studies are reported on use of stone dust
with/without lime and/or fly ash.

 Roobhakhshan and Kalantari (2013) conducted consistency limit, standard

compaction test, unconfined compressive test and CBR test and concluded that there
is remarkable influence on strength and CBR value at 1% lime + 6% waste stone
powder for CBR and 7% lime + 6% waste stone powder for U.C.S which are
optimum percentage.

 Sabat (2012) conducted series of tests and concluded that addition of quarry dust
decreases Liquid limit, Plastic limit, Plasticity index, Optimum moisture content,
Cohesion and increases shrinkage limit, Maximum dry density, Angle of internal
friction of expansive soil.

 Satyanarayana et al. (2013) conducted plasticity, compaction and strength tests on

gravel soil with various percentage of stone dust and found that by addition of stone
dust plasticity characteristics were reduced and CBR of the mixes improved. Addition
of 25-35% of stone dust makes the gravel soil meet the specification of morth as sub-
base material.

 Ali and Koranne (2011) presented the results of an experimental programme

undertaken to investigate the effect of stone dust and fly ash mixing in different
percentages on expansive soil. They observed that at optimum percentages, i.e., 20 to
30% of admixture, the swelling of expansive clay is almost controlled and there is a
marked improvement in other properties of the soil as well. It is concluded by them
that the combination of equal proportion of stone dust and fly ash is more effective
than the addition of stone dust/fly ash alone to the expansive soil in controlling the
swelling nature.

4
 Bshara et al. (2014) reported the effect of stone dust on geotechnical properties of
poor soil and concluded that the CBR and MDD of poor soils can be improved by
mixing stone dust. They also indicated that the liquid limit, plastic limit, plasticity
index and optimum moisture content decrease by adding stone dust which in turn
increases usefulness of soil as highway sub-grade material.

The clay particles in the soil structure are arranged in sheet like structures composed
of silica tetrahedral and alumina octahedra. The sheets form many different
combinations, but there are three main types of formations .The first is kaolinite,
which consists of alternating silica and alumina sheets bonded together. This form of
clay structure is very stable and does not swell appreciably when wetted .The next
form is montmorillonite, which is composed of two layers of silica and one alumina
sheet creating a weak bond between the layers. This weak bonding between the layers
allows water and other cations to enter between the layers, resulting in swelling in the
clay particle. The last type is illite, which is very similar to montmorillonite ,but has
potassium ions between each layer which help bond the layers together. Inter layer
bonding illite is therefore stronger than for montmorillonite, but weaker than
kaolinite. Clay particles are small in size but have a large to mass ratio, resulting in a
larger surface area available for interaction with water and cations. the clay particles
have negatively charged surfaces that attract cations and polar molecules,including
water forming a bound water layer around the negatively charged clay particles. The
amount of water surrounding the clay particles is related to the amount of water that is
available for the clay particle to take in and release. This moisture change around the
clay particles causes expansion and swelling pressures within clays that are confined .

5
2.1 Uses of stabilization

Pavement design is based on the premise that minimum specified structural quality
will be achieved for each layer of material in the pavement system. Each layer must
resist shearing, avoid excessive deflections that cause fatigue cracking within the
layer or in overlying layers, and prevent excessive permanent deformation through
densification. As the quality of a soil layer is increased, the ability of that layer to
distribute the load

over a greater area is generally increased so that a reduction in the required thickness
of the soil and surface layers may be permitted.

2.2 Quality improvement

The most common improvements achieved through stabilization include better soil
gradation, reduction of plasticity index or swelling potential, and increases in
durability and strength. In wet weather, stabilization may also be used to
provide a working platform for construction operations. These types of soil quality
improvement are referred to as soil modification.

6
 CHAPTER 3

3.0 EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMME

In this chapter, a brief review of various experiments conducted using clay and the
same stabilized with Marble Stone Dust are explained.

3.1 MATERIALS USED

1. Clayey soil

Soil is brought from a paddy field in Shahpura.

Therefore the strength of pavement
pa
compressive load under traffic.
ura. Soil over there is highly plastic clay.
sub-grade
grade needs to be ascertained to withstand the

7
 Properties of clay used in the study.

Sr NO. Properties Values

1. LIQUID LIMIT 43
2. PLASTIC LIMIT 17.17
3. SHRINKAGE LIMIT 0.59
4. MAX DRY DENSITY 1.735 gm/cc
5. OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT 9.8%
6. SPECIFIC GRAVITY 2.64
7. CBR VALUE 4.35

2. Additives

The additives used for stabilization and modification include Stone Dust. The soils
were mixed with lime for which there were reasonable expectations of improved
engineering properties. The amount of additive used was determined based on
testing the strength for addition of varying percentages and selecting the one with
greatest strength. The lime percentage 8%, 12% ,16% and 20%.

8
3.2 LAB TESTING

The various tests conducted on the sample are the following:

1. Sieve Analysis

2. Specific gravity

3. Atterberg limits

4. Proctor compaction test

5. Shrinkage Limit test

6. CBR test

Firstly the above tests were conducted on plane clay sample to determine its
properties. Thereafter, certain percentages of lime are added to the clay sample to
stabilize it. And the percentages of the above additives which produce the optimum
strength to the soil.

3.3 SOIL PREPARATION

The soil was collected from site in large sacks. It is brought to the lab and is dried in
oven for 24 hours in large pans. This soil due to loss of water formed big lumps which
is broken to smaller pieces or even fine powder and is sieved according to the needs
of different experiments.

3.4 SIEVE ANALYSIS

OBJECTIVE

(a) Select sieves as per I.S specifications and perform sieving.

(b) Obtain percentage of soil retained on each sieve.

3.5 NEED AND SCOPE OF EXPERIMENT

The grain size analysis is widely used in classification of soils. The data obtained
from grain size distribution curves is used in the design of filters for earth dams and to
determine suitability of soil for road construction, air field etc. Information obtained

9
from grain size analysis can be used to predict soil water movement although
permeability tests are more generally used.

APPARATUS

 Balance

 I.S sieves

 Rubber pestle and mortar.

 Mechanical Sieve Shaker

The grain size analysis is an attempt to determine the relative proportions of different
grain sizes which make up a given soil mass.

KNOWLEDGE OF EQUIPMENT

1. The balance to be used must be sensitive to the extent of 0.1% of total weight
of sample taken.
2. I.S 460-1962 are to used. The sieves for soil tests: 4.75 mm to 75 microns.

PROCEDURE

If the soil contains a substantial quantity (say more than 5%) of fine particles, a wet
sieve analysis is required. All lumps are broken into individual particles.

1. Take 200gm of oven dried soil sample and soaked with water.

2. If deflocculation is required, 2% calgon solution is used instead of water.

3. The sample is stirred and left for soaking period of at least 1 hour.

4. The slurry is then sieved through 4.75 mm sieve and washed with a jet of water.

5. The material retained on the sieve is the gravel fraction, which should be dried in

oven and weighed.

10
 6. The material passing through 4.75 mm sieve is sieved through 75 micron
sieve.
7. The material is washed until the water filtered becomes clear.
8. The soil retained on 75 micron sieve is collected and dried in oven.
9. It is then sieved through the sieve shaker for ten minutes and retained material
on each sieve is collected and weighed.
10. The material that would have been retained on pan is equal to the total mass of
soil minus the sum of the masses of material retained on all sieves.

OBSERVATIONS AND RECORDING

Sample Initial weight of Soil retained on Soil passed % Fine

though
soil (gm) sieve (gm)
the sieve (gm)
1 200 gm 28 gm 172 gm 86%

CALCULATION

1. The percentage of soil retained on each sieve shall be calculated on the basis of total
weight of soil sample taken.
2. Cumulative percentage of soil retained on successive sieve is found.

SPECIFIC GRAVITY

Specific gravity is the ratio of the density of a substance to the density of a reference
substance; equivalently, it is the ratio of the mass of a substance to the mass of a
reference substance for the same given volume. Apparent specific gravity is the ratio
of the weight of a volume of the substance to the weight of an equal volume of the
reference substance. The reference substance is nearly always water at its densest
(4°C) for liquids; for gases it is air at room temperature (21°C). Nonetheless, the
temperature and pressure must be specified for both the sample and the reference.
Pressure is nearly always 1 atm (101.325 kPa).

11
Temperatures for both sample and reference
reference vary from industry to industry. In British
beer brewing, the practice for specific gravity as specified above is to multiply it by
1000.[1] Specific gravity is commonly used in industry as a simple means of obtaining
information about the concentration of solutions of various materials such as brines,
hydrocarbons, sugar solutions (syrups, juices, honeys, brewers wort, must etc.) and
acids.

Pycnometer

Specific gravity can be measured in a number of value ways. The following

illustration involving the use
use of the pycnometer is instructive. A pycnometer is simply
a bottle which can be precisely filled to a specific, but not necessarily accurately
known volume, . Placed upon a balance of some sort it will exert a force .

The specific gravity of soil is determined

det using the relation:

Where M1=mass of empty Pycnometer, M2= mass of the Pycnometer with dry soil
M3= mass of the Pycnometer and soil and water, M4 = mass of Pycnometer filled with
water only. G= Specific gravity of soils.
AIM :-

To determine the specific gravity of given sample of fine and coarse aggregates.

REFERENCE STANDARD

IS : 2720(Part 3/Sec 2)-1980-

2) Methods of test for soils.

12
APPARATUS

1. A balance of capacity not less than 3kg ,readable and accurate to 0.5 gm and of
such a type as to permit the weighing of the vessel containing the aggregate and
water .
2. A well ventilated oven to maintain a temperature of 100ºC to 110ºC

3. Pyconometer of about 1 littre capacity having a metal conical screw top with a
6mm hole at its apex . The screw top shall be water tight .
4. a means supplying a current warm air .

5. A tray of area not less than 32cm².

6. An air tight container large enough to take the sample.

7. Filter papers and funnel.

PROCEDURE

1. Clean and dry the Pycnometer. Tightly screw its cap. Take its mass (M1) to the
nearest of 0.1 g.
2. Mark the cap and Pycnometer with a vertical line parallel to the axis of the
Pycnometer to ensure that the cap is screwed to the same mark each time.
3. Unscrew the cap and place about 200 g of oven dried soil in the Pycnometer.
Screw the cap. Determine the mass (M2).
4. Unscrew the cap and add sufficient amount of de-aired water to the Pycnometer
so as to cover the soil. Screw on the cap.
5. Shake well the contents. Connect the Pycnometer to a vacuum pump to remove
the entrapped air, for about 20 minutes for fine-grained soils and about 10
minutes for coarse-grained soils.
6. Disconnect the vacuum pump. Fill the Pycnometer with water, about three-
fourths full. Reapply the vacuum for about 5min till air bubbles stop appearing
on the surface of the water.
7. Fill the Pycnometer with water completely upto the mark. Dry it from outside.
Take its mass (M3).
8. Record the temperature of content .

13
 9. Empty the Pycnometer. Clean it and wipe it dry.

10. Fill the Pycnometer with water only. Screw on the cap upto the mark. Wipe it
dry. Take its mass (M4).

CALCULATION

Apparent specific gravity = (weight of dry sample/weight of equal volume of water )

= (M2-M1)/[(M2-M1)
M1)- (M3-M4)]

14
SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF SOIL:

Sr. No. Determination I II III

1. Mass of Pycnometer 652 652 652
(M1) g
2. Mass of Pycnometer + 908 946 915
Soil (M2) g

3. Mass of Pycnometer + 1630 1657 1632

Soil + Water (M3) g
4. Mass of Pycnometer + 1470 1472 1468
Water (M4) g
5. Specific Gravity at T°C 2.67 2.601 2.656
6. Average Specific
Gravity at T°C 2.642

SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF STONE DUST

Determination No.
Sr.

No. Observations an Calculations 1 2 3

1 MASS OF EMPTY PYCNOMETER 612 gm 612 gm 612 gm

(M1)

MASS OF PYCNOMETER AND DRY

2 862 gm 862 gm 862 gm
SOIL (M2)

MASS OF PYCNOMETER, SOIL

3
AND WATER (M3) 1786 gm 1786 gm 1784 gm

MASS OF PYCNOMETER AND

4 1630 gm 1632 gm 1628 gm
WATER (M4)

15
 CALCULATIONS

5 M2 – M1 250 gm 250 gm 250 gm

6 M3 – M4 156 gm 154 gm 158 gm

7 CALCULATE G USING FORMULA 2.659 2.604 2.659

RESULT

Specific gravity of soil = 2.65 Specific gravity of stone dust = 2.64

ATTERBERG LIMITS

The Atterberg limits are a basic measure of the critical water contents of a fine-
grained soil, such as its shrinkage limit, plastic limit, and liquid limit. As a dry, clayey
soil takes on increasing amounts of water, it undergoes dramatic and distinct changes
in behavior and consistency. Depending on the water content of the soil, it may appear
in four states: solid, semi-solid, plastic and liquid. In each state, the consistency and
behavior of a soil is different and consequently so are its engineering properties. Thus,
the boundary between each state can be defined based on a change in the soil's
behavior. The Atterberg limits can be used to distinguish between silt and clay, and it
can distinguish between different types of silts and clays. These limits were created by
Albert Atterberg, a Swedish agriculturist.[1] They were later refined byArthur
Casagrande. These distinctions in soil are used in assessing the soils that are to have
structures built on. Soils when wet retain water and some expand in volume. The
amount of expansion is related to the ability of the soil to take in water and its
structural make- up (the type of atoms present). These tests are mainly used on clayey
or silty soils since these are the soils that expand and shrink due to moisture content.
Clays and silts react with the water and thus change sizes and have varying shear
strengths. Thus these tests are used widely in the preliminary stages of designing any
structure to ensure that the soil will have the correct amount of shear strength and not
too much change in volume as it expands and shrinks with different moisture
contents.

16
As a hard, rigid solid in the dry state, soil becomes a crumbly (friable) semisolid when
a certain moisture content, termed the shrinkage limit, is reached. IIf it is an expansive
soil, this soil will also begin to swell in volume as this moisture content is exceeded.
Increasing the water content beyond the soil's plastic limit will transform it into a
malleable, plastic mass, which causes additional swelling. The
The soil will remain in this
plastic state until its liquid limit is exceeded, which causes it to transform into a
viscous liquid that flows when jarred.

LABORATORY TESTS

Shrinkage Limit

The shrinkage limit (SL) is the water content where further loss of m
moisture will not
result in any more volume reduction. The shrinkage limit is much less commonly used
than the liquid and plastic limits.

Plastic Limit

The plastic limit (PL) is determined by rolling out a thread of the fine portion of a soil
on a flat, non-porous
porous surface. If the soil is at a moisture content where its behaviour is
plastic, this thread will retain its shape down to a very narrow diameter. The sample
can then be remoulded and the test repeated. As the moisture content falls due to
evaporation, the thread will begin to break apart at larger diameters. The plastic limit
is defined as the moisture content where the thread breaks apart at a di
diameter of 3.2

17
mm (about 1/8 inch). A soil is considered non-plastic
non plastic if a thread cannot be rolled out
down to 3.2 mm at any moisture possible.

18
Liquid limit

The liquid limit is the moisture content at which the groove, formed by a standard tool
into the sample of soil taken in the standard cup, closes for 10 mm on being given 25
blows in a standard manner. This is the limiting moisture content at which the
cohesive
ohesive soil passes from liquid state to plastic state. Liquid limit is significant to
know the stress history and general properties of the soil met with construction. From
the results of liquid limit the compression index may be estimated. The compressio
compression
index value will help us in settlement analysis. If the natural moisture content of soil
is closer to liquid limit, the soil can be considered as soft if the moisture content is
lesser than liquids limit, the soil can be considered as soft if the moistur
moisture content is
lesser than liquid limit. The soil is brittle and stiffer.

Plasticity index

The plasticity index (PI) is a measure of the plasticity of a soil. The plasticity index is
the size of the range of water contents where the soil exhibits plastic properties. The
PI is the difference between the liquid limit and the plastic limit (PI = LL
LL-PL). Soils
with a high PI tend to be clay, those with a lower PI tend to be silt, and those with a
PI of 0 (non-plastic) tend to have little or no silt or clay

19
 PI and their meanings

 (0-3)- Nonplastic

 (3-15) - Slightly plastic

 (15-30) - Medium plastic

 >30 - Highly plastic

Liquidity Index

The liquidity index (LI) is used for scaling the natural water content of a soil sample
to the limits. It can be calculated as a ratio of difference between natural water
content, plastic limit, and liquid limit: LI=(W-PL)/(LL-PL) where W is the natural
water content.

Consistency Index

The consistency index (CI) indicates the consistency (firmness) of a soil. It is

calculated as

CI = (LL-W)/(LL-PL) , where W is the existing water content. Soil at the liquid limit
will have a consistency index of 0, while soil at the plastic limit will have a
consistency index of 1.

PLASTIC LIMIT:
Determination No.
Sr. No. Observations and Calculations
1 2 3
Observation
12
1 Mass of empty container (M1) 14 gm 12 gm
Gm
20
2 Mass of container + wet soil (M2) 22 gm 20 gm
Gm
18.75
3 Mass of container + dry soil (M3) 21 gm 18.73 gm
Gm

20
 Calculations
1.25
4 Mass of water = M2-M3 1 gm 1.27 gm
Gm
6.75
5 Mass of dry soil = M3-M1 7 gm 6.73 gm
Gm
Water content = w = [(M2-M3) / (M3-M1)] x 100 18.5
6 14.2% 18.8%
%

LIQUID LIMIT:

Weight Of Container (W0)

14 gm 12 gm 12 gm

Weight Of Container + Wet Soil (W1)

21 gm 20.75 gm 20 gm

Weight Of Container + Dry Soil (W2) 19 gm 18.25 gm 17.5 gm

Weight Of Water (W1-W2) 2 gm 2.75 gm 2.5 gm

Weight Of Dry Soil (W2-W0) 5 gm 6.25 gm 5.5 gm

Moisture Content (%) 40 44 45

No. Of Blows 32 23 18

21
SHRIKAGE LIMIT:

WEIGHT OF CONTAINER 36 gm 36gm

(W1)
WEIGHT OF CONTAINER + 80gm 82gm

WET SOIL (W2)

WEIGHT OF CONTAINER + 72gm 72gm

DRY SOIL (W3)

WEIGHT OF OVEN DRY SOIL 36gm 36gm
PAT (W0)
[(W3-W1)]
WEIGHT OF WATER (W2- 8gm 10gm

W3)
MOISTURE CONTENT (%) 22.22% 27.77%

W= (W2-W3)/(W3-W1) *100

VOLUME OF SOIL PAT (Vd) 20.93% 19.44%

= Wm/Gm
VOLUME OF WET SOIL (V) 23 cc 23 cc
SHRINKAGE LIMIT (Ws)= 16.47gm 17.88gm

[W-{(V-Vd)/W0}]*100
SHRINKAGE RATIO (R)= 0.56 0.63

[(V-Vd)/Vd*(W-Ws)*100]

22
SAFETY & PRECAUTIONS
 Soil used for liquid limit determination should not be oven dried prior to
testing.

 After mixing the water to the soil sample , sufficient time should be given to
permeate the water throughout out the soil mass
 Wet soil taken in the container for moisture content determination should not
be left open in the air, the container with soil sample should either be placed in
desiccators or immediately be weighed.

3.6 PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST

The Proctor compaction test is a laboratory method of experimentally determining

the optimal moisture content at which a given soil type will become most dense and
achieve its maximum dry density. The term Proctor is in honor of R. R. Proctor, who
in 1933 showed that the dry density of a soil for a given compactive effort depends on
the amount of water the soil contains during soil compaction. His original test is most
commonly referred to as the standard Proctor compaction test later on, his test was
updated to create the modified Proctor compaction test.
These laboratory tests generally consist of compacting soil at known moisture content
into a cylindrical mold of standard dimensions using a compactive effort of controlled
magnitude. The soil is usually compacted into the mold to a certain amount of equal
layers, each receiving a number of blows from a standard weighted hammer at a
specified height. This process is then repeated for various moisture contents and the
dry densities are determined for each. The graphical relationship of the dry density to
moisture content

is then plotted to establish the compaction curve. The maximum dry density is finally
obtained from the peak point of the compaction curve and its corresponding moisture
content, also known as the optimal moisture content.
In geotechnical engineering, soil compactions the process in which a stress applied to
a soil causes densification as air is displaced from the pores between the soil grains. It
is an instantaneous process and always takes place in partially saturated soil (three
phase system). The Proctor compaction test is a laboratory method of experimentally
determining the optimal moisture content at which a given soil type will become most

23
dense and achieve its maximum dry density Determination of the relationship
between the moisture content and density of soils compacted in a mould of a given
size with a 2.5 kg rammer dropped from a height of 30 cm. the results obtained from
this test will be helpful in increasing the bearing capacity of foundations, Decreasing
the undesirable settlement of structures, Control undesirable volume changes,
Reduction in hydraulic conductivity, Increasing the stability of slope sand so on.

OBJECTIVE:

For determination of the relation between the water content and the dry density of
soils using light compaction.

REFERENCE STANDARD

IS: 2720(Part 7)-1980- Methods of test for soils: Determination of water

content-dry density relation using light compaction.

APPARATUS REQUIRED:

1. Proctor mould having a capacity of 944 cc with an internal diameter of 10.2 cm

and a height of 11.6 cm. The mould shall have a detachable collar assembly and
a detachable base plate.

2. Rammer: A mechanical operated metal rammer having a 5.08 cm diameter face

and a weight of 2.5 kg. The rammer shall be equipped with a suitable
arrangement to control the height of drop to a free fall of 30 cm.
3. Sample extruder, mixing tools such as mixing pan, spoon, towel, and spatula.

4. A balance of 15 kg capacity, Sensitive balance, Straight edge, Graduated

cylinder, Moisture tins.

24
PROCEDURE:

1. Take a representative oven-dried sample, approximately 5 kg in the given pan.

Thoroughly mix the sample with sufficient water to dampen it with approximate
water content of 4-6 %.

2. Weigh the proctor mould without base plate and collar. Fix the collar and base
plate. Place the soil in the Proctor mould and compact it in 3 layers giving 25
blows per layer with the 2.5 kg rammer falling through. The blows shall be
distributed uniformly over the surface of each layer.

3. Remove the collar; trim the compacted soil even with the top of mould using a
straight edge and weigh bulk.

4. Divide the weight of the compacted specimen by 944 cc and record the result as
the bulk density

5. Remove the sample from mould and slice vertically through and obtain a small
sample for water content.

6. Thoroughly break up the remainder of the material until it will pass a no.4 sieve
as judged by the eye. Add water in sufficient amounts to increase the moisture
content of the soil sample by one or two percentage points and repeat the above
procedure for each increment of water added. Continue this series of
determination until there is either a decrease or no change in the wet unit weight
of the compacted soil.

25
PROCTOR TEST:

FRESH SOIL:

Sr. No. Determination I II III IV

1. Wt. of Empty Mould 3624 3624 3624 3624

(M1) g
2. Wt. of Mould +Soil (M2) g 5360 5402 5502 5412

3. M=M2-M1 1736 1778 1878 1788

4. Water Content (w) 6% 8% 10% 12%
5. Bulk Density Yb=M/V 1.736 1.778 1.878 1.788
6. Dry Density Yd= 100 Yb 1.527 1.676 1.717 1.596
(100+w )

26
8% STONE DUST:

Sr. No. Determination I II III IV

1. Wt. of Empty Mould 3624 3624 3624 3624

(M1) g
2. Wt. of Mould +Soil (M2) g 5444 5644 5731 5516

3. M=M2-M1 1820 2020 2107 1892

4. Water Content (w) 6% 8% 10% 12%
5. Bulk Density Yb=M/V 1.754 1.798 1.888 1.814
6. Dry Density Yd= 100 Yb 1.617 1.787 1.790 1.690
(100+w )

12% STONE DUST:

Sr. No. Determination I II III IV

1. Wt. of Empty Mould 3624 3624 3624 3624

(M1) g
2. Wt. of Mould +Soil (M2) g 5564 5744 5835 5594
3. M=M2-M1 1940 2120 2211 1970
4. Water Content (w) 6% 8% 10% 12%
5. Bulk Density Yb=M/V 1.704 1.834 1.944 1.778
6. Dry Density Yd= 100 Yb 1.641 1.821 1.808 1.72
(100+w )

27
16% STONE DUST:

Sr. No. Determination I II III IV

1. Wt. of Empty Mould 3624 3624 3624 3624

(M1) g
2. Wt. of Mould +Soil (M2) g 5628 5854 5934 5684

3. M=M2-M1 2004 2230 2310 2060

4. Water Content (w) 6% 8% 10% 12%
5. Bulk Density Yb=M/V 1.718 1.844 1.874 1.784
6. Dry Density Yd= 100 Yb 1.678 1.844 1.829 1.74
(100+w )

REPORT:

 For plain soil at the water content of 9.8% the maximum dry density is
1.735gm/cc.

 For soil mixed with 16% stone dust at the water content 8% the maximum dry density
is 1.844gm/cc.

SAFETY & PRECAUTIONS:

 Use hand gloves & safety shoes while compacting.

 Adequate period (about 15 minutes for clayey soils and 56 minutes for coarse
grained soils) is allowed after mixing the water and before compacting into the
mould.
 The blows should be uniformly distributed over the surface of each layer.

28
3.7 CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO TEST

The California bearing ratio (CBR) is a penetration test for evaluation of the
mechanical strength of natural ground, subgrades and basecourses beneath new
carriageway construction. It was developed by the California Department of
Transportation before World War II. The basic site test is performed by measuring the
pressure required to penetrate soil or aggregate with a plunger of sta
standard area. The
measured pressure is then divided by the pressure required to achieve an equal
penetration on a standard crushed rock material. The CBR test is fully described in BS
1377: Soils for civil engineering purposes : Part 4, Compaction related te
tests, and in
Part 9: In-situ
situ tests. The CBR rating was developed for measuring the load
load-
bearing capacity of soils used for building roads. The CBR can also be used for
measuring the load-bearing
bearing capacity of unimproved airstrips or for soils unde
under paved
airstrips. The harder the surface, the higher the CBR rating. A CBR of 3 equates to
tilled farmland, a CBR of 4.75 equates to turf or moist clay, while moist sand may
have a CBR of 10. High quality crushed rock has a CBR over 80. The st
standard
material for this test is crushed California limestone which has a value of 100,
meaning that it is not unusual to see CBR values of over 100 in well compacted areas.

29
 = measured pressure for site soils [N/mm²]

= pressure to achievee equal penetration on standard soil [N/mm²]

OBJECTIVE

Determination of CBR of soil either in undisturbed or Remoulded condition

REFERENCE STANDARDS

IS: 2720(Part 16)-1973

1973- Methods of test for soils: Laboratory determination of CBR.

EQUIPMENTS / APPARATUS

 Compression machine

 Proving ring, Dial gauge, Timer

 Sampling tube

 Split mould

 Vernier caliper, Balance

PREPARATION SAMPLE

The test may be performed

(a) On undisturbed soil specimen

(b) On remoulded soil specimen

(a) On undisturbed specimen

Undisturbed specimen is obtained by fitting to the mould, the steel cutting edge of
150 mm internal diameter and pushing the mould as gentky as possible into the
ground. When the mould is sufficiently full of soil, it shall be removed by under
digging. The top and bottom
bottom surfaces are then trimmed flat so as to give the required
length of specimen.

30
(b) On remoulded Specimens

The dry density for remoulding should be either the field density or if the subgrade is
to be compacted, at the maximum dry density value obtained from the Proctor
Compaction test. If it is proposed to carry out the CBR test on an unsoaked specimen,
the moisture content for remoulding should be the same as the equilibrium moisture
content which the soil is likely to reach subsequent to the construction of the road. If
it is proposed to carry out the CBR test on a soaked specimen, the moisture content
for remoulding should be at the optimum and soaked under water for 96 hours.

Soil Sample

The material used in the remoulded specimen should all pass through a 19 mm IS
sieve. Allowance for larger material may be made by replacing it by an equal amount
of material which passes a 19 mm sieve but is retained on a 4.75 mm IS sieve. This
procedure is not satisfactory if the size of the soil particles is predominantly greater
than 19 mm. The specimen may be compacted statically or dynamically.

I. Compaction by Static Method

The mass of the wet soil at the required moisture content to give the desired density
when occupying the standard specimen volume in the mould is calculated. A batch of
soil is thoroughly mixed with water to give the required water content. The correct
mass of the moist soil is placed in the mould and compaction obtained by pressing in
displacer disc, a filter paper being placed between the disc & soil.

II. Compaction by Dynamic Method

For dynamic compaction , a representative sample of soil weighing approximately 4.5

kg or more for fine grained soils and 5.5 kg or more for granular soil shall be taken
and mixed thoroughly with water. If the soil is to be compacted to the maximum dry
density at the optimum water content determined in accordance with light compaction
or heavy compaction, the exact mass of soil required is to be taken and the necessary
quantity of water added so that the water content of soil sample is equal to the
determined optimum water content. The mould with extension collar attached is

31
clamped to the base plate. The spacer disc is inserted over the base plate and a disc of
coarse filter paper placed on the top of the spacer disc. The soil water mixture is
compacted into the mould in accordance with the methods specified in light
compaction test or heavy compaction test.

PROCEDURE

1. The mould containing the specimen with the base plate in position but the top
face exposed is placed on the lower plate of the testing machine.
2. Surcharge weights, sufficient to produce an intensity of loading equal to the
weight of the base material and pavement is placed on the specimen.
3. To prevent upheaval of soil into the hole of the surcharge weights, 2.5 kg
annular weight is placed on the soil surface prior to seating the penetration
plunger after which the remainder of the surcharge weight is placed.
4. The plunger is to be seated under a load of 4 kg so that full contact is
established between the surface of the specimen and the plunger.
5. The stress and strain gauges are then set to zero. Load is applied to the
penetration plunger so that the penetration is approximately 1.25 mm per
minute.

6. Readings of the load are taken at penetrations 2.5, 5.0, 7.5, 10.0 and 12.5 mm.

7. The plunger is then raised and the mould detached from the loading equipment.

CALCULATION
Load-Penetration curve:

The load penetration curve is plotted taking penetration value on x-axis and Load
values on Y- axis. Corresponding to the penetration value at which the CBR is
desired, corrected load value is taken from the load-penetration curve and the CBR
calculated as follows

California bearing ratio = (PT/PS)x100

Where PT = Corrected unit (or total) test load corresponding to the chosen penetration
curve, and PS = Unit(or total) standard load for the same depth of penetration as for
PS taken from standard code.

32
REPORT
The CBR values are usually calculated for penetration of 2.5 mm and 5 mm. The
CBR value is reported correct to the first decimal place.

SAFETY & PRECAUTIONS

PRECAUT

 Clean the sieves with the help of a brush, after sieving

 While weighing put the sieve with soil sample on the balance in a concentric
position.

 Check the electric connection of the sieve shaker before conducting the test.

FRESH SOIL:

PENETRATION PROVING RING TEST LOAD (kg) STANDARD LOAD

DIAL (mm) READING (kg)

2.5 6.5 59.67 1370
5 9.1 83.53 2055
7.5 11.3 103.73 2630
10 13.2 121.17 3180
12.5 14.15 129.89 3600

33
SOIL + 8% STONE DUST:

PENETRATION PROVING RING TEST LOAD (kg) STANDARD LOAD

DIAL (mm) READING (kg)

2.5 5.75 53.30 1370
5 8 73.44 2055
7.5 9.9 90.88 2630
10 11.55 106.02 3180
12.5 12.8 117.50 3600

34
SOIL + 12% STONE DUST:

PENETRATION PROVING RING TEST LOAD (kg) STANDARD LOAD

DIAL (mm) READING (kg)

2.5 7.6 69.76 1370
5 11.2 102.81 2055
7.5 13.8 126.68 2630
10 15.75 144.58 3180
12.5 17.6 161.56 3600

35
SOIL + 16% STONE DUST:

PENETRATION PROVING RING TEST LOAD (kg) STANDARD LOAD

DIAL (mm) READING (kg)

2.5 5.25 45.9 1370
5 7.75 71.1 2055
7.5 10.25 94.09 2630
10 12.45 114.29 3180
12.5 14.6 134.02 3600

36
SOIL+ 20% STONE DUST:

PENETRATION PROVING RING TEST LOAD (kg) STANDARD LOAD

DIAL (mm) READING (kg)

2.5 7.6 69.768 1370
5 11.5 105.57 2055
7.5 14.6 134.20 2630
10 17.3 158.814 3180
12.5 19.8 181.764 3600

37
38
 CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The following chapter covers the results of the testing programs. The results that are
presented include soil properties admixture percentages and the various testing results
for the soil additive combinations.

Native soil properties and admixture percentages

Soil chacterstics were determined using atterberg limits ,hydrometer analysis, specific
gravity, s tandard proctor compaction and cbr tests. The test results is shown the table

SR NO. PROPERTIES VALUES

1. CBR VALUE 4.355
2. MAX. DRY DENSITY 1.735

4.1 STANDARD PROCTOR TEST

MAXIMUM DENSITY AND OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT

Optimum moisture content and maximum density for native soil and each of the soil
additive combination at different curing period is presented in the table and the
variation of maximum density and optimum moisture content is plotted.

OPTIMUM MOISTURE DRY DENSITY

FRESH SOIL 9.8% 1.735gm/cc
STONE DUST 8% 8.9% 1.789gm/cc
STONE DUST 12 % 8.3% 1.81gm/cc
STONE DUST 16% 8% 1.844gm/cc

39
4.2 CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO

CBR VALUE
FRESH SOIL 4.35
STONE DUST 8% 3.88
STONE DUST 12% 5.09
STONE DUST 16% 3.46
STONE DUST 20% 5.13

40
 CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION

We brought our soil from shahpura and as a result we found that 12% stone dust of
the soil gives us the best result for soil stabalization on futher adding of stone dust,
soil stablization decreases. For this soil sample respective amount of stone dust in the
soil is best for soil stablization.

Also it has been observed that CBR value has increased on addition of stone dust till
16%. After addition of 16% stone dust of the soil the CBR value relatively decreased
and then again took a rise on addition of 20% stone dust.

It’s also inferred from the graphs that maximum dry density of the soil kept on
increasing with increase in dosage of the stone dust in soil. But it is also observed that
the optimum moisture content kept declining with increase in quantity of stone dust in
soil.

The construction cost can be reduced to a large extent if locally available materials are
used. In the flexible pavement construction the main constituent is soil, which
comprises the base layer and sub-base layer. If the locally available soil is having a
very low CBR value, it can be treated with locally available materials to improve its
quality. Stone dust from construction site is not only an environmental hazard but its
disposal is also a problem. In this study it has seen that stone dust when mixed with
the locally available soil improved the engineering properties of soil, especially MDD
and CBR.

41
 REFERENCES

1. Ankit Singh Negi , Mohammed Faizan, Devashish Panday, Sidharth, Rohanjot singh
(2013) “SOIL STABILIZATION USING LIME”. Vol 2.issue 2.

2. Ankur Mudgal , Raju sarkar,A K Sahu(2014) “EFFECT OF LIME AND STONE

DUST IN THE GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES OF BLACK COTTON SOIL” vol
1, no.2.

3. Aparva Roy (2014) “SOIL STABILIZATION USING RICE HUSK ASH AND
CEMENT “, Vol.5, no.1.

4. C. Rajkumar, T Meenambal (2015) “ EFFECT OF COAL ASH IN THE

STABILIZATION OF EXPANSIVE SOIL FOR THE PAVEMENT” , vol 8. No. 1.

5. Ghatge Sandeep Hambirao, Dr P.G. Rakaraddi(2014) “SOIL STABILIZATION

USING WASTE SHREDDED RUBBER TYRE CHIPS”, vol-11, no-1

6. Karthik.S, Ashok kumar , Goutham.P,Elango.G, Gokul, Thangaraj.S (2014)” SOIL

STABILIZATION BY USING FLY ASH”, vol.10,no.6

7. M Neerja, D.Daiva Prasanthi “ A STUDYON BLACK COTTON-SHREDDED

TYRES MIXTURE”.

8. Naman Agarwal (2015) “EFFECT OF STONE DUST ON SOME GEOTECHNICAL

PROPERTIES OF SOIL”, Vol.12, issue.1

9. S. Bhuvanshwari, R G Robinson, S R Gandhi(2005) “ STABILIZATION OF

EXPANSIVE SOILS USING FLY ASH”.

10. Satyam Tiwari, Nishant Tiwari(2016) “SOIL STABILIZATION USING WASTE

FIBRE MATERIALS” vol 4.no.3.

11. Shish Pal , Vinod kumar sonthwal, Jasvir S Rattan(2015) “SOIL STABILIZATION
USING POLYPROPYLENE AS WASTE FIBRE MATERIAL” vol 4.issue 11.

42
12. Shiva Prasad A, P.T Ravichandran, R Annadurai, P.R.Kannan Rajkumar (2014)
“STUDY ON EFFECT OF CRUMB RUBBER ON BEHAVIOUR OF SOIL”,
vol.4,no.3.

13. Shyam bhushan, Rajesh kumar, Ved prakash (2015) “STABILITY OF CLAY SOIL
USING RICE HUSK ASH AND STONE DUST”, vol.3, issue 5.

14. U Arun kumar, Kiran B Biradar “SOFT SUBGRADE STABILIZATION WITH

QUARRY DUST AND INDUSTRIAL WASTE”.

43