See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/226086470

Effect of Fly Ash Stabilization on Geotechnical Properties of Chittagong

Coastal Soil

Chapter · January 2007

DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4020-6146-2_26

CITATIONS READS

19 382

3 authors, including:

Mehedi Ansary Munaz Ahmed Noor

Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology
113 PUBLICATIONS   305 CITATIONS    42 PUBLICATIONS   138 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Earthquake vulnerability reduction strategies-in the context of Old Dhaka View project

ESTABLISHMENT OF BUET-JAPAN INSTITUTE OF DISASTER PREVENTION AND URBAN SAFETY (BUET-JIDPUS) [2009-2011] funded by JDCF and UGC, MoE View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mehedi Ansary on 19 June 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

A Study of Lime Stabilization on Soil of a Selected
Reclaimed Site of Dhaka City

M. A. Ansary, A. Siddique & K. A. Hasan

Department of Civil Engg., BUET, Dhaka-1000, Bangladesh
ansaryma@yahoo.com

Abstract: Engineering properties of a lime stabilised soil collected from a reclaimed site of Dhaka, Bangladesh was studied. The soil
used in this investigation is high plasticity silty clay with liquid limit of 52 and plasticity index of 29. Compaction tests, unconfined
compression tests on compacted large cylindrical samples (71 mm diameter by 142 mm high and compacted according to Modified
AASHTO compaction test), California Bearing Ratio (CBR) tests and flexural strength tests using simple beams with third point load-
ing were carried out on the untreated samples and samples stabilised with different lime contents (1%, 3%, 5% and 7%). Effect of cur-
ing age on unconfined compressive strength and flexural strength was also investigated for the stabilised samples. From compaction
tests, it was found that with increase in lime contents maximum dry density reduced and optimum moisture content increased. Consid-
erable increase in compressive strength was found due to stabilisation which depended on the lime content and curing age. CBR values
of the stabilised samples increased significantly. Flexural strength of soil-lime beams also increased.

1 INTRODUCTION Stabilization of soil with cement and lime was successfully

Improvement of mechanical properties of soil is essential to meet
the required soil condition for construction in many areas. Stabi-
lization is one of the most economical and desirable method for
improving the strength, durability and resistance to deformation
of both in situ and reclaimed soils. Soil stabilization always in-
volves certain mechanical treatment of the natural soil or remix-
ing the natural soil with admixtures followed by compaction of
the mixture. The different uses of soil demand various require-
ments of mechanical strength and of resistance to environmental
forces. Stabilization is considered as a technique that is applied
only when there is a particular and obvious deficiency in soil.
The usual deficiencies are mainly associated with inadequate
strength or stiffness, excessive sensitivity to changes in moisture
content, high permeability, poor workability and tendency to
erode.
There are a number of methods of soil stabilization for im-
proving the physical and engineering properties. Undoubtedly,
the most widely applied methods involve the use of inorganic
cementation bonds between the particles in the soil system
(Khan, 1989). Full use of the potential of stabilization requires an
awareness of the various methods available, their preferred appli-
cations and limitations, their properties and means of evaluation
and their construction requirements. NAASRA (1986) discussed
the factors for each of the commonly used methods.
Cement and lime stabilization are widely recommended for
construction of roads (Ingles & Metcalf, 1972; Kezdi, 1979;
NAASRA, 1986; Hausmann, 1990; Bell, 1993). The main engi-
neering benefits of lime stabilization are improved workability,
increased strength and volume stability. Lime-stabilization was
successfully used to stabilise clayey soils. The clay minerals
carry a negative charge on the surface, which adsorbed cautions
of sodium, magnesium, potassium or hydrogen, and to a large ex-
tent responsible for imparting plasticity to the soil sample. Lime
brings changes in the plasticity properties of a soil; it increases
soil contact bonds and therefore the strength.
used for the construction of road foundation all over the world. In
United States and Europe, lime stabilization is commonly used
for improving remoulded strength, loading capacity of founda-
tions of (roads or embankments) and for erosion control
(Macham et al., 1977). Markus et al. (1979) recommended that
stabilised cement and lime could be used for the construction of
low-cost building in developing countries. Central Road Re-
search Institute (CRRI), India has been advocating low cost soil
stabilization techniques for rural roads in India (Swaminathan et
al., 1976). Lime was already used as stabiliser for the sub-base
layer construction of a segment of highway in the Northern dis-
trict of Bangladesh.
In Bangladesh especially in capital city Dhaka, land develop-
ment activities have increased significantly in the recent time.
Every year new residential, commercial and recreational areas
are being developed by raising low lands. Houses, markets, roads
etc. are frequently being constructed on newly reclaimed ground.
In the reclamation process, filling soils are generally collected
from readily available borrow pits. But the properties of the soils
do not always comply with the specified requirements and thus
creates problems in the construction phase. Longer monsoon
heavy rainfall and flood are other problems in land development
works in Bangladesh. To mitigate the problems it is necessary to
improve the properties of in-situ soils and filling soils. Stabiliza-
tions could play a vital role in this process.
In this paper, lime stabilization of soil of a selected reclaimed
site (Bashundhara Housing project) of Dhaka was carried out.
2 THE TEST SCHEME
The whole research programme was carried out according to the
following phases:
(i) Index property tests of the soil without any treatment were
carried out to characterise the soils. Index tests include Atterberg
limit tests, specific gravity and grain size analysis. Index prop-

1
erty tests of the soil stabilised with different lime contents were method. The compacted samples were cured in moist environ-
also performed. ment for 7 days and air-dried. The air-dried samples were pulver-
(ii) The following tests were carried out on the soil without any ised to pass through No. 40 sieve and after mixing of water the
treatment and stabilised with four different lime contents (1%, samples were kept 24 hours in polythene bags to bring uniform
3%, 5% and 7%): moisture content in soils. Liquid limit, plastic limit and plasticity
(a) Modified compaction test index of the stabilised samples were determined following the
(b) Unconfined compressive strength test (at curing age of 7, 14 standard procedure outlined in BS 1377 and ASTM D424 respec-
and 28 days) on moulded cylindrical samples of 71 mm diameter tively. The shrinkage factor comprising the shrinkage limit was
by 142 mm high determined in accordance with the procedure specified in ASTM
(c) California Bearing Ratio (4 days soaked CBR) test and D427. Linear shrinkage of the cement and lime treated samples
(d) Flexural strength test (at curing age of 7 and 28 days) using were determined following the procedure outlined in BS 1377.
simple beam with third point loading system. Table 1. Physical and index properties of untreated soil.
Unconfined compressive strength tests and flexural strength
tests using simple beam with third point loading were carried out Index Properties and Classification of the Soil Sample
on lime stabilised samples cured at 7 days and 28 days in order to Specific Gravity 2.67
investigate the effect of curing age on the measured compressive Liquid Limit 52%
strength and flexural strength and stiffness. In order to investi- Plastic Limit 23%
gate CBR - Dry density relationships for the untreated and stabi- Plasticity Index 29%
lised soils, laboratory CBR tests were carried out on the untreated Shrinkage Limit 14%
samples and samples treated with lime using three levels of com- Linear Shrinkage 13.5%
paction energies. Absorption tests were also carried out on the % Sand (2 mm to 0.075 mm) 2%
portions of the cement-stabilized samples used in the flexural % Silt (0.075 mm to 0.002 mm) 78%
strength tests. % Clay (<0.002 mm) 20%
(iii) In order to investigate the effect of moulding water content % of Material Finer than No. 200 Sieve 98%
on the compressive strength, unconfined compression strength Unified Soil Classification CH
tests were carried out on 71 mm diameter by 142 mm high stabi- AASHTO Soil Classification A-7-5
lised soil samples treated with 3% lime content which had been
compacted according to the Modified Compaction test with two
moulding water contents. The following water contents were 4.1 Plasticity and Shrinkage Characteristics
used for compaction:
The values of plasticity and shrinkage properties of the untreated
(a) Water content corresponding to 95% of maximum dry den-
and lime-treated soil samples are shown in Table 2. These results
sity at dry side of the optimum moisture content.
are in agreement with those reported by Ahmed (1984), Rajbong-
(b) Water content corresponding to 95% of maximum dry den-
shi (1997), Shahjahan (2001) and Hasan (2002). Table 2 shows
sity at wet side of the optimum moisture content.
the linear shrinkage of the stabilized samples reduced with in-
creasing lime content. Similar results were also reported by Bell
(1993).
3 PHYSICAL AND INDEX PROPERTIES OF UNTREATED
SOIL Table 2. Index and shrinkage properties of lime-treated soil.

The sample collected from the field was disturbed. This sample Index Shrinkage Lime Content (%)
was then air-dried and the soil lumps was broken carefully with a Properties 0 1 3 5 7
wooden hammer so as to avoid breakage of soil particle. The re- Liquid Limit 52.0 50.5 49.0 48.0 46.5
quired quantity of soil was then sieved through sieve No. 40 Plastic Limit 23.0 23.5 24.0 25.0 25.5
(0.425 mm). The different fractions of sand, silt and clay of the Plasticity Index 29.0 27.5 25.0 23.0 22.5
sample were found from the grain size distribution curve follow- Shrinkage Limit 14.0 15.0 15.5 16.0 17.0
ing the MIT Textural Classification System. The soil was classi- Linear Shrinkage 13.5 13.0 11.0 8.0 6.0
fied according to Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM
D2487). The soils were also classified according to AASHTO
Soil Classification System (AASHTO M145-49). Table 1 pre- 4.2 Moisture-Density Relations
sents the values of index and shrinkage properties, grain size dis- The moisture-density relationship of untreated and lime-treated
tribution and classifications of the soil sample used. samples is shown in Fig. 1. It can be seen from Fig. 1 that with
the increase in lime content values, γmax reduced while the values
of wopt increased. Compared with the untreated sample, the val-
4 PHYSICAL AND ENGINEERING PROPERTIES OF LIME ues of γmax reduced up to 4% for an increase in lime content up to
TREATED SOIL 7%. The values of wopt increased up to 21% for an increase in
lime content up to 7%. Ahmed (1984) found that for sandy silt
Liquid limit, plastic limit, plasticity index and shrinkage charac- and silty clay soils of Bangladesh, the maximum dry density re-
teristics including shrinkage limit and linear shrinkage of the duced with the increase in lime content. Rajbongshi (1997) also
lime stabilised soil were determined. Hydrated lime (i.e., slaked found that compared with untreated sample the maximum dry
lime) was used as additive. Liquid limit, plastic limit and plastic- density of lime-treated samples of two fine-grained coastal soils
ity index of the stabilised samples were estimated from tests car- reduced while optimum moisture content slightly increased. Re-
ried out on air-dried pulverised samples. The required quantities duction in the values of γmax with increasing lime content was
of pulverised soil were sieved through sieve No. 40 (0.425 mm).
The lime treated soils were compacted following ASTM D558

2
also reported by a number of researchers (Kezdi, 1979; Haus- Lime Content Curing Age qu εf
mann, 1990; Bell, 1993). (%) (Days) (kPa) (%)
0 - 380 10.7
4.3 Unconfined Compressive Strength 7 470 8.5
1 14 775 9.6
Table 3 presents a summary of the unconfined compression test 28 984 6.4
results of the untreated and treated samples. The values of uncon- 7 1020 12.9
fined compressive strength (qu) and axial strain at failure (εf) for 3 14 1381 4.3
the untreated samples and samples treated with different lime 28 2015 2.1
contents (1%, 3%, 5% and 7%) and cured for 7, 14 and 28 days 7 1877 2.7
are presented in Table 3. Table 3 shows that compared with the 5 14 2192 3.2
untreated sample, the values of qu of the treated samples in- 28 2385 2.1
creased significantly, depending on the lime content and curing 7 2173 1.6
age. Ahmed (1984) found that unconfined compression strength 7 14 2304 1.6
for sandy silt and silty clay samples treated with various lime 28 2678 1.6
contents (0.5% to 5%) increased with the increase in lime content
and curing age. Serajuddin (1992) and Rajbongshi (1997) also
reported that the unconfined compressive strength of regional al- 4.4 California Bearing Ratio
luvial soils and coastal soils of Bangladesh treated with 3% to A summary of the CBR test results is presented in Table 4. In or-
10% hydrated lime increased with the increase in lime content der to investigate CBR-dry density relationship for untreated and
and curing age. Table 3 also shows that the value of qu of sample stabilized samples, CBR tests were performed on samples com-
treated with 7% lime and cured at 28 days was found to be about pacted according to Modified Compaction test using three levels
7 times higher than the strength of the untreated sample. of compaction energies, e.g., low compaction (471 kN-m/m3),
19 medium compaction (1178 kN-m/m3) and high compaction (2639
kN-m/m3). It can be seen from Table 4 that compared with the
untreated sample, CBR-values of the treated samples at all levels
18
of compaction increased considerably. TRB reported the effect of
lime treatment on CBR-values for three plastic clays (LL = 35 to
Dry Density (kN/m )
3

17
16
0% Lime
1% Lime
3% Lime
15
5% Lime
7% Lime
14
6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Moisture Content (%)
Fig. 1. Moisture-density relations of lime-treated soil.
Ingles & Metcalf (1972) recommended that when lime stabiliza-
tion has to be used in order to upgrade heavy clays to sub-base mate-
rial quality type, a qu-value of 250 psi (1722 kPa) at seven days is
required. Table 3 shows that the unconfined compressive strength of
samples treated with 5% and 7% lime contents fulfilled the require-
ments as proposed by Ingles & Metcalf (1972). These results are in
agreement with those reported by a number of researchers (Ingles &
Metcalf, 1972; Ahmed, 1984; Serajuddin, 1992; Bell, 1993; Ra-
jbongshi, 1997; Mollah, 1997).
In order to investigate the effect of molding water content on the
compressive strength, unconfined compression tests were also car-
ried out on 71 mm diameter by 142 mm high soil samples stabilized
with 3% lime content and cured for 7, 14 and 28 days. The samples
were compacted according to the modified Compaction test with
two additional molding water contents other than the optimum mois-
ture content as mentioned in Article 2. The variation of qu with cur-
ing age for the soil sample treated with 3% lime and compacted with
different molding water contents are shown in Fig. 2.
Table 3. Unconfined compressive strength test results of un-
treated and lime-treated soil.
59, PI = 15 to 30) and showed that for all the soils CBR increase
markedly with increasing lime content. It can be seen from Table
4 that CBR-values of soil stabilized with 7% lime increased up to
about 4 times than that of the respective untreated samples.
Ingles & Metcalf (1972) recommended that for improvement
of base material in road construction, the minimum CBR-values
of soil-lime mix should be 80. It can be seen from Table 4 that
CBR value of soil treated with 7% lime and compacted at high
20 energy is 70, which does not fulfill the criteria proposed by In-
gles & Metcalf (1972). Therefore, slightly higher lime content
may be required to achieve higher CBR values in order to fulfill
the above criteria suggested by Ingles & Metcalf (1972). Mollah
(1997) and Rajbongshi (1997) showed that at all levels of com-
paction, CBR increases markedly with the increase in lime con-
tent also with the increase in dry density.
4.5 Flexural Strength and Modulus
The flexural properties of untreated and stabilized samples were
investigated by carrying out flexural strength test using simple
beam test with third point loading. From the flexural stress and
deflection data, flexural strength and modulus were determined.
The flexural properties of the soil are presented in Table 5. It can
be seen from Table 5 that compared with the untreated sample,
flexural strength and modulus of the treated samples cured at 7
and 28 days increased significantly. The flexural strength and
modulus of treated soil with 7% lime and cured at 28 days are
about 3.0 times and 2.7 times higher than those of the untreated
samples, respectively. Rajbongshi (1997) also showed that com-
pared with the untreated soils flexural strength and modulus of
treated samples cured at 28 days increase significantly. The
maximum deflection and failure strain of untreated and stabilized
soil-lime beams were in the range of 0.49 mm to 1.08 mm and
0.22% to 0.48%, respectively.

3
 3000
Table 5. Flexural properties of lime-treated soil.
Optimum
2500 Dry Side Lime Curing Flexural Maximum Flexural Failure
Wet Side Content Age Strength Deflec- Modulus Strain
(%) (Days) (kPa) tion (mm) (MPa) (%)
2000
0 - 40.80 0.780 23.37 0.354
qu (kN/m )
2

7 54.36 0.860 24.00 0.372

1
1500 28 67.80 0.740 29.39 0.331
7 77.88 0.495 38.84 0.226
3
28 81.20 0.720 52.70 0.324
1000
7 85.00 0.580 43.06 0.267
5
28 94.80 0.860 57.70 0.394
500 7 96.20 0.840 53.85 0.382
0 7 14 21 28 35 7
Curing Age (Days)
28 121.70 1.080 62.70 0.487
Fig. 2. Unconfined compressive strength versus curing age of 3%
lime-treated soil for different molding water content.
REFERENCES
Table 4. CBR test results of untreated and lime-treated Soil. Ahmed, N.U. 1984. Geotechnical properties of selected local
soils stabilized with lime and cement. M.Sc. Engg. Thesis,
Lime Compaction Dry Density 4 Days
Dept. of Civil Engg., BUET, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Content Energy (kN/m3) Soaked CBR
Bell, F.G. 1993. Engineering treatment of soils. An Imprint of
Low 16.90 13
Chapman & Hall, First Edition, London, U.K.
0 Medium 17.80 15
Hasan, K.A. 2002. A study on cement and lime stabilization on
High 18.20 17
soils of selected reclaimed sites of Dhaka city. M.Sc. Engg.
Low 16.32 17 Thesis, Dept. of Civil Engg., BUET, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
1 Medium 17.31 23 Hausmann, M.R. 1990. Engineering principles of ground modifica-
High 17.92 36 tion. McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, Singapore.
Low 15.94 32 Ingles, O.G. & Metcalf, J.B. 1972. Soil stabilization-principles
3 Medium 17.04 43 and practice. Butterworths, Pty. Limited, Australia.
High 17.36 49 Kezdi, A. 1979. Stabilized earth roads. Elsevier Scientific Pub-
Low 15.21 49 lishing Company, New York.
5 Medium 16.39 57 Khan, M.J. 1989. Effect of flyash with lime and cement additives
High 16.86 60 on the engineering behaviour of soft Bangkok clay. M. Engi-
Low 14.89 53 neering Thesis GT 89-16, Asian Institute of Technology,
7 Medium 15.89 64 Bangkok, Thailand.
High 16.04 70 Macham, L.R. et al. 1977. Laboratory study of the effectiveness
of cement and lime stabilization for erosion control. Transpro-
tation Research Board, 641: 24-28.
5 CONCLUDING REMARKS
Markus, T.A. et al. 1979. Stabilised soil: an under-utilised re-
The main findings and conclusions of the present study are as source for low-cost building in developing countries. Univer-
follows: The plastic limit and shrinkage limit increased with in- sity of Strathclyde, Glasgow.
creasing lime content while liquid limit reduced with the increase Molla, M.A.A. 1997. Effect of compaction conditions and state vari-
in lime content. Compared with the untreated sample, linear ables on engineering properties of the lime stabilized soil. M.Sc.
shrinkage of the stabilized samples reduced with increasing lime Engg. Thesis, Dept. of Civil Engg., BUET, Dhaka, Bangla-
content. With the increase of lime content: maximum dry density desh.
values reduced, optimum moisture content values increased and NAASRA 1986. Guide to stabilization in roadworks. Sydney,
unconfined compressive strength values also increased. It was Australia.
found that irrespective of curing ages, values of compressive Rajbongshi, B. 1997. A study on cement and lime stabilized Chit-
strength is maximum and minimum at molding moisture contents tagong coastal soils for use in road construction. M.Sc. Engg.
of wet side of optimum and dry side of optimum respectively. It Thesis, Dept. of Civil Engg., BUET, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
therefore appears that in order to achieve adequate compressive Serajuddin, M. 1992 Chemical stabilization of Bangladesh fine-
strength, lime stabilized samples should be compacted at the wet grained soils for improvement of road sub-grade. Proceedings of
side of their optimum moisture contents. the Indian Geotechnical Conference, 1: 223-226.
Compared with the untreated sample, CBR values of the Shahjahan, A.B.M., 2001. Long term strength development of lime
treated samples increased considerably at all levels of compac- stabilized soils. M.Sc. Engg. Thesis, Dept. of Civil Engg.,
tion effort, depending on the lime content. It was found that cur- BUET, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
ing age has got significant effect on the increase in flexural Swaminathan, C.G. et al. 1976. A system approach to rural road
strength and modulus of lime-treated soil. The maximum deflec- development. Journal of Indian Road Congress, 42-43: Paper
tion and failure strain of stabilized soil-lime beams were found to No. 346.
be small and the maximum were 1.08 mm and 0.48% respec-
tively.

View publication stats