CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

The foundation of a building or road is an essential part for effective

transmission of load to the subsoil present beneath it. The quality of soil
has large impact on type of structure and its design. The expansive soils are
examples of weak soils, which encountered in foundation engineering for
bridges, highways, buildings, embankments etc. Expansive soil undergoes
volume changes when they come in contact with water. They show
alternate swelling and shrinkage properties of soil. It expands during rainy
season and shrinks during summer season. Expansive soil covers nearly
40% of the land mass in India. In Tamilnadu region, the expansive soils are
identified by name “Black Cotton” soil. These soils possess weak
properties due to presence of clay minerals known as “Montmorillonite”.
Typical behaviour of soil results into failure of structure in form of
settlements cracks etc. Therefore it is important to remove the existing
weal soil and replaced it with a non-expansive soil or improves the
properties of weak soil by stabilization

1.2 Objectives of the project

 To use agricultural waste bagasse ash as a stabilizing material and to
solve the problem of waste disposal.
 To evaluate the strength characteristics of black cotton soil for
different proportions of bagasse ash in replacement of 2%, 4%, 6%,
8% and 10%.
 To study the change in properties of untreated and treated soil.
 To study the results of replacement and concentration on future use.

1
1.3 Scope of the project
In remote rural villages, the development of road network is of vital
importance in the socioeconomic development. Especially the rural
villages having black cotton soil as subgrade is very difficult to lay the
pavement. Today, world faces a serious problem in disposing the large
quantity of agricultural waste. The disposal of agricultural waste without
proper attention creates impact on environmental health. The engineers
have to take challenge for safe disposal of agricultural waste. This research
undertakes use of agricultural waste in stabilizing black cotton soil, various
attempts have been made to improve the strength of soil using different
chemical additives in combination with lime and cement, but research
work has to focus more on use of cheaper and locally available material.
As the bagasse Ash is an industrial waste from cane mills, the optimum
usage of this material in subgrade soil stabilization will bring down the
construction cost of the pavements. In our study, an attempt is made to
stabilize black cotton soil with addition of bagasse ash as a stabilizing
agent. The strength parameters like CBR, UCS are determined to know the
suitability of material.

1.4 Methodology

Basic laboratory tests (Attenberg’s limit, compaction, CBR, UCC) were

carried out on black cotton soil sample, and on combination of soil and
bagasse ash to determine the basic properties of soil sample.

 Then the stabilization of black cotton soil with bagasse is carried out
by blending the soil with different percentages of bagasse ash ((2%,
4%, 6%, 8%, and 10%) and then optimum percentage of bagasse ash
can be added have determined.

2
 To determine the strength behaviour of black cotton soil with
bagasse ash waste, the laboratory tests (compaction, California
bearing ratio, unconfined compressive strength) are carried.

 The strength tests are carried out on each percentage of blends. By

getting the results of all these blends the comparison of the best
suitable additive mix will be carried out.

 The results are concluded suitably IS 2720

3
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

Moses G., K. J. Osinubi studied the “Influence of Compactive

Efforts on Cement-Bagasse Ash Treatment on Expansive Black Cotton
Soil” The dark grey soil used in this study was obtained along Gombe-Biu
road in Yamatu Deba Local Government Area of Gombe State using the
method of disturbed sampling. The index properties were determined on
the natural and treated soils with Stepped percentages of cement (i.e., 0, 2,
4, 6 and 8%) were admixed with 0, 2, 4, 6 and 8% of bagasse ash by dry
weight of soil.

“Soil Stabilization by Calcium Carbide Residue and Fly Ash”

Calcium carbide residue (CCR) and fly ash (FA) are both waste products
from acetylene gas factories and power plants. The input of CCR reduces
the maximum dry unit weight of the soil because the specific gravity of the
CCR is lower than that of the soil. In the active zone, strength significantly
increases with the CCR content up to the CCR fixation point. Beyond this
point, the strength gradually increases. This zone is designated as the inert
zone. Next is the deterioration zone in which strength decreases with the
CCR content.
“Soil Stabilization with Calcined Paper Sludge: Laboratory and
Field Tests” This paper examines the use of calcined paper sludge (CPS).
The soils were stabilized with mixtures of CPS and cement (C). The
mixture of CPS and Portland cement leads to mechanical improvements in
the stabilization of soils. It is estimated that the greatest strength gain under

4
compression may be obtained for mixtures of CPS:cement with ratios (in
weight) of approximately 25:75.
Kiran R. G., Kiran L had studied “The analysis of Strength
Characteristics of Black Cotton Soil Using Bagasse Ash and Additives as
Stabilizer”. In this study the black cotton soil is taken from Harihara,
Davanagere district, Karnataka. Under this study laboratory experiments
are carried out for different percentages (4%, 8% and 12%) of bagasse ash
and additive mix proportions. The strength parameters like CBR, UCS are
determined. It is observed that, the blend results of bagasse ash with
different percentage of cement for black cotton soil gave change in density,
CBR and UCS values. The density values got increased from 15.16 kN/ m3
to 16.5 kN/m3 for addition of 8% bagasse ash with 8% cement, Then CBR
values got increased from 2.12 to 5.43 for addition of 4% bagasse ash with
8% cement and UCS values got increased to 174.91 kN/ m3 from 84.92 kN/
m3 for addition of 8% bagasse ash with 8% cement.

Dr. Praveen Kumar, Dr. G D Ransinchungh R. N. & Aditya

Kumar Anupam (2012) studied the waste materials as an alternative to
conventional materials in rural road. They reported that admixing of rice
husk ash improves the CBR of the soil. Blast furnace slag improves the
properties of soil.

E. A. Meshida, G. L. Oyekan, A. O. Ogundalu (2013) carried

laboratory investigation on the influence of steel mill dust on
characteristics of tropical black cotton soil. The addition of steel mill dust
increased the Maximum Dry Density (MDD) of tropical black cotton soil
about 28%. This is considered satisfactory to excellent.

5
 CHAPTER 3
SOIL STABILIZATION

3.1 General

Soil stabilization is a procedure in which existing properties of soil

are improved by means of addition of cementing materials or chemicals.
Stabilization is the process of blending and mixing materials with a soil to
improve the soil’s strength and durability. By soil stabilization, the soil
becomes more stable by the reduction in the permeability and
compressibility and by the increase in shear strength. With the increase in
soil stabilization properties the bearing capacity of soil is increased
significantly.

3.1.1 Requirement of soil stabilization

The main requirement of soil stabilization is adequate strength and it
depends on character of soil. In case of cohesion less soil, the strength
could be improved by providing confinement or by adding cohesion with a
cementing or binding agent. In case of cohesive soil, the strength could be
increased by drying, making soil moisture resistant, altering the clay
electrolyte concentration, increasing cohesion with a cementing agent and
adding frictional properties. Black cotton soil swells during rainy season
and shrinks during summer season. This alternate swelling and shrinkage
creates cracks in the black cotton soil. These shrinkage cracks are 100 mm
to 150 mm wide and 0.5 to 2 m deep. Swelling creates upward pressure on
structure and shrinkage creates downward pull. It results into cracks or
damage in the foundations.

6
3.2 History of Soil Stabilization
The necessity of improving the engineering properties of soil has
been recognised for as long as construction has existed. Many ancient
cultures including the Chinese, Romans and Incas utilised various
techniques to improve soil suitability, some of which were so effective that
many of the buildings and roadways they constructed still exist today.
The modern era of soil stabilization began during the 1960's and 70's when
general shortages of aggregates and fuel resources forced engineers to
consider alternatives to the conventional techniques of replacing poor soils
at building sites with shipped-in aggregates that possessed more favourable
engineering characteristics. Soil stabilization then fell out of favour,
mainly due to faulty application techniques and misunderstandings.

3.3 Types of stabilizing agents

To select the proper stabilizer type for a particular soil, perform a sieve
analysis test and an Attenberg’s-limits test according to the procedures and
the types of conventional stabilizing agents are to be selected. They are:

 Cement
 Lime
 Fly ash
 Bitumen

3.3.1 Cement

Portland cement can be used either to modify and improve the

quality of the soil or to transform the soil into a cemented mass with
increased strength and durability. Cement can be used effectively as a
stabilizer for a wide range of materials; however, the soil should have a PI

7
less than 30. For coarse-grained soils, the amount passing the No. 4 sieve
should be greater than 45 per cent. The amount of cement used depends on
whether the soil is to be modified or stabilized.

3.3.2 Lime
Lime will react with many medium-, moderately fine-, and fine-
grained soils to produce decreased plasticity, increased workability,
reduced swell, and increased strength. Soils classified according to the
USCS as CH, CL, MH, ML, OH, OL, SC, SM, GC, GM, SW-SC, SP-SC,
SM-SC, GWGC, GP-GC, ML-CL, and GM-GC should be considered as
potentially capable of being stabilized with lime. Lime should be
considered with all soils having a PI greater than 10 and more than 25 per
cent of the soil passing the No. 200 sieve.

3.3.3 Fly Ash

Fly ash, when mixed with lime, can be used effectively to stabilize
most coarse- and medium-grained soils; however, the PI should not be
greater than 25. Soils classified by the USCS as SW, SP, SP-SC, SW-SC,
SW-SM, GW, GP, GP-GC, GW-GC, GP-GM, GW-GM, GC-GM, and SC-
SM can be stabilized with fly ash.

3.3.4 Bitumen
Most bituminous soil stabilization has been performed with asphalt
cement, cutback asphalt, and asphalt emulsions. Soils that can be
stabilized effectively with bituminous materials usually contain less than
30 percent passing the No. 200 sieve and have a PI less than 10. Soils
classified by the USCS as SW, SP, SW-SM, SP-SM, SW-SC, SP-SC, SM,
SC, SM-SC, GW, GP, SW-GM, SP-GM, SW-GC, GP-GC, GM, GC, and

8
GM-GC can be effectively stabilized with bituminous materials, provided
the above-mentioned gradation and plasticity requirements are met.

3.3.5 Combination
Combination stabilization is specifically defined as lime-cement,
lime-asphalt, and LCF stabilization. Combinations of lime and cement are
often acceptable expedient stabilizers. Lime can be added to the soil to
increase the soil’s workability and mixing characteristics as well as to
reduce its plasticity. Cement can then be mixed into the soil to provide
rapid strength gain. Combinations of lime and asphalt are often acceptable
stabilizers. The lime addition may prevent stripping at the asphalt-
aggregate interface and increase the mixture’s stability.

3.4 Conventional methods of Stabilization

The various method of soil stabilization includes:

 Mechanical Stabilization
 Cement Stabilization
 Lime Stabilization
 Bitumen Stabilization
 Stabilization by Geo-textiles

3.4.1 Mechanical Stabilisation

Mechanical stabilisation involves two operations: (i) changing the

composition of soil by addition or removal of certain constituents, and (ii)
deification or compaction. The particle size distribution and composition
are the important factors governing the engineering behaviour of a soil.
Significant changes in the properties can be made by addition or removal
of suitable soil fractions. For mechanical stabilisation, where the primary
9
purpose is to have a soil resistant to deformation and displacement under
loads, soil materials can be divided into two fractions : the granular
fraction retained on a 75 micron IS sieve and the fine soil fraction passing a
75-micron sieve. The granular fraction imparts strength and hardness. The
fine fraction provides cohesion or binding property, water-retention
capacity and also acts as a filler for the voids of the coarse fraction

3.4.2 Cement Stabilization

In cement stabilization pulverized soils and cement in suitable
proportion are mixed with water and the resulting mixture is compacted by
compacting equipment such as rollers. The material obtained by mixing
cement and soil is called soil-cement. When cement hydrates and develops
strength the soil cement becomes a hard and durable structural material.
Factors affecting Soil cement

 Type of Soil
 Quality of cement
 Quantity of water
 Mixing, compaction and curing
 Admixtures

The suitable materials must be pulverisable. They, in

general, comprise granular materials with sufficient fines. Such material
requires less cement. In materials, which contain deficiency in fines require
more cement but they are also fall under suitable materials.

10
3.4.3 Lime Stabilization
In lime stabilization the soil is stabilized by adding lime. By this
method clayey soil is stabilized well. When lime is added to soil, it reacts
with the soil and cations are exchanged in the diffused double layer. As a
result plasticity is reduced significantly and the resulting material becomes
more friable than the original clay. Consequently the material is therefore
more suitable as sub grade. The amount of lime required for stabilization
varies between 2 to 10 %. For a rough guide the following amount of lime
may be used.

3.4.4 Chemical Stabilization

There are a great many chemicals which are used for stabilisation.
Only the chemicals which are commonly used for stabilising moisture in
the soil and for cementation of particles will be desired here.

Calcium chloride
Calcium Chloride acts as soil flocculent. It facilitates compaction
and usually causes a slight increase in the compacted density. The salt may
be spread on the surface, or incorporated into the soil by mix-in-place and
plant-mix methods. The chief advantages is that the beneficial effects are
lost if the salt is leached out. Frequent applications depending upon the
climatic conditions are therefore necessary, which increases the cost. The
relative humidity of the atmosphere should be above 30% for the salt to be
effective.

Sodium Chloride
The stabilising action of sodium chloride is somewhat similar to that
of calcium chloride, but it has not been so widely used. It attracts and
retains moisture and reduces the rate of evaporation another beneficial

11
phenomenon is the crystallisation of the sat in the soil pores near the
surface, which retards further evaporation and also reduces the formation
of shrinkage cracks. The salt is not applied on the surface, but it is mixed
into the soil by mix-in place or plant-mix methods.

Sodium Silicate
The Sodium Silicate solution in water, known as water glass, in
combination with other chemicals, such as Calcium Chloride, is used as an
injection for stabilising deep deposits of soil. The two chemicals react and
precipitate in the form of an insoluble silica-gel within the soil pores
making the soil impervious to water and increasing its shearing strength.

3.4.5 Stabilisation by Heating

Heating a fine grained soil to temperature of 400 to 6000 C causes
irreversible changes in clay minerals. The soil becomes non-plastic, less
water sensitive and non-expansive. Also the clay clods get converted into
aggregates. Soil can be baked in kilns, or in-situ downwards draft slow
moving furnaces. The artificial aggregates so produced can be used for
mechanical stabilisation.

3.4.6 Bituminous Stabilization

Bituminous stabilization is generally done with asphalt as binder.
Asphalt acts as a binder for coarse-grained soil. In cohesive soil asphalt
protects the soil by plugging its void and water proofing it. It helps the
cohesive soil to maintain low moisture content and to increase bearing
capacity. There are four types of Bituminous Stabilization. They include:

12
Soil Bitumen – The soil bitumen is used to stabilize clay soil. The
stabilized soil becomes water- proof. The quantity of bitumen required
varies from 4 to 7 % of dry weight.

Sand Bitumen - This is bitumen stabilized cohesion less soil system. The
sand should be free from vegetable matter or lumps of clay. The sand
should not contain more than 25 % minus 200-sieve material for dune
sands and not more than 12 % in case of other types of sand. The amount
of bitumen required varies from 4 to 10 %.

Water – proofed Clay Concrete – It is water proofed soil made by adding

1 to 3 % of bitumen. In general, three gradations are in use to successfully
stabilize the soil. The percentages passing 75 micron sieve are specified as:

 8 to 12 %
 10 to 16 %
 13 to 30 %

Oiled Bitumen – It is a bitumen treated silty clay material. The material is

made waterproof by spraying bitumen in two or three applications. Slow or
medium curing bitumen or emulsions are used. The bitumen penetrates
only a short depth into the soil. The amount of bitumen required is about 5
litres per square meter of the soil surface.

3.4.7 Stabilization by Geo – Textiles

Geo-textiles are fabrics made of synthetic materials, such as
polyethylene, polyester, nylon, polyvinyl chloride and so on. They are
manufactured in varieties of ways in the woven, non-woven or grid-form.
A geo-textile has high tensile strength. When properly embedded in the
soil, it contributes to its stability. It is used in the construction of unpaved

13
roads over soft soils. The geo-textile is laid over the soil. Aggregates are
laid directly over the geo-textile. When traffic passes over the road, the
geo-textile deforms and its strength is mobilized. The more a geo-textile
deforms, the greater the load it can carry.

3.4.8 Electrical Stabilisation

The stability or shear strength of fine-grained soils can be increased

by draining them with the passage of direct current through them. The
process is also known as electro-osmosis, Electrical drainage is
accompanied by electro-chemical composition of the electrodes and the
deposition of the metal salts in the soil pores. There may also be changes in
the structure of soil. The resulting cementing of soil due to all these
reaction, is also known as electro-chemical hardening and for this purpose
the use of aluminium anodes is recommended.

3.5 Advantages of soil stabilization

 Stabilized soil functions as a working platform for the project

 Stabilization waterproofs the soil
 Stabilization improves soil strength
 Stabilization helps reduce soil volume change due to temperature or
moisture
 Stabilization improves soil workability and durability
 Stabilization reduces dust in work environment
 Stabilization upgrades marginal materials
 Stabilization dries wet soils
 Stabilization conserves aggregate materials
 Stabilization reduces cost
 Stabilization conserves energy

14
3.6 Benefits of Soil Stabilization

 Technical Benefits
Treatment with lime (lime stabilisation) and/or cement (cement
stabilisation) allows production of a long lasting and stable material
comparable to those of graded aggregates. Hard wearing, with greater
stiffness and strength they provide excellent performance within
the construction process and have become widely recognised as a strong
alternative to typical construction methods.

 Financial Benefits
The recycling and re-use of in-situ materials gives significant savings,
as it minimises the stripping and removal to landfill of material along with
their associated transport costs and also saves on the import of aggregates.
In addition to this, the duration of the works are also shorter, giving further
savings to the contract program.

 Environmental Benefits
There are significant environmental benefits of soil stabilisation in
comparison to traditional construction methods including energy savings
by reducing the transport of materials (this also reduces the indirect effects
including nuisance to the public), minimising the use of aggregate
resources and utilising some binders that are by-products of the energy
industry.

15
3.7 Applications of soil stabilization

 Creation of winter working platforms

 Waterlogged sites (quick reduction in moisture content)
 Piling mats
 Embankment stability
 Haul road construction
 Car parks
 Lorry parks
 Foundations for floor slabs
 Highway pavement construction
 Airport runways, taxiways and aprons
 Reclamation and remediation of contaminated land

16
 CHAPTER 4

MATERIALS

4.1 Black Cotton Soil

Black cotton soil is the Indian name given to the expansive soil
deposit in the central part of the country. Black cotton Soil is a residual
soil, which have been formed from basalt or trap and contain the clay
mineral montmorillonite that causes excessive swelling and shrinkage
characteristics of the soil. The swelling behaviour of the soil would depend
largely on the type of clay minerals that are present in these soils and
proportions in which they are present. The swelling and shrinkage of the
black cotton soil can lead to damage the foundations of the buildings and
road pavements. This results in difficulty of construct of foundation on
such soil, so this soil needs special care. This soil produces excessive
settlement of the foundation due to high compressibility. So it is important
to improve the geotechnical properties of the black cotton soil.

The black cotton soil sample I is obtained from edapadi District, soil
sample II from Illampillai District and soil sample III from Omalur Taluk
at a depth of 20cm. Manual labour method was used for the procurement of
soil. Top vegetation and dry soil crust was removed for the depth of 20cm
with crow bars. Bigger size lumps were broken down with pick axes and
rammers. The soil was pulverized with wooden mallet to break the lumps
and then sun dried. Then it was oven dried for 24 hours at 105°c to 110°c.

17
4.2 Bagasse Ash
Sugarcane bagasse ash is a by-product of sugar factories found after
burning sugarcane bagasse which itself is found after the extraction of all
economical sugar from sugarcane. The disposal of this material is already
causing environmental problems around the sugar factories. On the other
hand, the boost in construction activities in the country created shortage in
most of concrete making materials especially cement, resulting in an
increase in price. This study examined the potential use of sugarcane
bagasse ash as a partial cement replacement material.

The Bagasse is the fibrous waste produced after the extraction of the
sugar juice from cane mills. Bagasse ash is the residue obtained from the
incineration of bagasse in sugar producing factories. This material usually
poses a disposal problem in sugar factories particularly in tropical
countries. In many tropical countries there are substantial quantities of
Bagasse is rich in amorphous silica indicated that it has pozzolanic
properties. Utilization of industrial and agricultural waste products in the
construction of roads has been the focus of research for economical and
environmental reasons. To stabilize expansive soil, the waste product
bagasse ash is collected from Ponni sugars, located in Erode district. 20 -32
MT of sugar factory Bagasse ash was produced.

18
 Fig: 1 Collected bagasse ash

Fig: 2 Collected Soil sample I

19
 Fig: 3 Collected Soil sample II

Fig: 4 Collected Soil sample III

20
 CHAPTER 5
PROPERTIES OF BLACK COTTON SOIL AND BAGASSE ASH

5.1 Properties of Black cotton Soil

5.1.1 Colour
The colour of the black cotton soil or expansive soil is grey.

5.1.2 Specific Gravity

The Pycnometer method can be used for determination of the
specific gravity of solid particles of both fine grained and coarse grained
soils. The specific gravity of solids is determined 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 solids.

21
 Table 5.1 Observations and calculations

Sl. Sample No
Observations an Calculations
No. 1 2 3
577.5 577.5 577.5
1 Mass of empty Pycnometer (M1)

Mass of Pycnometer and dry 953 997 965

2
soil (M2)
Mass of Pycnometer, soil and 1658 1718.5 1695.5
3
water (M3)
Mass of Pycnometer and water 1487.5 1487.5 1488.0
4
(M4)
Calculations
375.5 419.5 387.5
5 M2 – M1

170.5 231 207.5

6 M3 – M4

1.831 2.225 2.152

7 Calculate G using formula

5.1.3 Water Content

A Pycnometer is a glass jar of about 1 litre capacity, fitted with a

brass conical cap by means of a screw type cover. The cap has a small hole
of about 6mm diameter at its apex.

The water content (w) of the sample is obtained as

22
Where, M1=mass of empty Pycnometer,
M2= mass of the Pycnometer with wet soil
M3= mass of the Pycnometer and soil, filled with water,
M4 = mass of Pycnometer filled with water only.
G= Specific gravity of solids.

Table 5.2 Observations and calculations

Observations and Soil Sample

S.No
Calculations 1 2 3
Mass of empty 600 600 600
1
pycnometer (M1)
Mass of pycnometer + 953 997 965
2
wet soil (M2)
Mass of Pycnometer soil, 1658 1718.5 1695.5
3
filled with water (M3)
Mass of Pycnometer
1487.5 1487.5 1488.0
4 filled with water only
(M4)
353.0 419.5 387.5
5 M2 – M1

170.5 231 207.5

5 M3 – M4

0.516 0.551
7 (G – 1) / G 0.519

8 w (using above formula) 68.23% 62.10% 31.35%

23
5.1.4 Grain Size Analysis

The soil is sieved through a set of sieves. The material retained on

different sieves is determined. The percentage of material retained on any
sieve is given by

Where, = mass of soil retained on sieve ‘n’

M= total mass of the sample.

The cumulative percentage of the material retained

Where , etc. are the percentages retained on sieve 1, 2 etc. which are
coarser than sieve ‘n’. The percentage finer than the sieve ‘n’.

%Finer = 100- Cumulative % reatined

24
 Observation and Calculation

Table 5.3 Dry Sieve Analysis for Soil Sample I

Particle Mass
% Cumulative Cumulative
S.No IS Sieve size D retained
Retained % retained % Finer
(mm) % (g)
1 4.75mm 4.75mm 43.00 10.43 10.43 89.57
2 2.360mm 2.360mm 55.61 13.90 24.33 75.67
3 1.78mm 1.78mm 53.30 13.33 37.66 62.34
4 1.18mm 1.18mm 51.60 12.90 50.56 49.44
5 600µ 0.600mm 68.60 17.15 67.71 32.29
6 300 µ 0.300mm 61.60 15.40 83.11 16.89
7 150 µ 0.15mm 41.80 10.45 93.56 6.44
8 90 µ 0.09mm 3.00 0.75 94.31 5.69
9 75 µ 0.75mm 4.40 1.10 95.41 4.59
10 Pan - 18.39 4.60 100.00 0

Graph

The graph is drawn to determine the coefficient of curvature and

coefficient of uniformity. Graph is drawn IS sieve along X-axis and %
finer along Y-axis

25
 Table 5.4 Dry Sieve Analysis for Soil Sample II

Particle Mass
% Cumulative Cumulative
S.No IS Sieve size D retained
Retained % retained % Finer
(mm) % (g)
1 4.75mm 4.75mm 43.00 10.43 10.43 89.57
2 2.360mm 2.306mm 49.70 12.42 22.85 77.15
3 1.78mm 1.78mm 59.60 14.90 37.75 62.25
4 1.18mm 1.18mm 53.70 13.42 51.17 48.83
5 600µ 0.600mm 67.00 16.75 67.92 32.08
6 300 µ 0.300mm 60.80 15.20 83.12 16.88
7 150 µ 0.15mm 41.00 10.25 93.37 6.67
8 90 µ 0.09mm 3.40 0.85 94.22 5.78
9 75 µ 0.75mm 5.30 1.32 95.54 4.46
10 Pan - 16.50 4.46 100.00 0

Graph

The graph is drawn to determine the coefficient of curvature and

coefficient of uniformity. Graph is drawn IS sieve along X-axis and %
finer along Y-axis

26
 Table 5.5 Dry Sieve Analysis for Soil Sample III

Particle Mass
% Cumulative Cumulative
S.No IS Sieve size D retained
Retained % retained % Finer
(mm) % (g)
1 4.75mm 4.75mm 57.5 14.37 14.37 85.63
2 2.360mm 2.306mm 54.5 13.62 27.99 72.01
3 1.78mm 1.78mm 60.75 15.18 43.17 56.83
4 1.18mm 1.18mm 49.50 12.37 55.54 44.46
5 600µ 0.600mm 72.50 18.12 73.66 26.34
6 300 µ 0.300mm 52.30 13.07 86.73 13.27
7 150 µ 0.15mm 32.00 8.25 94.98 5.02
8 90 µ 0.09mm 4.50 0.61 95.59 4.41
9 75 µ 0.75mm 6.20 0.90 96.49 3.51
10 pan - 14.00 3.51 100.00 0

Graph

The graph is drawn to determine the coefficient of curvature and

coefficient of uniformity. Graph is drawn IS sieve along X-axis and %
finer along Y-axis

27
5.1.5 Attenberg’s Limit

 Liquid Limit

The liquid limit (LL) is often conceptually defined as the water content
at which the behaviour of a clayey soil changes from plastic to liquid.
Actually, clayey soil does have very small shear strength at the liquid limit
and the strength decreases as water content increases.

Procedure

Place a portion of the prepared sample in the cup of the liquid limit
device. Form a horizontal surface over the soil. Form a groove in the soil
by drawing the grooving tool, bevelled edge forward, through the soil from
the top of the cup to the bottom of the cup. Lift and drop the cup at a rate
of 2 drops per second. The two halves must meet along a distance of 13mm
(1/2 in). Remove a slice of soil and determine its water content, w.

Water content, W = (M2 – M1) / (M1 – M2) x 100%

Where,

M1 is the mass of the empty container

M2 is the mass of container + mass of wet soil

M3 is the mass of container + mass of dry soil

28
 Table 5.6 Observations table for Liquid and plastic limit

Sample 01 02 03
Trials 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
No of
24 32 38 19 28 31 15 26 28
blows
M1 195.5 195.5 195.5 195.5 195.5 195.5 195.5 195.5 195.5
M2 352 365 410 381 395 372 384 395 380
M3 320 300 320 312 300 320 346 310 320
Water
content 25.70 62.2 72.29 59.22 90.90 41.76 25.24 74.23 32.50
(%) W

The values corresponding 25 blows is the Liquid limit of that soil.

29
 Soil Sample I
80
60
40
20
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Fig 5.1 Liquid limit for soil sample I is 40%

Soil Sample II
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Fig 5.2 Liquid limit for soil sample II is 47%

Soil Sample III

80

60

40

20

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Fig 5.3 Liquid limit for soil sample III is 71%

30
  Plastic Limit

Plastic limit is the water contest below which the soil stops behaving as
a plastic material. It begins to crumble when rolled into a thread of soil of
3mm diameter.
For determination of the plastic limit of a soil, it is air dried and sieved
through a 425 micron IS sieve. About 30gm of soil is taken in an
evaporation dish. It is mixed thoroughly with distilled water till it becomes
plastic and can be easily moulded with finger. The mould is rolled with
fingers on a glass plate to from a soil threat of uniform diameter. By
taking the dry weights and wet weights the water content is determined.
For clay or Black cotton soils the plastic limit ranges from 20-65%. Plastic
Limit is calculated by taking average of all water content of the soil
sample.
Plastic Limit for Soil Sample I is 62.21%

Plastic Limit for Soil Sample II is 46.38%

Plastic Limit for Soil Sample III is 63.96%

 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-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.

31
  (0-3)- Non plastic
 (3-15) - Slightly plastic
 (15-30) - Medium plastic
 >30 - Highly plastic

For Soil Sample I - 22.21%

Soil Sample II - 28%

Soil Sample III - 47%

Fig.5 Plasticity Chart

Soil sample I belongs to CL classification

Soil sample II belongs to CL classification

Soil sample I belongs to CH classification

32
  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

It is defined as the ratio of the liquid limit minus natural water content
to the plasticity index of the soil.

𝐖𝐋 −𝐖
Ic =
𝑰𝒑

Where, WL is the liquid limit of soil sample

W is the natural water content
Ip is the Plasticity index of the soil sample
If the consistency of the soil is equal to unity, it is at plastic limit If the
consistency of the soil is equal to zero, it is at Liquid limit. If the
consistency of the soil is exceeds unity, the soil is in semi-solid state and
stiff. A negative consistency index indicates that the soil has natural water
content greater than the liquid limit and hence behaves just like a liquid.

33
 Fig 6 Consistency Index

 Activity

The activity (A) of a soil is the PI divided by the percent of clay-sized

particles (less than 2 μm) present. Different types of clays have different
specific surface areas which controls how much wetting is required to
move a soil from one phase to another such as across the liquid limit or the
plastic limit. From the activity, one can predict the dominant clay type
present in a soil sample. High activity signifies large volume change when
wetted and large shrinkage when dried. Soils with high activity are very
reactive chemically. Normally the activity of clay is between 0.75 and
1.25, and in this range clay is called normal. It is assumed that the
plasticity index is approximately equal to the clay fraction (A = 1). When
A is less than 0.75, it is considered inactive. When it is greater than 1.25, it
is considered active.

34
  Shrinkage limit

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

Procedure

Take a sample of mass about 100g from a thoroughly mixed soil

passing 425 sieve. Take about 30g of soil sample in a large evaporating
dish. Mix it with distilled water to make a creamy paste which can be
readily worked without entrapping the air bubbles. Take the shrinkage dish.
Clean it and determine it’s mass. Fill the mercury in the shrinkage dish.

Transfer the mercury of the shrinkage dish to a mercury weighing

dish and determine the mass of the mercury to an accuracy of 0.1g. The
volume of the shrinkage dish is equal to the mass of mercury in grams
divided by the specific gravity of the mercury (i.e. 13.6) .Coat the inside of
the shrinkage dish with a thin layer of silicon grease or Vaseline. Place the
soil specimen in the centre of the shrinkage dish equal to about one-third
the volume of the shrinkage dish. Strike out the top surface of the plate
with a straight edge. Wipe of all soil adhering to the outside of the
shrinkage dish. Determine the mass of the wet soil (M1).

Dry the soil in the shrinkage dish in air until the colour of the pat
turns from dark to light. Then dry the pat in the oven at 105 to 110 0C to
constant mass. Cool the dry pat in a desiccator. Remove the dry pat from
the desiccator after cooling, and weight the shrinkage dish with the dry pat
to determine the dry mass of the soil (Ms).

35
 Place a glass cup in a large evaporating dish and fill it with mercury.
Remove the excess mercury by pressing the glass plate with prongs firmly
over the top of the cup. Wipe off any mercury adhering to the outside of
the cup. Remove the glass cup full of mercury and place it in another
evaporating dish taking care not to spill any mercury from the cup.

Take out the dry pat of the soil from the shrinkage dish and immerse
it in the glass cup full of mercury. Take care not to entrap air under the pat.
Press the plate with prongs on the top of the cup firmly. Collect the
mercury displaced by the dry pat in the evaporating dish and transfer it to
the mercury weighing dish. Determine the mass of the mercury to an
accuracy of 0.1g.

Table 5.7 Observation and Calculations

Soil Soil Soil

S.No Particulars
Sample I Sample II Sample III
1 Mass of Wet Soil, M1 44.6 41.4 50
2 Mass of Dry Soil, Ms 32.8 29.2 31.4
3 Volume of shrinkage dish, V1 16.2 14.4 17.2
4 Volume of dry pat, V2 108 100 126
Shrinkage limit,
5 19.51% 33.42% 40.57%

Shrinkage ratio,
6 0.30 0.292 0.314

36
 Table 5.8 Properties of Black cotton soil

Results obtained in the laboratory

Description of
S.No Soil Soil Sample Soil Sample
Properties
Sample I II III
Black –
1 Colour Black – grey Black – grey
grey
1.831 2.225 2.152
2 Specific Gravity

68.23 62.10 31.35

3 Water Content

Grain Size Analysis

Coefficient of
4 4 5.5 8.33
Uniformity
Coefficient of curvature 1.05 2.27 1.48
5 Liquid Limit 40 47 71
6 Plastic Limit 62.21 46.68 63.96
7 Shrinkage Limit 19.25 20.22 16.53
8 Shrinkage ratio 0.30 0.292 0.314
9 Plasticity index 22.21 28 47
10 Consistency Index 1.271 0.539 0.843
11 Liquidity Index -0.27 1.82 0.63

37
5.2 Properties of Bagasse Ash

As the bagasse ash possesses the properties of ordinary Portland

cement, the properties of Bagasse ash is compared with OPC. The physical
and chemical properties of SCBA and OPC are listed below.

Table 5.9 Properties of Bagasse Ash and OPC

Description of
S.No SCBA OPC
Properties
Chemical Properties
1 SiO2 18.4 62.43
2 Al2O3 5.6 4.38
3 Fe2O3 3.0 6.98
4 CaO 66.8 11.8
5 MgO 1.4 2.51
6 SO3 2.8 1.48
7 K2O 0.5 3.53
Physical Properties
8 Density (g/cm3 ) 3.15 2.52
Blain Surface area
9 3250 5140
(cm2/g)
10 Particle Size (µm) 36.2 28.9
11 Colour Dark Grey/ Black Grey

SCBA – Sugarcane Bagasse Ash

OPC – Ordinary Portland cement

38
 CHAPTER 6

EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATIONS

The influence of Bagasse Ash on the geotechnical properties of

black cotton soil were investigated by conducting various laboratory tests
viz. standard proctor test, Unconfined compression testing (UCC) and
California bearing ratio (CBR) test.

6.1 Standard Proctor Test

6.1.1 General

Compaction is the process of densification of soil by reducing air

voids. The degree of compaction of a given soil is measured in terms of its
dry density. The dry density is maximum at the optimum water content. A
curve is drawn between the water content and the dry density to obtain the
maximum dry density and the optimum water content.

6.2.2 Formula

M/V
Dry density of soil: γ =
1+w

Where, M = total mass of the soil, V= volume of soil, w= water content.

6.2.3 Procedure

 Take about 20kg of air-dried soil. Sieve it through 20mm and 4.7mm
sieve.
 Calculate the percentage retained on 20mm sieve and 4.75mm sieve,
and the percentage passing 4.75mm sieve.

39
 Mix the soil retained on 4.75mm sieve and that passing 4.75mm
sieve in proportions determined in step (2) to obtain about 16 to 18
kg of soil specimen.
 Clean and dry the mould and the base plate. Grease them lightly.
 Weigh the mould with the base plate to the nearest 1 gram.
 Take about 16 – 18 kg of soil specimen. Add water to it to bring the
water content to about 4% if the soil is sandy and to about 8% if the
soil is clayey.
 Keep the soil in an air-tight container for about 18 to 20 hours for
maturing. Mix the soil thoroughly. Divide the processed soil into 6
to 8 parts. Attach the collar to the mould. Place the mould on a solid
base.
 Take about 2.5kg of the processed soil, and hence place it in the
mould in 3 equal layers. Take about one-third the quantity first, and
compact it by giving 25 blows of the rammer. The blows should be
uniformly distributed over the surface of each layer.
 The top surface of the first layer be scratched with spatula before
placing the second layer. The second layer should also be compacted
by 25 blows of rammer. Likewise, place the third layer and compact
it.
 The amount of the soil used should be just sufficient to fill the mould
ad leaving about 5 mm above the top of the mould to be struck off
when the collar is removed.
 Remove the collar and trim off the excess soil projecting above the
mould using a straight edge. Clean the base plate and the mould
from outside. Weigh it to the nearest gram.
 Remove the soil from the mould. The soil may also be ejected out.
 Take the soil samples for the water content determination from the
top, middle and bottom portions. Determine the water content.

40
6.1.4 Observation and Calculation

Soil Sample I

Table 6.1 Moisture Content Determination

% Replacement
S.No Particulars
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
Mass of empty
1 Mould with lid , 6750 6750 6750 6750 6750 6750
M1
Mass of
2 Mould+Lid+Moist 8790 8990 8750 8890 8520 8670
soil, M2
Mass of
3 Mould+Lid+dry 8540 8660 8360 8460 8210 8370
soil M3
Moisture Content,
4 13.96 17.27 24.20 25.15 21.23 18.52
W

Table 6.2 Dry Unit Weight

% Replacement
S.NO Particulars
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
Mass of empty
1 6570 6570 6570 6570 6570 6570
Mould, W1
Mass of Mould
2 + soil 7950 8320 8520 8950 8760 8450
W2
Volume of
3 mould , V 1335.2 1335.2 1335.2 1335.2 1335.2 1335.2
3
(cm )
Unit weight, γ
4 1.033 1.310 1.460 1.782 1.640 1.408
( g/cm3)
Dry Unit
5 Weight, 0.852 1.054 1.281 1.678 1.186 0.950
γd(g/cm3)

41
Soil Sample II

Table 6.3 Moisture Content Determination

% Replacement
S.No Particulars
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
Mass of empty
1 Mould with lid 6750 6750 6750 6750 6750 6750
M1
Mass of Mould
+ Lid + Moist
2 8210 8230 8850 8520 8610 8360
soil
M2
Mass of mould +
3 lid + dry soil 8110 8120 8650 8320 8520 8280
M3
Moisture
4 7.35 8.03 10.52 12.73 5.084 5.228
content, W

Table 6.4 Dry Unit Weight

% Replacement
S.NO Particulars
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
Mass of
1 empty 6570 6570 6570 6570 6570 6570
Mould, W1
Mass of
2 Mould + soil 8090 8120 8320 8640 8320 8220
W2
Volume of
3 mould , V 1335.2 1335.2 1335.2 1335.2 1335.2 1335.2
(cm3)
Unit weight,
4 1.138 1.160 1.310 1.550 1.310 1.235
γ( g/cm3)
Dry Unit
5 Weight, 0.810 1.073 1.162 1.402 1.246 1.173
γd(g/cm3)

42
Soil Sample III

Table 6.5 Moisture Content Determination

% Replacement
S.No Particulars
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
Mass of empty
1 Mould with lid 6750 6750 6750 6750 6750 6750
M1
Mass of Mould
+ Lid + Moist
2 8990 8640 8850 8560 8620 8750
soil
M2
Mass of mould +
3 lid + dry soil 8770 8460 8530 8230 8410 8620
M3
Moisture
4 content, 10.89 10.52 17.97 22.29 12.65 6.95
W

Table 6.6 Dry Unit Weight

% Replacement
S.NO Particulars
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
Mass of empty
1 6570 6570 6570 6570 6570 6570
Mould, W1
Mass of Mould
2 + soil 8550 8650 8760 8990 8520 8430
W2
Volume of
3 mould , V 1335.2 1335.2 1335.2 1335.2 1335.2 1335.2
(cm3)
Unit weight, γ
4 1.482 1.557 1.640 1.812 1.460 1.393
( g/cm3)
Dry Unit
5 Weight, 1.212 1.408 1.390 1.634 1.365 1.236
γd(g/cm3)

43
6.2 Unconfined Compression test

6.2.1 General

The unconfined compressive strength ( ) is the load per unit area

at which the cylindrical specimen of a cohesive soil falls in compression.

6.2.2 Formula

Where P= axial load at failure, A= corrected area = , where is the

initial area of the specimen, = axial strain = change in length/original
length.

6.2.3 Procedure

For undisturbed samples, push the sampling tube into the clay
sample. Saturate the soil sample in the sampling tube by a suitable method.
Coat the split mould lightly with a thin layer of grease. Weigh the mould.
Extrude the sample out of the sampling tube into the split mould, using the
sample extractor and the knife.

Trim the two ends of the specimen in the split mould. Weigh the
mould with the specimen. Remove the specimen from the split mould by
splitting the mould into two parts. Measure the length and diameter of the
specimen with vernier callipers.

Place the specimen on the bottom plate of the compression machine.

Adjust the upper plate to make contact with the specimen. Adjust the dial

44
gauge and the proving ring gauge to zero. Apply the compression load to
cause an axial strain at the rate of ½ to 2% per minute.

Record the dial gauge reading, and the proving ring reading every
thirty seconds up to a strain of 6%. The reading may be taken after every
60 seconds for a strain between 6%, 12% and every 2minutes or so beyond
12%. Continue the test until failure surfaces have clearly developed or until
an axial strain of 20% is reached. Measure the angle between the failure
surface and the horizontal, if possible. Take the sample from the failure
zone of the specimen for the water content determination.

45
 6.2.5 Observation and Calculations

Table 6.7 Unconfined compression stress for soil sample I with%

replacement

%
% Deformation Load Stress
Sample Strain Corrected Load
Replace dial reading dial L/A’
deformation (e) Area (A’) (kN)
ment (d) mm reading N/mm2
(mm2)
92 8 3 0.4 2649.3 0.16 0.060
0%
81 10 4 0.53 3382.1 0.2 0.059
106 8 3 0.4 2649.37 0.16 0.060
2%
98 12 4 0.53 3382.18 0.24 0.070
112 10 3 0.4 2649.37 0.2 0.075
4%
106 12 3 0.4 2649.37 0.24 0.090
112 7 2 0.27 1160.4 0.14 0.120
6%
74 12 3 0.4 2615.5 0.24 0.091
110 8 3 0.4 2650.7 0.16 0.060
8%
95 12 3 0.4 2650.7 0.24 0.090
95 6 5 0.67 4817.0 0.12 0.024
10%
74 10 7 0.93 2708.9 0.2 0.008

46
 Table 6.8 Unconfined compression stress for soil sample II with %
replacement

%
% Deformation Load Stress
Sample Strain Corrected Load
Replace dial reading dial L/A’
deformation (e) Area (A’) (kN)
ment (d) mm reading N/mm2
(mm2)
95 9 4 0.53 3382.1 0.18 0.053
0%
81 10 3 0.4 2649.3 0.20 0.075
120 9 3 0.4 2649.3 0.18 0.060
2%
102 12 4 0.53 3382.1 0.24 0.070
112 10 3 0.4 2649.3 0.20 0.075
4%
100 12 3 0.4 2649.3 0.24 0.090
121 10 2 0.27 1589.6 0.20 0.125
6%
114 12 2 0.27 1589.6 0.24 0.150
95 7 3 0.4 2650.72 0.14 0.053
8%
85 10 2 0.26 2149.23 0.20 0.093
90 7 5 0.67 4817.0 0.14 0.029
10%
85 9 3 0.4 2649.3 0.18 0.068

47
 Table 6.9 Unconfined compression stress for soil sample III with %
replacement

%
% Deformation Load Stress
Sample Strain Corrected Load
Replace dial reading dial L/A’
deformation (e) Area (A’) (kN)
ment (d) mm reading N/mm2
(mm2)
95 9 5 0.67 4817.0 0.18 0.037
0%
81 10 3 0.4 2649.3 0.20 0.075
112 8 2 0.27 2177.5 0.16 0.073
2%
95 12 4 0.53 3382.1 0.24 0.070
120 9 3 0.4 1589.6 0.18 0.113
4%
102 12 4 0.53 3382.1 0.24 0.070
125 8 2 0.26 2148.1 0.16 0.074
6%
101 14 1 0.13 1827.1 0.28 0.153
110 12 4 0.53 3382.1 0.24 0.070
8%
85 10 3 0.4 2649.3 0.20 0.075
95 8 5 0.67 4817.0 0.16 0.033
10%
86 14 3 0.4 2649.3 0.28 0.105

48
6.3 California Bearing Test

6.3.1 General

The California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test was developed by the

California Division of Highways as a method of classifying and evaluating
soil- subgrade and base course materials for flexible pavements. CBR is a
measure of resistance of a material to penetration of standard plunger under
controlled density and moisture conditions. CBR test may be conducted in
remoulded or undisturbed sample. Test consists of causing a cylindrical
plunger of 50mm diameter to penetrate a pavement component material at
1.25mm/minute. The loads for 2.5mm and 5mm are recorded. This load is
expressed as a percentage of standard load value at a respective
deformation level to obtain CBR value.

6.3.2 Procedure

Sieve the sample through 20mm IS sieve. Take 5kg of the sample of
soil specimen. Add water to the soil in the quantity such that optimum
moisture content or field moisture content is reached. Then soil and water
are mixed thoroughly. Spacer disc is placed over the baseplate at the
bottom of mould and a coarse filter paper is placed over the spacer disc.
The prepared soil water mix is divided into five. The mould is cleaned and
oil is applied. Then fill one fifth of the mould with the prepared soil. That
layer is compacted by giving 56 evenly distributed blows using a hammer
of weight 4.89kg. The top layer of the compacted soil is scratched. Again
second layer is filled and process is repeated. After 3 rd layer, collar is also
attached to the mould and process is continued. After fifth layer collar is
removed and excess soil is struck off. Remove base plate and invert the
mould. Then it is clamped to baseplate.

49
 A surcharge weight of 2.5kg is placed on top surface of soil. Mould
containing specimen is placed in position on the testing machine. The
penetration plunger is brought in contact with the soil and a load of 4kg
(seating load) is applied so that contact between soil and plunger is
established. Then dial readings are adjusted to zero. Load is applied such
that penetration rate is 1.25mm per minute. Load at penetration of 0.5, 1,
1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 7.5 ,10 and 12.5mm are noted.

6.2.3 Standard Load Values

Table 6.10 Standard Load values

Unit Standard
Penetration(mm) Standard Load(kg)
Load(kg/cm2)

2.5 1370 70

5 2055 105

7.5 2630 134

10.0 3180 162

12.5 3600 183

The values of CBR are tabulated in next chapter.

50
 CHAPTER 7

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

After the determination of basic properties of black cotton soil, soil

stabilized with bagasse ash and the strength parameters like MDD, UCC
and CBR were determined by conducting compaction, UCS (unconfined
compressive stress) tests and CBR (California bearing ratio).

7.1 Results of OMC and MMD for black cotton soil stabilized with
bagasse ash

Black Cotton Black Cotton Black Cotton

Soil + % Bagasse Soil + % Bagasse Soil + % Bagasse
% Ash Ash Ash
Replacement Soil Sample I Soil Sample II Soil Sample III
OMC MDD OMC MDD OMC MDD
(%) (g/cc) (%) (g/cc) (%) (g/cc)
0 13.96 0.852 7.35 0.810 10.89 1.212
2 17.27 1.054 8.03 1.073 10.52 1.408
4 24.20 1.281 10.52 1.162 17.97 1.390
6 25.15 1.678 12.73 1.402 22.29 1.634
8 21.23 1.186 5.804 1.246 12.65 1.365
10 18.52 0.950 5.228 1.173 6.95 1.236

OMC – Optimum Moisture Content

MMC – Maximum Dry Density

51
 30

25

20
Soil I
15
Soil II
10 Soil III

0
0 2 4 6 8 10

Fig 7.1 Results of OMC for black cotton soil stabilized with bagasse
ash

1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1 Soil I
0.8 Soil II
0.6 Soil III
0.4
0.2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10

Fig 7.2 Results of MMD for black cotton soil stabilized with bagasse

ash

52
 7.2 Results of unconfined compression test for black cotton soil

stabilized with bagasse ash

Unconfined compressive strength of Black Cotton

%
Soil + Bagasse Ash (kN/m2)
Replacement
Soil Sample I Soil Sample II Soil Sample III

0 60 64 56
2 65 65 71.5
4 82.5 82.5 91.5
6 105.5 137.5 113.5
8 75 73 72.5
10 16 48.5 69

160

140

120

100
Soil I
80
Soil II
60 Soil III

40

20

0
0 2 4 6 8 10

Fig 7.3 Results of UCC Test for black cotton soil stabilized with
bagasse ash

53
 7. 3 Results of CBR test for black cotton soil stabilized with bagasse
ash

% CBR Value for Black Cotton Soil + Bagasse Ash

Replacement Soil Sample I Soil Sample II Soil Sample III

0 1.28 1.85 1.39

2 1.59 2.04 1.52
4 1.74 2.10 1.82
6 2.20 2.39 2.25
8 1.56 1.36 1.42
10 1.30 1.21 1.23

2.5

Soil I
1.5
Soil II
Soil III
1

0.5

0
0 2 4 6 8 10

Fig 7.4 Results of CBR test for black cotton soil stabilized with bagasse
ash

54
 CHAPTER 8

CONCLUSION

The use of agricultural waste slightly improves the properties of

expansive soils, bagasse can be used as replacement in black cotton soil up
to certain limits. The properties which improves are discussed here,
 The initial laboratory test showed that collected black cotton soil is
solid and stiff. It has low permeability, high compressibility and low
bearing capacity.
 It was observed that by the addition of 6% bagasse ash for black
cotton soils, the density has significant increases, but OMC
decreases. Further addition of Bagasse Ash density decreases and
OMC increases.
 UCS values got increases at 6% bagasse ash content. Further
addition of Bagasse ash, UCS values decreases.
 The increase in California bearing ratio value at 6% dosage had
better effect compared to the other dosage. Increase in California
bearing ratio indicates reduction in settlement.
 The effective percentage replacement of bagasse ash was found to
be 6%. The blend suggested from this project is Black cotton soil +
6% replacement by bagasse ash, without any addition of cementing
or chemical material; this would be an economic approach.
 Furthermore, if any cementing material is added in suggested blend,
then there will be definitely more improvisation in properties of
expansive soils.

55
 CHAPTER 9

SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE WORK

This project shows significant increase of properties, strength,

bearing capacity of black cotton soil samples at 6% replacement of bagasse
ash without any admixtures or any cementing materials.

If any stabilizing agents like lime, cement, bitumen, or any

chemicals added with, will show considerable increase in properties,
strength, bearing capacity of black cotton soil samples.

56
 CHAPTER 10

REFERENCES

 Dr. B. C. Punmia, Ashok Kumar Jain and Dr. Arun Kumar Jain,
“Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering” 16th edition
1999,Laxmi Publication Pvt. Ltd, Delhi.
 Dr.P. Purushothamaraj., “Ground Improvement Techniques” 2nd
edition 1999, University Science Press Publication, Imprint of
Laxmi Publication Pvt. Ltd, Delhi .
 Gopal Ranjan and A. S. R. Rao., “Basic and Applied Soil
mechanics” 2nd edition 2000, New Age International (P) Ltd
Publisher, Delhi .
 IS 2720 – (Part III, IV, V, VI, VII and X)
 Jian-Long Zheng, Rui Zhang, and He-Ping Yang “Highway Sub
grade Construction in Expansive Soil Areas”, American Society for
Civil Engineering, 2009, pp 154 - 162 .
 Prasad P. Dahale, Dr. P.B. Nagarnaik, Dr. A.R. Gajbhiye
“Utilization of Solid Waste for Soil Stabilization: A Review” 2012,
Vol. 17 Bund Q.
 T.S. Ijimdiya, A.L. Ashimiyu, D.K. Abubakar “Stabilization of
Black Cotton Soil Using Groundnut Shell Ash” EJGE, 2012, pp
3645 -3652 .
 Udayashankar D.Hakari, S.C.Puranik “Stabilization of Black Cotton
Soils Using Fly Ash, Hubballi-Dharwad Municipal Corporation
Area, Karnataka, India” 2012, Vol. 12 Issue 2.

57