International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2020) 6:31

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-020-00212-3

ORIGINAL PAPER

Utilization of Marble Powder and Magnesium Phosphate Cement

for Improving the Engineering Characteristics of Soil
Partab Rai1 · Huafu Pei1 · Fanhua Meng1 · Mahmood Ahmad1,2

Received: 10 February 2020 / Accepted: 20 May 2020 / Published online: 9 June 2020
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Abstract
In this study, the effects of waste marble powder and magnesium phosphate cement on the properties of soil were investigated.
The incorporation of waste marble powder (MP) and (MPC) magnesium phosphate cement as a novel additive, lead the
significant environmental and economic contributions in soil stabilization. The key properties of natural soil were extracted
and several tests, such as specific gravity, Atterberg limits, sieve analysis, unconfined compression strength test, Direct shear
box test, modified Proctor test, California bearing ratio, and Scanning electron microscopy test were performed on soil sam-
ples prepared with different percentages of MPC and MP, i.e. 0%, 2.5%, 5%, 7.5% and 0%, 5%, 10%, 15%, respectively. An
unconfined strength test was used to obtain desired comprehensive strengths following 7, 14, 28 days of curing time. The
overall experimental results revealed that MP and MPC can be added to enhance the stability of the soil. While usability
and effectiveness of MPC and MP are cost-effective and eco-friendly as the substitution of natural soil for deep foundations.

Keywords  Soil stabilization · Magnesium phosphate cement · Marble powder · Bearing capacity

Introduction of road pavement [3, 4], railways foundations [6], embank-

Soil stabilization is a technique for modifying the proper-
ties of soil by mixing and combining new materials [1–4],
In the present day, the growing trend of using waste mate-
rial in soil stabilization or soil strengthening is operating
worldwide. The key reason behind this phenomenon is the
excessive production of waste such as marble powder which
not only poses hazards but also creates problems with des-
posal. The use of this waste material in the building would
ease adverse environmental effects, save energy and money,
add economic value to the waste, and reduce total costs [5].
It is generally utilized to stabilize soil for the construction
* Huafu Pei
huafupei@dlut.edu.cn
Partab Rai
partabrai@mail.dlut.edu.cn
Mahmood Ahmad
ahmadm@mail.dlut.edu.cn
1
State Key Lab of Coastal and Offshore Engineering, Dalian
University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China
2
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering
and Technology, Peshawar (Bannu Campus), Bannu 28100,
Pakistan
ments [7], buildings, beneath connect docks, earthen dams,
terminals for rail and wagon, an economical base for road-
ways, building cushions, and reservoir linings, composting
facilities and as a mixture material for several purposes in
construction work [1, 2, 8]. The soil is a building material
taking on the distinct properties that vary from place to place
[6, 7]. Unlike new compounds, there are also variations in
properties that are required to be properly evaluated for the
specific area of study [9]. This is because with a general soil
inspection of a city it may mislead us for a definite project
position. Examining the bearing strength specification of
soil, it usually shows many modifications along with the
horizontal and vertical sketch of the land. In some areas,
it may have a beneficial strength for less depth whereas, it
might not have adequate strength at an impressive profundity
for which it gets basic to make building improvement strides
for its stabilization [9].
The primary objective of this research is to conduct
an accurate investigation into the effects of MPC–MP
mixtures on the unconfined compression strength, direct
shear strength, compaction properties and to diminish the
development cost via doing the best utilization of locally
accessible materials. Besides, it determines all the index
properties of composite samples (i.e., those prepared with

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
31 
Page 2 of 13
different amounts of MPC–MP). It is creating as a popular
and practical technique for soil improvement [10], There
are various stabilizing admixtures available [9], here, in
this study work, soil stabilization has been finished with
the utilization of arbitrarily accumulated marble powder
which is a waste that remains during cleaning and cutting
of marble material. The waste that survived from marble
powder utilized in this examination was not for any way to
exchange. Marble has held its significance to the present-
day. According to the review the world’s marble stores are
to be more than 15 billion m ­ 3, and Turkey shares a nor-
mal marble hold of around 5.2 billion m ­ 3. Marble is being
carried out in different industrial resources and plants in
just over 50 countries around the world [9, 11]. China is
the world’s second-largest marble producer and produces
about 350 million m ­ 2 of marble planks in 2015 [5]. As
the cutting of marble stone makes sludge, in this manner,
the quickly developing marble industry has environmen-
tal concerns because of the negative impacts of marble
quarrying [10–12]. Subsequently, the reuse of these wastes
offers favorable circumstances to reduce development
expenditures and raise maintainability, [9, 11, 13]. The
most significant use of waste marble powder had the high-
est resistance to sulphate against seawater and the pres-
ence of excess C­ a2+ ions which helps to stabilize the soil
[5]. Nevertheless, the MPC is a contemporary inorganic
cementitious material is made by setting up the phosphate
and dead utilized magnesia, through-arrangement acid-
based reaction to create chemical bonding strength [14,
15], Besides, it is superior correlated to (OPC) ordinary
Portland cement, MPC has a different chemical reaction,
and performance [16–18]. MPC has numerous benefi-
cial properties, such as high strength, quick setting in an
inhibited temperature condition (− 20 °C) without heat
analysis, quick-setting and hardening (can be demolded
within 30 min after casting), frost resistance, great hold-
ing quality with old concrete, a bit of drying shrinkage,
low thermal development coefficient, good adhesive per-
formance, great corrosion resistance, and fire resistance
conduct [15, 19–22]. Due to its high early strength, MPC
is used as repair or binders materials and widely applied in
the rehabilitation works related to civil engineering infra-
structural projects worldwide for a long time, such as air-
field runways, bridges, highways, fixing harmed asphalts
and 3D powder printing materials [18, 19, 23–25]. the
nuclear waste landfills have likewise begun using MPC
as lining materials attributable to its great durability and
low permeability [23, 24]. Further, it is as often as pos-
sible applied in the stabilization of blended wastes [19].
the development in the shear strength details has been
stressed and comparative investigations have been per-
formed applying various techniques of shear resistance
estimation [10]. It manages to be increased by various
13
International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2020) 6:31
stabilization procedures one of these is the stabilization of
by the addition of MPC and MP, it is economical somehow
and efficient than others as well.
The various investigators reported the effect of the mate-
rials on different engineering properties after additions of
MP and MPC on the soil. Ural [26] investigated the effect of
soil type on stabilization with marble powder for forest road
development. The author has reported that plastic soils were
effective in improving different properties after stabilization
with marble dust (MD). The soil with more clay content
demonstrated the best improvement. Significant the value
of the Plasticity index decreases with the MD method, espe-
cially for high PI soils. The results obtained that the geotech-
nical requirements of forest soils were widespread through
the production of marble dust. Plasticity was decreased by
15 to 30% and strength increased by 25 to 50%. It carried
out the greatest strength at 8% marble powder. For MD-
treated soils, the most considerable strength improvements
occurred after 28 days. The adjustment with marble dust for
forest roads represents a naturally advantageous method, as
utilizing materials of nature, which is inexhaustible and they
give the reason to improved road developments, from the
organic, specialized, and effective perceptions. Pandey [27]
studied “soil stabilization using cement” and were effective
in improving various properties of subgrade soil. Choksi
[28] pursuance of waste marble powder to improve soil sta-
bilization. The study carried out was positive in improv-
ing the various properties of alluvial soil. Arora [29] has
“discussed the improvement of engineering characteristics
of the locally available soil mass by using marble dust”.
They noted that the increments of marble powder with the
soil increased the gradation of soil, increasing the maximum
dry density and shear resistance, decreased the optimum
moisture content, swelling characteristics, and diminished
permeability. Gurbuz [8] concentrated on the adjustment of
clayey soil by utilizing marble powder in subclassified of
road improvement. And to examine the ductility behavior
and unconfined compressive strength of clayey soil by utiliz-
ing marble powder with different extents (2.5, 5, 10, 15, 20,
and 25%), respectively. Conclusive results determined that
the ductility increased and peak strength with the addition
of marble content up to 10% and then it proceeded with
a decreasing propensity as marble substance increased. In
light of these outcomes, 10% of waste marble was chosen
as a satisfactory measurement. Okagbue [30] examined the
possibility of using marble dust to stabilize red tropical
soil. Parameters tried secured the grain size distribution,
Atterberg limits, specific gravity, compressive strength, the
standard compaction attributes, and California bearing ratio
teat after different curing conditions, plasticity decreased by
20–33%, California Bearing Ratio and strength improved by
30–46% and 27–55%, respectively. Babu ; Abdulla; Zum-
rawi [2, 31, 32] examined the impact of various proportions
International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2020) 6:31 Page 3 of 13  31
of marble powder in the stabilization of expansive soil and
detailed that the usage of marble in differing percentages
decreased consistency limit values. Bhavsar [33] concen-
trated on the stabilization of black cotton soil by replace-
ment of 30% of soil with Marble Waste Powder (MWP) and
Brick Dust (BD). Test outcomes indicated that the MWP
gave decrease 10% in swelling, 17.7% in shrinkage, 4.08% in
Plasticity, and 5.72% in Optimum moisture content (OMC)
with an increase 11.69% in maximum dry density (MDD).
Similarly, for BD there was a reduction of 10% in swelling,
14.3% in shrinkage, 5.57% in Plasticity, 5.72% in OMC, and
an increase of 11.69% in MDD. Pei [34] has recommended a
new mechanism using FBG to measure the early shrinkage
of MPC paste independent of temperature.
In-depth investigation of the research depicts that soil sta-
bilization was increased by the extension of various addi-
tives, i.e. marble powder [26, 33–35], cement [27], geopoly-
mer [36], and Portland cement [37], lime and cement [38,
39], Ordinary Portland cement and magnesium phosphate
cement [37, 38, 40]. For soil strength growth, only less con-
centrate is given to MPC, so this study takes care of MPC as
a novel additive mixture. The reason for taking MPC is that
it’s highly performed, environmentally friendly, economi-
cally feasible, and having quick setting time comparatively
OPC [21], however, on the other hand, marble powder is
also cheaper, easily available and cost-effectively [10, 41].
The key contribution of this paper is to enhance the sta-
bility of soft soil, to make stabilization more economic than
earlier, to make use of waste marble powder very important,
and to introduce with new stabilization technique by utili-
zation of waste marble powder and magnesium phosphate
cement as a novel additive. However, besides, the objective
of this investigation was derived from an experimental inves-
tigation into soil composite material properties obtained use-
ful results to explain MPC/MP performance mechanisms
Fig. 1  Satellite image of a site
for soil sample collection
on the soil. Furthermore, the results given demonstrated the
specific characteristics of the soil concerning each geotech-
nical examination. Moreover, based on the results obtained
and taking into account the cost-effective and eco-friendly
solution and to analyze the behaviour of the selected materi-
als i.e., MPC and waste marble powder. In view of under-
standing the soil properties, plasticity, MDD (maximum dry
density), OMC (optimum moisture content), UCS (uncon-
fined compressive strength), CBR (California bearing ratio),
direct shear box test, and SEM testing were performed on
natural soil and soil samples and findings were compared
to the soil stabilization efficiency investigation to use of a
particular additive dosage contributes to an increase in soil
properties.
Materials and Methods
The soil sample selected for the present investigation
were collected from the Dalian Reclamation Industrial Park
reclamation project is situated in the sea area northwest of
Maoyuzi Village, Dalian Bay Street, Gansuzi District, in the
middle of Dalian Jinzhou Bay, 1.5 km aside from the shore.
Geographic coordinates: 39° 04′~39° 06′ north latitude, 121°
37′~121° 39′ east longitude as illustrated in Figs. 1 and 2a.
Marble Powder
The marble powder is a waste remains by shaping, cutting,
and polishing of marble stone. It is an industry generated
waste material. Marble powder comprises a large proportion
of calcium, silica, and alumina. Marble powder for this study
is assembled from the Sichuan region, Chengdu central capi-
tal. As shown in Fig. 2b.
13
31 
Page 4 of 13 International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2020) 6:31

Fig. 2  a Disturbed natural soil sample; b marble powder; c magnesium phosphate cement

Magnesium Phosphate Cement Mg O (S) + KH2 PO4 (S) + 5H2 O → Mg KPO4 ⋅ 6HO (S) (1)

The magnesium phosphate cement for the present inves-

tigation was made by Dead-burned MgO (M) Powder,
phosphate, and inactive fillers in a specific proportion
[22, 42]. MgO utilized for MPC must be dead singed at
a temperature above 1400° and has a Blaine fineness of
around 200–300 ­m2/kg [21]. According to Eq. (1). M/P
ratio is theoretically 3:1 under the complete reaction con-
dition [43]. As shown in Fig. 2c, The binder is framed
from a response among MgO and ­KH2 ­PO4 in water, with
magnesium potassium phosphate hexahydrate as the prime
response reaction item.
Research Methodology
The methodology utilized for this examination work was to
divide the samples into two parts, initially for soils at the
natural stage, and secondly was with MP and MPC mixture.
Initial soil testing was conducted on natural soil samples
shown in Fig. 3. After which they were mechanically com-
bined with a different proportion of 5%, 10%, 15% marble
powder, and 2.5%, 5%, 7.5% magnesium phosphate cement,

Fig. 3  Natural soil tests

Study Area Selection

Determination of Initial properties of soil

Specific gravity
Atterber Shear Density California Bearing
Gradation by AASHTO
Limits Strength Determination Ratio test
T100-74

Sieve Liquid Unconfined Direct Soaked California

Plastic Modified
Analysis Limits Compression Shear Bearing Ratio test
Limits Proctor test
Strength test Box test

Result
Discussion

Conclusion

13
International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2020) 6:31 Page 5 of 13  31

added to find out the effect of the various amount of admix- Table 1  Natural soil sample results
tures on index and engineering properties. After mixing with Properties Characteristics
the mentioned percentage, the prepared mixed soil is kept at
constant temperature and humidity. Basic experiments cured Plastic limit, PL (%) 21
out to determine the geotechnical properties of the untreated Liquid limit, LL (%) 41
soil. And the experiments were done as shown in Fig. 4. It Plasticity index, PI (%) 20
shows a specific evaluation of test results and discussion in Grain size distribution
the following section. Clay, % 14.47
Sand, % 10.01
Silt, % 75.54
Results and Analysis Organic content, % 0.736
Specific gravity 2.73
They conducted tests on the natural soil specimen to work pH 8.061
out the different properties. The test results are shown in Salt concentration (%) 6.71
Table 1. Conductivity, µs/cm 12,071
As in the above Table  1. Demonstrating the Plastic UCS value ( kPa) 963.3
limit and liquid limit is 21% and 41% as per SL237-007- Max dry density (g/cc) 1.53
1999. They obtained the specific gravity is 2.73 and the OMC (%) 22.62
clay mineral present is silt, sand. Based on the plasticity Cohesion (c) kPa 13.286
outline, a plasticity index value of 20%. Which falls soil Angle of internal friction (ɸ) 6.56◦
in the group of A-7-6 silty clayey soil. Whereas the UCS CBR @ 95% compaction 21%
value is 963.3kpa as per SL237-020-1999, and, cohesion, CBR @ maximum dry density 28.42%
angle of internal friction is 13.285 kPa, 6.56◦ . However the
CBR value maximum 21% at 95% compaction and 28.42%
maximum at maximum dry density. The graphical por- According to the classification standard all given tests con-
trayal of these examinations is interpreted individually in ducted at natural soil and afterward with the expansion of
approach sub-sectors. different percentages marble powder and magnesium phos-
phate cement. When admixtures are applied, the effects of
Atterberg Limit Test the liquid limit, plastic limit, and plasticity index slightly
decrease.
Based on the limit moisture content method in (SL237-007-
1999), the soil used in this study was mixed and prepared Modified Proctor Test
according to the maximum dry density and the optimum
moisture content measured through the compaction process. According to the specification of soil test in SL237-
Test results are shown in Table 2 for the Atterberg soil limits. 011-1999, The Modified Proctor compaction test was

Fig. 4  Soil tests with magne-

sium phosphate cement and
marble powder
Addition of (5%,10%,15%) Marble
powder and (2.5%,5%,7.5%) MPC.

Modified Direct Unconfined

Atterberg California Bearing SEM
Proctor Shear Box compression
limits Test Ratio test Test
test strength test

Results
Conclusion
Discussion

13
31 
Page 6 of 13 International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2020) 6:31

Table 2  Test results of soil Soil sample Plastic limit liquid limit Plasticity index
plastic limit, liquid limit, and
plastic index Natural soil 21 41 20
2.5% MPC + 5% marble powder 20.8 40.4 19.6
5% MPC + 10% marble powder 20.5 40 19.5
7.5% MPC + 15% marble powder 20.4 39.8 19.4

Table 3  Test results of OMC Soil sample MDD (Gms/cc) (maximum dry Optimum moisture
and MDD for soil sample with density) content (OMC) (%)
MPC and MP addition
Natural soil 1.53 22.62
2.5% MPC + 5% marble powder 1.561 22.58
5% MPC + 10% marble powder 1.64 22.5
7.5%MPC + 15% marble powder 1.73 22.3

accompanied on the natural soil sample. The same test was Natural soil sample
carried out with a little modification of MP and MPC. The 2.5%MPC+5% Marble Powder
5%MPC+10%Marble Powder
0%, 5%, 10% and 15% of marble powder and 0%, 2.5%, 5%, 7.5%MPC+ 15% Marble Powder
1.8
7.5% of Magnesium phosphate cement were added to soil.
The test results after modification are verified in Table 3. 1.7
Dry density (g/cm3)

Apparently, from the testing proceeds, natural soil speci- 1.6

men, by performing  a modified proctor experiment, the
results show that the maximum density has increased and
OMC has been decreased compared to the natural soil by
addition to a differing percentage of admixtures. The maxi-
mum dry density increases 1.53 to 1.73 gm/cm3 whereas the
OMC decreases to 22.3%. The results are shown in Table 3.
Which shows the positive effect on improvement in the sta-
bility of the soil. Increments MDD this can be explained
by the cation exchange between soil particles the structural
change of the soil can also be attributed to this increase in
MMD [44]. The OMC has been increased by increasing the
MPC–MP mixture. This can be attributed to the pozzolanic
reaction of silica and alumina in soil and phosphorus with
calcium in cement to form the hydrate of calcium silicate
and calcium aluminum hydrate which are the cementing
agents [45]. Further, Fig. 5. Graphically shows the co-rela-
tionship of OMC and MDD of the modified proctor test.
Unconfined Compression Test
According to Chinese standard specification in the soil
experiment method (SL237-020-1999), the unconfined com-
pression testing specimen was prepared by compaction at
the OMC and maximum dry density. Moistness soil mixed
with marble powder and magnesium phosphate cement
was separated into four layers each layer was compacted
by 25 blows in a triaxial split mold for compaction, speci-
mens are formed with 39.1 mm in thickness and a height
of 80 mm. After curing in the humidity box for 28 days at
the steady temperature, specimens were collected out for
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
10 15 20 25 30 35
Water content (%)
Fig. 5  Comparison of MDD and OMC for soil sample without and
with MPC and MP addition
the unconfined compression strength test. The unconfined
compressive strength of soil under different magnesium
phosphate cement and marble powder contenting different
curing time is represented in Table 4.
Apparently, from the testing proceeds, natural soil has
a moderate strength of  963.3  kPa only. All the strength
of modified soil has expanded compared with the natural
soils. After the expansion, a different percentage of 0%,
5%, 10%, 15% MP and 0%, 2.5%, 5%, 7.5% MPC modi-
fied soil becomes improved the strength. 2.5% MPC and
5% MP  modified soil becomes developed the strength
among them at 7 days, 14 days, and 28 days of curing time.
Meanwhile, at 5% MPC and 10%, MP modified soil has
developed strength among them at 28 days. After curing
for 28 days, 5% MPC and 15% MP modified the soil has
developed high strength in 1953.65 kPa as related to other
percentages. These results illustrate that marble powder and

13
International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2020) 6:31 Page 7 of 13  31
Table 4  Unconfined Soil sample
compressive strength of soil
samples Natural soil
2.5% MPC + 5% marble powder
5% MPC + 10% marble powder
7.5% MPC + 15% marble powder
3000 7-dayUCS 14-dayUCS 28-dayUCS
UCS(kPa)
2000
1000
0
Natural soil 2.5% MPC + 5 % 5% MPC +10% 7.5% MPC+15%
Marble Powder Marble Powder Marble Powder
Fig. 6  Unconfined compressive strength result
magnesium phosphate cement can significantly increase the
strength of the natural soil. It can also be found that the
compressive strength of modified soil is increased with an
increase in curing time. The changes in compressive strength
up to a certain quantity of different admixtures needed to fill
the pores in the soil as the pores are filled, the soil is densi-
fied and further addition may attempt to lose soil strength.
Figure 6 displayed the unconfined compressive test data
collected from the usage of a specific proportion of marble
powder and magnesium phosphate cement.
Direct Shear Box Test
Figure 7 illustrates the shear stress–horizontal displacement
curves for natural soil and magnesium phosphate cement
and marble powder mixtures on the 100, 200, 300, and
400 kPa normal stresses. Curves for natural soil and mix-
tures with different content of magnesium phosphate cement
and marble powder may be found to be different. The shear
stress versus horizontal displacement curves for natural soil
exhibits a definite peak identified with collapse, and the
curves show a strain-softening character, as demonstrated
in Fig. 7a. The shear stress versus horizontal distance curves
for blends with various magnesium phosphate cement and
marble powder substances display a strain hardening ten-
dency without peak, as appeared in Fig. 7b–d. The expla-
nation behind the differentiation between natural soil and
mixtures is that adding magnesium phosphate cement and
marble powder contents to soil increase its compressibility.
As a result, the magnesium phosphate cement and marble
7-day UCS (kPa) 14-day UCS (kPa) 28-day UCS (kPa)
963.3 – –
1381.7 1449.35 1674.85
1418.6 1533.4 1918.8
1430.9 1560.05 1953.65
powder mixtures show strain hardening and shear shrinking
behaviours.
So as to investigate the effects of magnesium phosphate
cement and marble powder content and normal stress on
the shear stability, the investigations of shear strength
under various conditions are showed in Fig. 8. In this dis-
cussions, shear stability was determined as the peak shear
stress. Nevertheless, for most assessments, a peak shear
stress was not moved after 5 mm of horizontal displace-
ment, as showed up in Fig. 7. Normally, in tests for which
no peak shear stress was examined, as indicated by the Chi-
nese code for the soil experiment method (JTJ051-93, GB/
T50123-1999) shear stress at a horizontal displacement of
5 mm was accounted as the shear strength [46]. The test
results exhibit that the shear quality is positively connected
with normal stress and enhances consistently with the rise
of normal stress. The expansion of magnesium phosphate
cement and marble powder content to clay soil enhances the
shear strength of clay soil. The shear strength of tests devel-
ops with the expansion of the magnesium phosphate cement
and marble powder content, however, the development rate
is slight.
To examine the shear strength of natural soil and magne-
sium phosphate cement and marble powder blends, accord-
ing to Mohr–Coulomb criteria, internal friction angle and
cohesion of the samples were interpreted, as appeared in
Fig. 9.
Linear fit of MPC and MP = (0%, 2.5%, 5%, and 7.5%)
and (0%, 5%, 10%, 15%)
𝜃1 = 6.56 C1 = 3.286 kPa 𝜃2 = 7.53 C2 = 16.412 kPa
𝜃3 = 8.620 C3 = 20.319 kPa 𝜃4 = 20.127 C4 = 32.821 kPa
Figure 10 displays the connection between internal fric-
tion angle and magnesium phosphate cement and marble
powder content and the connection among cohesion and
magnesium phosphate cement and marble powder content.
It tends to be seen that including magnesium phosphate
cement and marble powder to soil strengthens its cohesion
and internal friction angle. The angle of internal friction (ɸ)
rises lightly with the expansion of magnesium phosphate
cement and marble powder content and cohesion of the soil
sample expands with the increment of magnesium phosphate
cement and marble powder content.
13
31 
Page 8 of 13 International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2020) 6:31

70 (a) 80 (b)
Stress strain softening Stress strain hardening
60 70
60

Shear stress (KPa)

Shear stress (KPa)

50
50
40
40
30
30
20 20
10 10
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
Horizantal displacment (mm) Horizantal displacement (mm)
n=100KPa n=200KPa n=300KPa n=400KPa n=100KPa n=200KPa n=300KPa n=400KPa

200 (d)
(c) Stress strain hardening
90 180
80 Stress strain hardening 160
70 140

Shear Stress (KPa)

Shear stress (KPa)

60 120
50 100
40 80
30 60
20 40
10
20
0
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Horizantal displacement (mm)
Horizantal displacement (mm)
n=100KPa n=200KPa n=300KPa n=400KPa
n=100KPa n=200KPa n=300KPa n=400KPa

Fig. 7  Shear stress–horizontal displacement curves MP and MPC content: a 0%; b 2.5% and 5%; c 5% and 10%; d 7.5% and 15%

Fig. 8  Shear strength of soil

samples

13
International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2020) 6:31 Page 9 of 13  31

200 for this increase may be due to the ample amount of calcium
= 0.1157 +13.286
180 = 0.1321 + 16.412
required to form calcium silicate hydrate and calcium alumi-
160 = 0.1516 + 20.319 nate hydrate which are important factors in rising strength.
140 = 0.3665 + 32.821
Shear Strength (kPa)

120
California Bearing Ratio (CBR) Value at 95%
Compaction
100
80
Figure 12 exhibits that while observing the CBR test on
60
natural soil sample, the CBR esteem at 95% compaction
40 turns out to be 10.5% which increments to 15% on 2.5%
20 MPC and 5% marble powder and 17.5% on 5%MPC and
0 10% MP development. On further addition up to7.5%MPC
0 100 200 300 400
Normal stress (kPa) and 15% MP, the CBR esteem further increments to 21%.
This implies by an expansion in marble powder and MPC
Fig. 9  Calculations of internal friction angle and cohesion by Mohr– addition, the strength of soil to be used as sub-level under-
Coulomb criteria neath asphalts further increments.

Scanning Electron Microscopy Test (SEM)

California Bearing Ratio (CBR) Value at Maximum
Dry Density
Figure 11 reveals that while observing the CBR test on natu-
ral soil sample, at the maximum dry density the CBR esteem
turns out to be 15.8% which increments to 18.47% on 2.5%
MPC and 5% MP and 20.5% which increment on 5%MPC
and 10% MP expansion. On further mean 7.5% MPC and
15% MP, its value increments to 28.42%. As the results
obtained from the test, the value of the CBR has increased in
general after the addition of MPC and MP. The explanation
The SEM specimens were collected immediately from four
groups of unconfined compression test specimens. The
samples were cut into small blocks and put into the liquid
nitrogen in a container to freeze and then dry in a vacuum
chamber. In this process, they effectively kept the fabric and
pore structure of the specimen. After drying, the samples
become dry and are ready for the SEM evaluation. A natural
surface of the samples exposed for SEM testing, to get a
good conductive effect; the surface is gold plated first. The
SEM patterns obtained from the experiments are illustrated

Fig. 10  Comparison between
cohesion, angle of internal fric-
tion, MPC, and MP content

13
31 
Page 10 of 13
Fig. 11  Co-relationship of CBR at MDD for soil sample with and
without MP and MPC addition
Fig. 12  Correlation of CBR value at 95% compaction for soil sample
without and with MP and MPC addition
in Figs. 14, 15, 16. The SEM picture of natural soil is indi-
cated in Fig. 13. Some clay particles have a flaky sheet
frame, which is generally the structure of Montmorillonite
(Figs. 14, 15). Is the SEM photograph of 2.5%, 5% MPC
and 5%, 10% marble powder modified natural soil; it tends
Fig. 13  SEM image of natural
soil
13
International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2020) 6:31
to be respected that the woolly different products between
the soils are developed by MP and MPC hydration reaction.
The correlation between the soil particles is increased due
to MPC and marble powder modification effect. Yet, there
are some considerable pores between the soil particles. It
is also detected that the fractured surface becomes steady
after the alteration.
Figure 16 is the SEM image of characteristic soil changed
with 15% MP and 7.5% MPC in correlation with the soil and
2.5%, 5% MPC, and 5%, 10% MP modified soil samples, the
soil surface structure becomes denser, this is because of all
remaining staying void pores between soil molecule loaded
up with MPC and MP, which simple to form the chemical
bond with the hydration results of MPC and MP, and to
establish a new network based on the original network struc-
ture of marble powder and MPC paste. This newly formed
network structure can tremendously improve the durability
and physical–mechanical properties of the marble powder
and MPC modified soil.
EDS Analysis
As shown in Fig. 17a–c, EDS spectrum of point (a–c) SEM
Photograph prepared by modified soil samples and observed
the component and element distribution of the sample by
EDS energy spectrum and EDS mapping. The presence
of the MPC and marble powder components are shown in
Fig. 17.
Conclusions
Consequently, all the proceeds of the analyses carried out in
this research at the different percent of MP and MPC at vari-
ous time interruptions, the conclusions of this examination
can be summarized in the accompanying.
• Atterberg limits of the natural soil decrease by the expan-
sion of different proportions of MPC and MP.
International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2020) 6:31 Page 11 of 13  31
Fig. 14  SEM image 2.5% MPC
and 5%MP
Fig. 15  SEM image 5% MPC
and 10%MP
Fig. 16  SEM image 7.5% MPC
and 15%MP
• By the addition of MP and MPC content, maximum dry
density increases whereas the OMC decrease. By 2.5%
MPC and 5% MP content inclusion, optimum moisture
content declines up to 0.17% whereas the expansion in
MDD is about 2.02%. On the other part, on 5% MPC
and 7.5% MP content addition, there is a 0.53% decline
in OMC and 7.18% in MDD. Whereas on the addition
of 7.5% MPC and 15% MP content, there is a 1.41%
decrease in OMC and 13.07% in MDD.
• The unconfined compressive strength test of modified
soil increments with the expansion of age. The maximum
strength was 1953.65 kPa with 7.5% MPC and 15% MP
content after 28 days of curing. However, the extension
of more marble powder and MPC content it will show up
a negative effect. Furthermore, the estimations of internal
friction angle (ɸ) and cohesion (c) increments by the
expansion of MPC and MP.
• CBR value at MDD increases with the including of MP
and MPC content. On 2.5% MPC and 5% MP expan-
sion the CBR increases from 15.8 to 18.47%. In this way,
the net percent expansion is 16.90%. Then again, on 5%
MPC and 10% MP content, it increments from 15.8 to
20.5% ascending in about 29.74% expansion in the CBR
estimation of soil. However, on 7.5% MPC and 15% MP
content, it increments from 15.8% to 28.42% resulting
in about 79.87% expansion in CBR estimation of soil.
While CBR esteem at 95% compaction increments with
the expansion of MPC and marble content. On 2.5%
MPC and 5% MP expansion the CBR content increments
from 10.5% to 15%. Accordingly, the net percent expan-
13
31 
Page 12 of 13
Fig. 17  EDS spectrum of the soil samples (a–c)
sion is 42.86%. Then again, on 5% MPC and 10% MP
expansion of marble content, it increments from 10.5 to
17.5% ascending in about 66.6% addition in the CBR
estimation of soil. On the other hand, 7.5% MPC and
15% MP content increases from 10.5% to 21% resulting
in about a 100% expansion in the CBR estimation of soil.
• The strength of soil contrasts a positive and negative way
with the extension of MP and MPC. Initially, the strength
of soil increments up to a particular measure of MP and
MPC needed to fill the pores in the soil once pores filled,
the soil gets densifier and further expansion will tend to
lose the strength of the soil.
• Through the perception of the SEM photos, it tends to
be distinguished that after including marble powder
and MPC content, a few pores of atoms are loaded up
with marble powder and magnesium phosphate cement,
which raises the minimization between soil particles.
The reaction products encapsulate the soil particles and
strengthen the shear strength of the soil.
• Overall, it can be concluded that MPC and MP mixtures
are considered to be a good ground improvement tech-
13
International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2020) 6:31
nique, especially in weak soil engineering projects where
they can act as a substitute for deep foundations, easing
adverse environmental impacts, saving resources and
energy, adding commercial value to waste and reducing
overall costs. Further research is highly recommended
using this form of replacing waste material on other fill-
ers or solid waste, such as ceramic waste, old concrete,
or brick dust.
Acknowledgements  This research was financed by the National Natu-
ral Science Foundation of China (Grants No. 51778107, 51408148) and
Liaoning Revitalization Talents Program (Grants No. XLYC1807263).
Compliance with Ethical Standards 
Conflict of interest  The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.
References
1. Firoozi AA, Guney Olgun C, Firoozi AA, Baghini MS (2017)
Fundamentals of soil stabilization. Int J Geo-Eng. https​://doi.
org/10.1186/s4070​3-017-0064-9
2. Babu SV, Sharmila MR (2017) S, Soil stabilisation using marble
dust. Int J Civ Eng Technol 8:1706–1713
3. Cheng G, Zhu H-H, Wen Y-N, Shi B, Gao L (2020) Experimental
investigation of consolidation properties of nano-bentonite mixed
clayey soil. Sustainability 12:459. https​://doi.org/10.3390/su120​
20459​
4. de Carneiro RJFM, de Melo GSSA (2011) analytical model for
cfrp-strengthened prestressed concrete girders subject to cyclic
loading. J Compos Constr 3:04015072. https​://doi.org/10.1061/
(ASCE)CC
5. Li LG, Huang ZH, Tan YP, Kwan AKH, Liu F (2018) Use of mar-
ble dust as paste replacement for recycling waste and improving
durability and dimensional stability of mortar. Constr Build Mater
166:423–432. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbu​ildma​t.2018.01.154
6. Thirumalai R, Babu SS, Naveennayak V, Nirmal R, Lokesh G
(2017) A review on stabilization of expansive soil using industrial
solid wastes. Engineering 09:1008–1017. https:​ //doi.org/10.4236/
eng.2017.91206​0
7. Kushwaha SS, Kishan D, Dindorkar N (2018) Stabilization of
expansive soil using eko soil enzyme for highway embankment.
Mater Today Proc 5:19667–19679. https:​ //doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr​
.2018.06.329
8. Gurbuz A (2015) Marble powder to stabilise clayey soils in sub-
bases for road construction. Road Mater Pavement Des 16:481–
492. https​://doi.org/10.1080/14680​629.2015.10208​45
9. Priyanka Mishra VKA (2018) Stabilization of silty soil with mar-
ble dust and sugarcane bagasse ash. In: Recycled waste materials
proceedings of EGRWSE, vol 32
10. Saygili A (2015) Use of waste marble dust for stabilization of
clayey soil. Medziagotyra 21:601–606. https​://doi.org/10.5755/
j01.ms.21.4.11966​
11. Hartemink AE (1800s) The definition of soil since the early
1800s. Elsevier Inc., Amsterdam. https:​ //doi.org/10.1016/bs.agron​
.2015.12.001
12. Alyamaç KE, Aydin AB (2015) Concrete properties containing
fine aggregate marble powder. KSCE J Civ Eng 19:2208–2216.
https​://doi.org/10.1007/s1220​5-015-0327-y
International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering (2020) 6:31 Page 13 of 13  31
13. Chawla A, Kabeer KISA, Vyas AK (2018) Evaluation of strength
and durability of lean concrete mixes containing marble waste
as fine aggregate. Eur J Environ Civ Eng 8189:1–16. https​://doi.
org/10.1080/19648​189.2018.14710​09
14. Khodabakhshian A, de Brito J, Ghalehnovi M, Asadi Shamsabadi
E (2018) Mechanical, environmental and economic performance
of structural concrete containing silica fume and marble industry
waste powder. Constr Build Mater 169(2018):237–251. https​://
doi.org/10.1016/j.conbu​ildma​t.2018.02.192
15. Le Rouzic M, Chaussadent T, Platret G, Stefan L (2017) Mecha-
nisms of k-struvite formation in magnesium phosphate cements.
Cem Concr Res 91:117–122. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemco​
nres.2016.11.008
16. Lin H, Li Y, Xie MY (2019) Study on magnesium phosphate
cement modified by steel slag. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng
479:012078. https​://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/479/1/01207​8
17. Xu B, Lothenbach B, Leemann A, Winnefeld F (2018) Reaction
mechanism of magnesium potassium phosphate cement with high
magnesium-to-phosphate ratio. Cem Concr Res 108:140–151.
https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemco​nres.2018.03.013
18. Pei H, Zhang S, Bai L, Hou D, Yang Q, Borana L (2019) Early-age
shrinkage strain measurements of the graphene oxide modified
magnesium potassium phosphate cement. Meas J Int Meas Confed
139:293–300. https:​ //doi.org/10.1016/j.measur​ ement​ .2019.03.002
19. Jia L, Zhao F, Guo J, Yao K (2019) Properties and reaction mecha-
nisms of magnesium phosphate cement mixed with ferroaluminate
cement. Materials (Basel) 12(16):2561
20. Lahalle H et al (2016) Investigation of magnesium phosphate
cement hydration in diluted suspension and its retardation by boric
acid. Cem Concr Res 87:77–86
21. Yang N, Shi C, Yang J, Chang Y (2013) Research progresses in
magnesium phosphate cement-based materials. J Mater Civ Eng
26:04014071. https​://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)mt.1943-5533.00009​
71
22. Chang Y, Shi C, Yang N, Yang J (2013) Effect of fineness of mag-
nesium oxide on properties of magnesium potassium phosphate
cement. J Chinese Ceram Soc 41(4):492–499 (in Chinese)
23. Yang Q, Zhang S, Wu X (2002) Deicer-scaling resistance of
phosphate cement-based binder for rapid repair of concrete.
Cem Concr Res 32:165–168. https​: //doi.org/10.1016/S0008​
-8846(01)00651​-2
24. Liu N, Chen B (2016) Experimental research on magnesium phos-
phate cements containing alumina. Constr Build Mater 121:354–
360. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbu​ildma​t.2016.06.010
25. Tan Y, Yu H, Li Y, Bi W, Yao X (2016) The effect of slag on the
properties of magnesium potassium phosphate cement. Constr
Build Mater 126:313–320. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbu​ildma​
t.2016.09.041
26. Ural N, Karakurt C, Cömert AT (2014) Influence of marble wastes
on soil improvement and concrete production. J Mater Cycles
Waste Manag 16(3):500–508
27. Pandey A, Rabbani A (2005) Soil stabilisation using cement.
Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 14:A95. https​://doi.
org/10.1016/0148-9062(77)90919​-6
28. Choksi R, Mishra CB, Patel N (2018) Pursuance of waste mar-
ble powder to improve soil stabilization. Int Res J Eng Technol
5(5):2018
29. Arora RP, Ameta NK, Samar K, Samdni KL (2014) Improve-
ment of engineering characteristics of locally available soil mass
by use of marble dust. Eng Technol India 5:54–59. https​://doi.
org/10.15740​/has/eti/5.1and2​/54-59
30. Okagbue CO, Onyeobi TUS (1999) Potential of marble dust
to stabilise red tropical soils for road construction. Eng Geol
53(3–4):371–380
31. Abdulla RS, Majeed NN (2014) Some physical properties treat-
ment of expansive soil using marble waste powder. Int J Eng Res
Technol 3(1)
32. Zumrawi MME, Abdalla EAE (2018) Stabilization of expansive
soil using marble waste powder. In: Second conference of civil
engineering in Sudan, pp 266–271
33. Bhavsar SN, Patel AJ (2014) Analysis of swelling and shrinkage
properties of expansive soil using brick dust as a stabilizer. Int
J Emerg Technol Adv Eng 4: 303–308. https​://www.resea​rchga​
te.net/public​ ation​ /269762​ 906_Analys​ is_of_Swelli​ ng_Shrink​ age_
Proper​ ties_​ of_Expans​ ive_Soil_using_​ Brick_​ Dust_as_a_Stabil​ izer​
.
34. Pei H, Yang Q, Li Z (2016) Early-age performance investigations
of magnesium phosphate cement by using fiber Bragg grating.
Constr Build Mater 120:147–149. https:​ //doi.org/10.1016/j.conbu​
ildma​t.2016.05.089
35. Ali AA Khan R Shah H (2012) Expansive soil stabilization using
marble dust. Int J Earth Sci Res. #02014710 Licens. Under Creat.
Commons Attrib. CC BY. 3: 2812–2816.
36. Das SK, Samadhiya NK (2015) Numerical modelling of pre-
stressed geogrid reinforced soil under different conditions. Indian
Geotech Conf. https​://doi.org/10.1061/40552​(301)16.2.Moses​
37. Ghadir P, Ranjbar N (2018) Clayey soil stabilization using geo-
polymer and Portland cement. Constr Build Mater 188:361–371.
https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbu​ildma​t.2018.07.207
38. Mohd Zambri N, Ghazaly ZMd (2018) Peat soil stabilization
using lime and cement. E3S Web Con 34:01034. https​://doi.
org/10.1051/e3sco​nf/20183​40103​4
39. Ojuri OO, Adavi AA, Oluwatuyi OE (2017) Geotechnical and
environmental evaluation of lime–cement stabilized soil–mine
tailing mixtures for highway construction. Transp Geotech 10:1–
12. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.trgeo​.2016.10.001
40. Liu D, Zhen S, Su Y, Lin N, Zhou Y, Yang J (2016) Solidifi-
cation/stabilization of simulated cadmium-contaminated wastes
with magnesium potassium phosphate cement. Environ Eng Res
21:15–21. https​://doi.org/10.4491/eer.2015.092
41. Ashish DK (2019) Concrete made with waste marble powder and
supplementary cementitious material for sustainable develop-
ment. J Clean Prod 211:716–729. https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclep​
ro.2018.11.245
42. Wang Y-S, Dai J, Wang L, Tsang DCW, Poon CS (2018) Influence
of lead on stabilization/solidification by ordinary Portland cement
and magnesium phosphate cement. Chemosphere 190:90–96.
https​://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemo​spher​e.2017.09.114
43. Xu S, Wu X, Cai Y, Ding Y, Wang Z (2018) Strength and leaching
characteristics of magnesium phosphate cement-solidified zinc-
contaminated soil under the effect of acid rain. Soil Sediment Con-
tam 27:161–174. https:​ //doi.org/10.1080/153203​ 83.2018.143836​ 4
44. Wubshet M, Tadesse S (2014) Stabilization of expansive clay soil
using Bagasse Ash and Lime Patrick. Zede 32:72
45. Cai YQ, Liang X (2004) Dynamic properties of composite
cemented clay. J Zhejiang Univ Sci 5:309–316. https​: //doi.
org/10.1631/jzus.2004.0309
46. Enquan Z, Qiong W (2019) Experimental investigation on shear
strength and liquefaction potential of rubber–sand mixtures. Adv
Civ Eng. https​://doi.org/10.1155/2019/59349​61
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
13