Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 909–918

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Strength performance of cement/slag-based stabilized soft clays

Li Liu a, Annan Zhou b, Yongfeng Deng a,⇑, Yujun Cui c, Zhao Yu a, Chuang Yu d
a
Institute of Geotechnical Engineering, School of Transportation, Southeast University, Nanjing, China
b
Discipline Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, School of Engineering, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT), Melbourne, Australia
c
Ecole des Ponts ParisTech, Laboratoire Navier/CERMES, Marne-la-Vallée, France
d
College of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Wenzhou University, Wenzhou, China

h i g h l i g h t s

The binder with steel slag, cement, and metakaolin is efficiently used to stabilize soft clay.

The existed clay mineral in soils absorbs the water and changes the water formation in the binder-soil mixture.

The binder-free water ratio is proposed to explicit the strength performance of the stabilized soils.

A unified analysis frame was attempted to unify the strength performance of concrete, mortar and stabilized soil.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper presents an experimental study on the strength behaviour of the soils stabilized by the com-
Received 17 September 2018 posite of steel slag, cement and metakaolin (SCM composite), at different clay fractions, water contents
Received in revised form 13 February 2019 and curing periods. The SCM composite can effectively improve the soil strength and the SCM stabilized
Accepted 20 March 2019
soil shows the similar property to cemented soils. The microstructures of SCM stabilized soils with dif-
Available online 29 March 2019
ferent curing periods and water contents are also presented via scanning electron microscope tests.
Comparing the microstructure and fissure between stabilized soils, mortar and concrete, it is clear that
Keywords:
the non-free water absorbed at the surface of clay minerals does not involve the hydration/pozzolanic
Steel slag composite
Stabilized soil
process. Moreover a new variable, the free water content, is proposed, which equates to total water con-
Plastic limit tent subtracts n times of plastic limits of the original soils. The free water content is effectively employed
Binder-free water ratio to characterize the unconfined compression strength of stabilized soils observed in this research and also
Unconfined compression strength in literatures. With this proposed concept, the binder stabilized soils can be accommodated by the frame-
Cement-based materials work for traditional cementitious material (concrete and mortar).
Ó 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction been done on the performance of stabilized clay by cement, consid-

With rapid economic development and population growth,
more land is requested in the coastal cities, expanding the
significant demand of the marine reclamation and foundation rein-
forcement. One widely-used method to improve soil strength is
cement-based stabilization. Cement plays an important role in
construction. For example, it has been widely used in mortars
and concretes in structural engineering, and also cement-based
stabilized soils in geotechnical engineering. The strength is the
one of most important properties of cemented-based stabilized
materials. In geotechnical engineering, numerous studies have
⇑ Corresponding author at: Institute of Geotechnical Engineering, School of
Transportation, Southeast University, SEU Avenue 2, Jiangning District, Nanjing
211189, China.
E-mail address: noden@seu.edu.cn (Y. Deng).
ering the diversity and complicacy of soils. Some representative
studies can refer to Nagaraj et al. [28], Tremblay et al. [34], Lee
et al. [23] and Horpibulsuk et al. [17].
The strength enhancement in cement-based stabilized soils
originates from cement hydration (i.e., primary hydration) and sec-
ondary pozzolanic reaction between hydration products and soils
[10]. The primary hydration takes place rapidly once cement con-
tacts with water, during which hydrated calcium aluminates
(C2AHx, C4AHx) and hydrated calcium silicates (C2SHx, C3S2Hx) are
formed while hydrated lime (Ca(OH)2) is generated as crystalline
solid phase. The secondary pozzolanic reaction occurs then
between the calcium ions from cement hydration and hydrous alu-
mina and silica of clay minerals. The secondary pozzolanic reaction
promotes the bonding strength between soil particles in a long
term.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.256
0950-0618/Ó 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
910 L. Liu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 909–918
In the engineering practices, it has been found that the soil min-
eral, clay fraction, cement type and water content significantly
affect the strength development of cement-based stabilized soils
[11,12]. For example, Croft [13] found that the chemical and min-
eral composition of clayey soils have a great impact on the cement
stabilization process through investigating seven types of clays
which were stabilized by cement. Soils with rich montmorillonite
retarded the hydration and hardening of cement, while kaolin
and illite were relatively inert. It was also observed that kaolin
and montmorillonite show different influences on the strength of
cemented soils [15]. Taki and Yang [33] found that the cement-
based stabilized sand shows higher strength than cemented silt
and clay. Bell [7] observed that more stabilizing materials were
needed with increase of clay fraction to enhance the strength of
stabilized soil. The similar conclusion was drawn by Bergado
et al. [8] and they suggested that the strength of cemented soil
decreased with the increase of clay fraction and plastic index.
Although numerous studies have been reported in literature,
the strength development of the cement-based stabilized soils
and its evaluation are still a challenging area in geotechnical engi-
neering. Some researchers [27,16] suggested the soil water- binder
(including cement) ratio (Ws/Cs) as a parameter for evaluating the
engineering properties of cement-based stabilized soils, following
Abrams’ law [1] for concrete and mortar. In Abrams’ framework,
Ws is the water content, which is equal to the mass ratio of total
water to the dry solid phase in the cement–water-soil/aggregate
matrix. Cs is binder (including cement) ratio, which is equal to
the mass ratio of binder to dry solid phase in the matrix. Horpibul-
suk et al. [16,18,19] suggested that the Ws/Cs is also a key and fea-
sible parameter for evaluating the strength development of
cement-treated clays by experimental studies. However, the
cement-based stabilized clay is more complicated than mortar or
concrete in which the non-free water can be ignored. The non-
free water (or adsorbed water) exists on the surface of fine soils
especially clayey soils is affected by the clay mineral and particle
size. The non-free water, which can be reflected by Atterberg lim-
its, is usually inert in terms of chemical and mechanical processes
due to a strong molecular force [41]. For example, Zhou et al.
[41,42] addressed that the non-free water does not contribute to
Fig. 1. Plasticity chart (ASTM D-2487, 2011).
the strength and deformation of unsaturated soils. Similarly, the
non-free water can also be inert in the stabilization process. There-
fore, Ws/Cs in which the free water and non-free water are not dif-
ferentiated from each other may be not suitable to describe the
unified strength of stabilized soil. There are some attempts tried
to study the water involved in hydration process (Zhu et al. [43]),
but the quantitative expression on the strength of the cement-
based stabilized soils considering the different water configura-
tions in clays has not been achieved.
It is clear that hydration products are prevalent cementations to
bind soil’s fragments into a composite with a high strength. Apart
from pure cement, some industrial wastes with similar hydration
reaction are added to reduce the cost and protect environment
[29]. Among them, steel slag is one of the options. Comparing with
ordinary Portland cement, the steel slag is lack of active oxides
SiO2 and Al2O3, with potential cementitious capacity consisting of
30%–55% CaO, 8%–20% SiO2, 1%–6% Al2O3 etc. [32]. To high efficiently
recycle the steel slag, metakaolin was added to complement the
steel slag-cement composite [40,14]. Note that, metakaolin is rich
in active SiO2 and Al2O3 phases, which can make up the active
Si/Al phases and improve the cementation [14,24]. In this case, the
artificially fabricated composite with slag, cement and metakaolin
(SCM composite) was used as the binder to stabilize the soft clays,
aiming to enrich the analysis of the binder type on stabilized soils [14].
This study aims to investigate the influence of soil water con-
tent on the strength development of SCM stabilized soils consider-
ing different water configuration in clays. In this study, the
commercial kaolin was used to adjust the clay mineral component
of Lianyungang marine clay, and then, the admixture was prepared
with different initial water contents. Hereafter, the admixtures
were stabilized by the SCM composite, and the unconfined com-
pression strengths and microstructures were tested at prescribed
curing periods. Based on the experimental results in this study
together with a large number of test data on stabilized soils in lit-
eratures, the water involved in the hydration process was dis-
cussed and deducted. After identifying that only free water is
involved in the hydration process, a new equation for strength of
stabilized soils was proposed. The most advantage of the proposed
equation is that the strength of cement-based materials can be
 L. Liu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 909–918 911

The steel slag was pretreated by the wet magnetic separation method from Jiax-
ing, Zhejiang province. The wet steel slag was air dried and then passed through No.
10 sieve. Its chemical component was listed in Table 3. The primary oxides of steel
slag are CaO and SiO2 (up to 85%) and the content of Al2O3 is limited (less than 5%).
As shown in Fig. 2, the slag content with particles size between 0.075 mm and
0.25 mm accounts for 62%, which results in the low activity. The Metakaolin (i.e.
MK) with 40% Al2O3, with particle size less than 0.005 mm, was used as the compo-
nent adjustment for steel slag in this study. The essential component of MK is anhy-
drous aluminum silicate by kaolin’s dehydrating at the temperature from 600 to
900 °C. The cement used in this study is ordinary Portland cement of Hailuo brand
(#42.5). The basic chemical properties of MK and cement are presented in Table 3.
According to previous investigations [40,14], when the mass ratio of slag, cement
and MK is 85:50:15, the maximal strength of the composite was achieved, equal
to 40 MPa after 28 days’ curing (almost same as that of cement paste). In this exper-
imental study, the SCM composite with this proportion was employed as the
binder.

2.2. Specimen preparation

Fig. 2. Particle size distribution of soft clay, steel slag and kaolin.
accommodated in a unified analysis framework which is suitable
for various concretes, mortars, and cement-based stabilized soils.
2. Material and methodology
2.1. Materials
The soil in this study is the upper marine clay collected from Lianyungang, a
coastal city in the east China and kaolin from Zhenjiang, Jiangsu Province. The liquid
limit (LL), plastic limit (PL) and plastic index (PI) of the marine clay (kaolin), deter-
mined following ASTM [3], are 54.7%, 26.4% and 28.3, respectively. The values of LL,
PL and PI of kaolin are 42.0%, 23.0% and 19.0, respectively. According to the Unified
Soil Classification System [4], the marine clay and kaolin are classified as high-
plasticity clay (CH) and low-plasticity clay (CL), respectively (see Fig. 1). As shown
in Fig. 2, the particle size distribution[2]of the marine clay is poorly graded, with
57.8% clay, 39.6% silt and 2.6% sand. The specific gravity ds of the marine clay [5]
is 2.71. To clarify the role of the non-free water enriched in clay matrix, the kaolin
was added into the marine clay as the ratio of 50% and 100% of dry weight of the
marine clay. The basic physical properties of the soils (the marine clay and kaolin)
are summarized in Table 1. Three mixtures of the marine clay and kaolin with dif-
ferent kaolin ratios are referred as to soil A (kaolin ratio = 0%), soil B (kaolin
ratio = 50%) and soil C (kaolin ratio = 100%). The characteristics of these soils (i.e.,
soils A, B and C) are listed in Table 2.
The raw marine clay was passed through a sieve with 2 mm in diameter to
remove stones and impurities. The commercial kaolin was added to adjust Atter-
berg’s limits of the soil with changing the clay mineral composition. The aim is to
investigate influences of the water content on the strength of cement-based stabi-
lized soils, since most ground improvement projects occur in soft clays with high
water contents. The specimens were prepared with initial water contents of 1.0,
1.15 and 1.3 times of LL.
Prior to mixing with water, the marine clay, kaolin and binder at the prescribed
proportions were first mixed to produce a homogeneous powder. In this investiga-
tion, the binder ratio (Cs, the ratio of binder mass to the dry soil mass) was set to be
20% referring the engineering practice in Lianyungang region. Water was then
added to the mixture to ensure uniform dispersion of the clay-binder-water matrix.
ASTM [6] was followed for a mixing process. The procedure when mixing with
water lasted for 10 min in total, in which 1 min was allowed to scrape off the mate-
rials attached to the sidewall and bottom of the mixing bowl. After mixing, the uni-
form paste was transferred to cylindrical split molds (50 mm in diameter and
100 mm in height). The paste was artificially tapped to remove trapped air bubbles.
The specimens were then sealed by plastic wraps and cured in the chamber
with a temperature of 20 ± 2 °C and a humidity of 95%. Prior to testing, the top
and bottom of the specimen were trimmed to ensure 100 ± 5 mm in height and
to maintain a length/diameter ratio about 2:1. The mass of each sample was
weighed and checked for consistency to within ±3 g of the mean mass of the matrix.
At least three samples were tested for each matrix.
2.3. Unconfined compression strength tests
After different curing periods (7, 14 and 28 days), the specimens were tested for
unconfined compressive strength (UCS) with a shearing rate of 1.00 mm/min (ASTM
D-2166). During compression tests, the specimens were covered by a preservative
film to minimize water loss due to evaporation. The tests were terminated when
the peak strength was attained, or 15% axial strain was reached.

Table 1
Physical properties of Lianyungang soft Clay and kaolin.

Soil LL (%) PL (%) Plastic index Particle size distribution (%) Specific gravity ds
PI
Sand >75 mm Silt [75,2] mm Clay <2 mm
Soft clay 54.7 26.4 28.3 2.6 39.6 57.8 2.71
Kaolin 42 23 19 0.2 78.1 21.7 2.74

Table 2
Characteristic of tested soil.

Soil type Kaolin ratio LL (%) PL (%) Ws (%) Curing period (days)
A 0% 54.7 26.4 54.7 62.9 71.1 7 14 28
B 50% 44.1 24.1 44.1 50.7 57.3
C 100% 42.7 21.8 42.7 49.1 55.5

Table 3
Chemical composition of Steel Slag, MK and Cement.

Materials CaO (%) Al2O3 (%) SiO2 (%) Fe2O3 (%) MgO (%) SO3 (%) Else (%) Loss of ignition
Steel slag 48.8 2.1 27.9 8.3 3.3 1.7 6.3 1.6
MK 1.0 40 52 2.5 0.8 / / /
Cement 54.7 7.5 21.7 2.9 1.7 3.5 1.9 3.4
912 L. Liu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 909–918

Table 4
Properties of stabilized soil samples from literatures.

Soil LL (%) PL (%) Ws (%) Cement type Cs (%) Curing period (d) Reference
Wuxi 75 29 108% Type 1 Ordinary Portland Cement 7.3–101.9% 7,28 [43]
Shenzhen 73 32 93% 6.4–90.7% 7,28
Guangzhou 62 35 95% 6.6–92.9% 7,28
Singapore 87 35 90%,120% Type I Portland cement 5–60% 7,28,90 [10]
Bangkok-1 103 43 80–160% Type I Portland cement 10% 7,28 [25]
Bangkok-2 89 30 89,119,148% Type I Portland cement 10–30% 7,14,28,90 [19]
Mizushima 65.3 15.5 97.95–130.6% Ordinary Portland Cement 2.04–25% 7,28,90 [20–22]
Tokuyama 107.6 35.4 161.4, 215.2% 11.1–25% 7,28,90
Hibiki 61.2 20.7 91.8% 11.1–25% 7,28,90
Moji 89.5 29.3 134.25% 11.1–25% 7,28,90
Ariake 120 57 106,130,160% Ordinary Portland cement 10,15,20% 7,28 [16]
Red earth 38 15 38,57,76% Portland cement 1.9–15.2% 7,14,28 [30]
Brown soil 60 23 60,90,120% 3–25% 7,14,28
Black cotton soil 97 35 97,135.5,194% 4.85–38.8% 7,14,28

sediment clay from Shenzhen, river sediment clay from Guangzhou, Singapore mar-
ine clay, Bangkok clay at different regions, dredged clay of four airports as well as
clays with high LL in Japan, and red earth, brown soil and black cotton soil from
India. The water content of these soils varies from 38% to 252.2%, the binder
(including cement) ratio ranges between 2.04% and 101.9%; and curing time ranges
from 7 days to 90 days.

2.4. SEM tests

Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was used to investigate the microstructure

changes of the stabilized soils with different curing periods, water contents and soil
types. Five specimens were tested by SEM in this study, including (1) soil A with
water content of 1.15 LL after 7, 14, and 28-day curing (three specimens), and (2)
soil A with water content of 1.0 LL and 1.3 LL after 28-day curing (two specimens).
Small pieces of specimens were first trimmed to appropriate size and shape and
then immersed in liquid nitrogen (196 °C) for instant freezing. Then the frozen
specimens were transferred to the vacuum chamber of a freeze dryer for sublima-
tion for approximately 24 h. Then, the dried specimens were trimmed flat and vac-
uum coated with a layer of gold in the thickness of 200–300 Å (1 Å = 0.1 nm) to
make it electrically conductive to prevent electric charge on the specimens.

3. Results and discussions

Fig. 3. Relationship between strength and water content.
In addition to the experiments performed, a detailed survey and data collection
from the literature have also been done in this study. The unconfined compression
test results on different types of clay treated with different cement-based materials
in literature [10,22,27,23] (Chew et al. [10], Horpibilsuk et al. [16,19], Lorenzo and
Bergado [25], Zhu et al. [43], Kang et al. [20–22], Narendra et al. [30]) were also
included in the analysis. As shown in Table 4, the unconfined compression results
cover different types of clay including lake sediment clay from Wuxi, marine
The test results in this study show that Atterberg limits of arti-
ficial soils decrease with the increase of kaolin content in Table 2.
In other words, with the increase of kaolin content, water-holding
capacity of artificial soils decreases, and the soils turn from high CH
to CL gradually. After the stabilization by the SCM composite, the
strength of stabilized soils improved significantly (>1 MPa after
28-day curing) as shown in Fig. 3. The SCM stabilized soils show
the similar properties of soils stabilized by pure cement, regarding
strength evolution with the water content, curing period and Atter-
berg limits.

Fig. 4. Relationship between strength and liquid limit.

Fig. 5. Relationship between strength and plastic limit.
 L. Liu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 909–918
Fig. 6. Relationship between strength and clay fraction (soil particle less than
2 lm).
3.1. Strength
It is well acknowledged that the microstructure of stabilized
soils is a combination of soil fabric and cementation [36,38]. The
fabric of stabilized soils refers to microstructure related to the
arrangement/constituent of mineral, fraction and porosity. The
cementation fills the space among soil particles and welds the fab-
ric by hydration process/pozzolanic reaction during curing. The
strength of stabilized soils is related to the component of solid
Fig. 7. Relationship between strength and curing periods.
Fig. 8. Microstructure of stabilized soil A (Ws = 1.15 LL, T = 7, 14, 28d).
913
phase, water content and cementation intensity. Therefore,
water-binder ratio, initially developed for concrete and mortar,
was introduced to interpret the strength of stabilized soils
[27,37,39].
The influence of the water content on the strength of stabilized
soils is presented in Fig. 3. It is clear that initial water content dis-
tinctly affects the strength development. For all the soil types, the
UCS almost decreases with the water content. With the increase of
water content, the distance between soil particle and cluster is
enlarged, resulting in weaker soil fabric and cementation. Addi-
tionally, this new binder has the same effectiveness when stabi-
lized soils, for the UCS28 of the clays stabilized by only cement
just about 1.0 MPa.
Unlike in concrete and mortar, the water in soils is not entirely
free. One part of water adheres to soils (especially fine clays and
montmorillonite-rich clays) and forms the bound water. The
remaining water (i.e., free water) gives consistency of clay-binder
paste and keeps flowability, like that in mortar and concrete. But
there is no very clear separation among two types of water. Partic-
ularly, it is hard to quantify the amounts of bound water and con-
nected water. It should be noted that bound water and connected
water are related to the plastic limit of the soil, which is a key
parameter to classify soil type.
Figs. 4 and 5 show the unconfined compression strength plotted
against LL and PL, respectively, for the samples with Ws/LL of 1.0,
1.15, and 1.3 after 7, 14, and 28-day curing. The results indicate
that higher strength was achieved at lower LL and PL for the same
value of Ws /LL. Although the tendency is similar, the details are
changing with the value of Ws /LL and the curing period. The UCS
decreases sharply as Ws /LL is relatively low, but changes gently
when Ws /LL is higher. However, when the Ws/LL ratio is high,
the slopes of trend lines are almost the same, implying that a water
content of 1.0 LL is appropriate for the reaction of soil–water-
binder matrix. Regarding the strength change with PL, it shows a
nearly linear relationship between UCS and PL when the value of
Ws/LL is low. When Ws/LL is greater than 1.0, the UCS changes little
if the value of PL is less than 24% and reduces sharply when PL is
larger than 24%. Therefore, it can be concluded that the strength
of stabilized soils with high water content is dependent of their
basic properties like Atterberg limits and closely related with the
water content.
Clay fraction is another key factor affecting the strength of the
stabilized soils with high water content. Fig. 6 shows the relation-
ship between the clay fraction and UCS of stabilized soils after 7,
14, and 28-day curing. The results illustrate that UCS decreases
as the clay fraction increases, with the same water contents (1.0,
1.15, and 1.3 LL respectively). Since the cohesion between clay par-
ticles is weak, high clay fraction implies more specific surface area
that needs more stabilized agent to bind particles together. As a
result, when the stabilized agent is limited, higher clay fraction
914 L. Liu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 909–918
Fig. 9. Microstructure of stabilized soil A (T = 28d, W = 1.0, 1.15, 1.3LL).
leads to a weaker gelation in general. As shown in Fig. 6, the shape
of the curve (UCS versus clay fraction) is similar to the UCS-PL
curve (UCS against plastic limit). When the water content is low
(e.g., 1.0 LL), the strength reduces linearly. When the water content
Fig. 10. Relationship between UCS7D and binder-water ratio.
Fig. 11. Relationship between UCS28D and binder-water ratio.
is higher than 1.15 LL, the reduction tendency changes non-linearly
from gentle to sharp. Therefore, the plastic limit can be employed
to reflect the influence of clay fraction on the strength of stabilized
soils.
The effect of curing periods on the UCS is presented in Fig. 7.
The strength develops rapidly at early age and thereafter slows
down with curing period. For example, the strength after 7-day
curing has achieved more than 60% of that after 28-day curing.
The increasing trends of different soils are almost same. With the
increase of water content, the strength of three types of stabilized
soils (soil A, B and C, see Table 2) converges with each other. For
example, the UCS of stabilized soil B (50% Lianyungang marine
clay) is equal to that of soil C (kaolin) when water content equates
to 1.3 LL.
3.2. Microstructure
The microstructures of stabilized soil A (Lianyungan marine
clay) with different curing periods are shown in Fig. 8. A large
number of ettringite (AFt and AFm) and calcium silicate hydrate
crystal (C-S-H) layers that enwrap the soil aggregate can be
observed, demonstrating how the binder effectively enhances the
strength. As shown in Fig. 8, the morphology and amount of
hydrates between soils are changing with the curing time. After
7-day curing, few AFt is observed on the soil surface. With the
increase of the preservative age, the products like AFm and C-S-H
are generated to connect soil particle and form large size aggre-
gates. After 28-day curing, there is no clear boundary between soil
Fig. 12. Relationship between UCS90D and binder-water ratio.
 L. Liu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 909–918
and hydrates, implying that the completion of stabilization. Fig. 9
presents the microstructure of stabilized soil A with different
water contents after 28-day curing. It is found that a higher water
content leads to a larger distance between soil particles (the circles
and lines are soil particles), resulting in a large porosity, weak
bonding and low strength.
In general, the strength of stabilized soils is affected by the fac-
tors like soil properties (i.e., Atterberg limits), water content, curing
duration, where the soil properties and water content are coupled
with each other. Different from clayey soils, there is little water
trapped on the surface of sands or coarse aggregates used in mortar
or concrete. The strength of concrete or mortar has a significant
linear correlation with water cement ratio. However, such a linear
correlation between strength and water cement ratio is not valid
for stabilized soils. The main reason can be attributed to a very
high affinity between water and clay particles due to a large sur-
face area of clay particles. Therefore, only part of the water in the
Fig. 13. Plastic limit of stabilized soils [35].
Fig. 14. Relationship between UCS7D and binder-free water ratio.
915
soil (i.e., free water, equal to the total water subtracts by the
absorbed water) can be involved in hydration. However, for con-
crete and mortar, almost all the water is involved in the hydration
process. Thus, it is worthy to highlight the content of free water
that involves the hydration process instead the total water content
for stabilized soils.
4. Unified strength framework for Cement-based materials
Abrams [1] proposed the principle of water-binder ratio
through numerous experiments. It states that, when the concrete
is completely compacted, the relationship of compression strength
(UCS) and water-binder ratio (Ws/Cs) can be summarized as below.
k1
UCS ¼ W s =C s
ð1Þ
k2
where k1 and k2 are experimental constants. This equation suggests
a positive correlation between compression strength and binder-
water ratio (Cs/Ws). Lyse [26] proposed an empirical relationship
of strength and cement–water ratio.
Cs
UCS ¼ a  þb ð2Þ
Ws
where a and b are constants related to cementation strength and
the gradation of coarse aggregate. It illustrates that the strength
depends on binder-water ratio (Cs/Ws) linearly. Bolomey [9] vali-
dated Lyse’s equation that has been widely used in concrete
industry.
According to the knowledge on the strength of concrete, the
binder-water ratio (Cs/Ws, the reciprocal of water-binder ratio)
was first introduced to evaluate the strength of stabilized soils by
Miura et al. [27]. The experimental relationships between strength
and Cs/Ws of stabilized soils from 15 regions/countries are pre-
sented in Fig. 10 (after 7 days’ curing), Fig. 11 (after 28 days’ cur-
ing) and Fig. 12 (after 90 days’ curing). Figs. 10–12 just indicate
that the strength roughly increases with the cement–water ratio
for all the samples involved. But the strength of the stabilized soils
cannot be adjusted well in terms of the binder-water ratio and in
view of the concept of the traditional cmenet-based materials
916 L. Liu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 909–918

Fig. 15. Relationship between UCS28D and binder-free water ratio.

(including mortar and concrete), suggesting that the strength of correlation between the strength and the cement free water ratio
cemented soils would not be directly evaluated by using the (Cs/Wf), which validates the proposed equation (i.e., Eq. (6)). The
binder-water ratio. This is because clay mineral disturbs the water slope of the regression lines (parameter a) in Figs. 14–16 is differ-
consumption during the hydration process and pozzolanic reac- ent from each other because of the different cementation intensity
tion. Sasanian and Newson [31] attempted to solve this problem of binder materials. This observation is similar with that for con-
by introducing soil’s activity (Ac) to modify the cement–water crete and mortar. In addition, parameter n increases with the cur-
ratio. According to Sasanian and Newson [31], the strength of sta- ing time (n = 1.2 after 7-day curing, 1.5 after 28-day curing and 2.5
bilized soils can be expressed as after 90-day curing).
The water in soils is more complicated than that in
UCS28D
¼ 125:24b2 þ 7:47b þ 0:42 ð3Þ concrete/mortar for the existence of bound water film which is
2pa
dominated by the particle size distribution and clay mineral. Based
where on the results presented above, it is clear that the cement free
  water ratio (Cs/Wf) is a key parameter for analyzing the strength
Cs
b ¼ Ac 3:2 ð4Þ development of stabilized soils. As shown in Fig. 17, the cement
Ws stabilized soils can be accommodated by the framework for tradi-
The work from Sasanian and Newson [31] confirms that the tional cementitious material (concrete and mortar) by adopting the
binder-water ratio initially developed in the concrete industry cement free water ratio (Cs/Wf).
should be modified when it is introduced into the cement-based
stabilized soils. However, Eq. (3) is empirical, which cannot physi-
cally answer the water consumption in the soil-binder-water
matrix.
Atterberg limits (PL and LL) are the synthesized indexes reflect-
ing soil’s water holding capacity influenced by the clay mineral and
particle distribution. Additionally, the previous investigations [27]
indicated that PL significantly increases with the increase of the
cement ratio and the curing period. This finding (see Fig. 13) is sim-
ilar to that by Uddin et al. [35]. Hence, the bound water (i.e., the
difference between the total water and the free water) can be fea-
sibly linked with the value of PL. Therefore, the PL of original soils
is introduced to extract the free water content (Wf) from total
water content (Ws). We have
W f ¼ W s  n  PL ð5Þ
where n is a material parameter. Combining Eqs. (2) and (5), the
strength of stabilized soils can be thus expressed as
aC s
UCS ¼ aC s =Wf þ b ¼ þb ð6Þ
ðW s  n  PLÞ
Figs. 14–16 present the relationships between strength and free
water content after various curing periods (7, 28 and 90 days,
respectively). It suggests that there is a strong positive linear Fig. 16. Relationship between UCS90D and binder-free water ratio.
 L. Liu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 909–918
Fig. 17. Concept of unified cement-based material.
5. Conclusions
The unconfined compression strength of stabilized soils was
investigated in this study over a range of water contents, plastic
limits and curing periods. From test results and analyses, the fol-
lowing conclusion can be drawn:
(1) The binder composed of the steel slag, cement and metakao-
lin, can effectively stabilize soft clays, the strength of which
could achieve 1.0 MPa after 28 days’ maintenance by the for-
mation of C-S-H, AFt and AFm among soil particles and
clusters.
(2) Higher strength of stabilized soils can be attained at a lower
water content and a longer curing period, which consisted
with concrete and mortar. Besides, clay fraction, plastic
and liquid limit has also affected strength of stabilized soils
significantly.
(3) The conventional binder-water ratio (Cs/Ws) is insufficient to
evaluate the strength of stabilized soils. The binder-free
water ratio (Cs/Wf) is proposed, where the free water content
(Wf) is equal to the total water content subtracting n times of
917
plastic limits. The value of n is related with the curing per-
iod, indicating the hydration/pozzolanic reaction between
stabilized agent and soil’s clay fraction.
(4) The binder-free water ratio (Cs/Wf) has been validated by
experimental results as an appropriate parameter for char-
acterizing the strength of stabilized soils with different clay
fractions and minerals. Through employing the binder-free
water ratio (Cs/Wf), the binder stabilized soils can be accom-
modated by the framework for traditional cementitious
material (concrete and mortar).
Conflict of interest
The authors declared that they have no conflicts of interest to
this work.
Acknowledgements
This study is supported by the National Natural Science Founda-
tion of China (Grant No. 41577280, 51878159) and the Fundamen-
tal Research Funds for the Central Universities and Postgraduate
918 L. Liu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 211 (2019) 909–918
Research & Practice Innovation Program of Jiangsu Province (Grant
No. KYCX17-0131).
References
[1] D.A. Abrams, Design of Concrete Mixtures, Structural Material Research
Laboratory, Lewis Institute, Chicago, 1918, p. 20.
[2] ASTMStandard Test Method for Particle-Size Analysis of Soils, D422 American
Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 2007.
[3] ASTMStandard Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index
of Soils, D 4318 American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 2010.
[4] ASTMStandard Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes
(Unified Soil Classification System), D2487 American Society for Testing and
Materials, Philadelphia, 2011.
[5] ASTMStandard Test Methods for Specific Gravity of Soil Solids by Water
Pycnometer, D854 American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia,
2010.
[6] ASTMStandard Practice for Mechanical Mixing of Hydraulic Cement Pastes and
Mortars of Plastic Consistency, American Society for Testing and Materials,
Philadelphia, 2014, pp. C305–C314.
[7] F.G. Bell, Engineering Treatment of Soil, Spon, London, UK, 1993.
[8] D.T. Bergado, L.R. Anderson, N. Miura, A.S. Balasubramaniam, Soft Ground
Improvement in Lowland and Other Environments, ASCE Press, New York, NY,
USA, 1996.
[9] J. Bolomey, Granulation et prevision de la resistance probable des betons,
Travoux 19 (30) (1935) 228–232.
[10] S.H. Chew, A.H.M. Kamruzzaman, F.H. Lee, Physicochemical and engineering
behavior of cement-treated clays, J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 130 (7) (2004)
696–706.
[11] N.C. Consoli, R.C. Cruz, M.F. Floss, L. Festugato, Parameters controlling tensile
and compressive strength of artificially cemented sand, J. Geotech.
Geoenviron. Eng. 136 (5) (2010) 759–763.
[12] N.C. Consoli, D.A. Rosa, R.C. Cruz, A.D. Rosa, Water content, porosity and
cement content as parameters controlling strength of artificially cemented
silty soil, Eng. Geol. 122 (2011) 328–333.
[13] J.B. Croft, The influence of soil mineralogical composition on cement
stabilization, Géotechnique 17 (2) (1967) 119–135.
[14] Y.F. Deng, T.W. Zhang, Y. Zhao, Q.W. Liu, Q. Wang, Mechanical behaviour and
microstructure of steel slag-based composite and its application for soft clay
stabilisation, Eur. J. Environ. Civ. Eng. (2017), https://doi.org/10.1080/
19648189.2017.1357787.
[15] V.A. Fernandes, P. Purnell, G.T. Still, T.H. Thomas, The effect of clay content in
sands used for cementitious materials in developing countries, Cem. Concr.
Res. 37 (2007) 751–758.
[16] S. Horpibulsuk, N. Miura, T.S. Nagaraj, Assessment of strength development in
cement-admixed high water content clays with Abrams’ law as a basis,
Géotechnique 53 (4) (2003) 439–444.
[17] S. Horpibulsuk, N. Miura, T.S. Nagaraj, Clay–water/cement ratio identity for
cement admixed soft clays, J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 131 (2) (2005) 187–
192.
[18] S. Horpibulsuk, R. Rachan, A. Suddeepong, Assessment of strength
development in blended cement admixed Bangkok clay, Constr. Build. Mater.
25 (4) (2011) 1521–1531.
[19] S. Horpibulsuk, R. Rachan, A. Suddeepong, A. Chinkulkijniwat, Strength
development in cement admixed Bangkok clay: laboratory and field
investigations, Soils Found. 51 (2) (2011) 239–251.
[20] G.O. Kang, T. Tsuchida, A.M.R.G. Athapaththu, Strength mobilization of
cement-treated dredged clay during the early stages of curing, Soils Found.
55 (2) (2015) 375–392.
[21] G.O. Kang, T. Tsuchida, A.M.R.G. Athapaththu, Engineering behavior of cement-
treated marine dredged clay during early and later stages of curing, Eng. Geol.
209 (2016) 163–174.
[22] G.O. Kang, T. Tsuchida, Y.S. Kim, Strength and stiffness of cement-treated
marine dredged clay at various curing stages, Constr. Build. Mater. 132 (2017)
71–84.
[23] F.H. Lee, Y. Lee, S.H. Chew, K.Y. Yong, Strength and modulus of marine clay-
cement mixes, J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 131 (2) (2005) 178–186.
[24] L. Liu, Q. Liu, Y. Deng, Y. Zhao, NaCl Activation of Steel Slag upon Component
Adjustment, in: Proceedings of China-Europe Conference on Geotechnical
Engineering. Springer Series in Geomechanics and Geoengineering, 2018, pp.
1282–1286.
[25] G.A. Lorenzo, D.T. Bergado, Fundamental parameters of cement-admixed clay-
new approach, J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 130 (10) (2004) 1042–1050.
[26] I. Lyse, Tests on consistency and strength of concrete having constant water
content, ASTM Proc. 32 (II) (1932) 629–636.
[27] N. Miura, S. Horpisulbuk, T.S. Nagaraj, Engineering behavior of cement
stabilized clay at high water contents, Soils Found. 41 (5) (2001) 33–45.
[28] T.S. Nagaraj, P.P. Yaligar, N. Miura, A. Yamadera, Predicting strength
development by cement admixture based on water content, Geotech. Eng.
Bull. 7 (1) (1998) 1–9.
[29] A. Neramitkornburi, S. Horpibulsuk, S.L. Shen, A. Arulrajah, M.M. Disfani,
Engineering properties of lightweight cellular cemented clayfly ash material,
Soils Found. 55 (2) (2015) 471–483.
[30] B.S. Narendra, P.V. Sivapullaiah, S. Suresh, S.N. Omkar, Prediction of unconfined
compressive strength of soft grounds using computational intelligence
techniques: a comparative study, Comput. Geotech. 33 (2006) 196–208.
[31] S. Sasanian, T.A. Newson, Basic parameters governing the behavior of cement
treated clays, Soils Found. 54 (2) (2014) 209–224.
[32] C. Shi, Steel slag-its production, processing, characteristics, and cementitious
properties, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 16 (3) (2004) 230–236.
[33] O. Taki, D. Yang, Soil–cement mixed wall technique, ASCE GSP 27 (1991) 298–
309.
[34] H. Tremblay, S. Leroueil, J. Locat, Mechanical improvement and vertical yield
stress prediction of clayey soils from eastern Canada treated with lime or
cement, Can. Geotech. J. 38 (2001) 567–579.
[35] K. Uddin, Strength and Deformation Behavior of Cement Treated Bangkok Clay
(Doctoral thesis), Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok, Thailand, 1994.
[36] Y. Yi, L. Gu, S. Liu, A.J. Puppala, Carbide slag-activated ground granulated blast
furnace slag for soft clay stabilization, Can. Geotech. J. 52 (5) (2015) 657–663.
[37] Y. Yi, C. Li, S. Liu, F. Jin, Magnesium sulfate attack on clays stabilized by carbide
slag- and magnesia-ground granulated blast furnace slag, Géotechn. Lett. 5 (4)
(2015) 306–312.
[38] Y. Yi, M. Liska, F. Jin, A. Al-Tabbaa, Mechanism of reactive magnesia-ground
granulated blastfurnace slag (GGBS) soil stabilization, Can. Geotech. J. 53 (5)
(2016) 773–782.
[39] Y. Yi, L. Gu, S. Liu, F. Jin, Magnesia reactivity on activating efficacy for ground
granulated blast furnace slag for soft clay stabilization, Appl. Clay Sci. 126
(2016) 57–62.
[40] Y. Zhao, Na2SiO4- and Cement-based Activation on Waste Steel Slag and Its
Application on Soft Soil Stabilization (Master’s thesis), Southeast University,
Nanjing, China, 2016.
[41] A.N. Zhou, R.-Q. Huang, D. Sheng, Capillary water retention curve and shear
strength of unsaturated soils, Can. Geotech. J. 53 (2016) 974–987.
[42] A.N. Zhou, S. Wu, J. Li, D. Sheng, Including degree of capillary saturation into
constitutive modelling of unsaturated soils, Comput. Geotech. 95 (2018) 82–
98.
[43] W. Zhu, C.L. Zhang, A.C.F. Chiu, Soil-water transfer mechanism for solidified
dredged materials, J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 133 (5) (2007) 588–598.