CHAPTER FOUR

4.0 PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF RESULT

TABLE 4.0

PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF NATURAL SOIL DURING PRELIMINARY TEST.

N.M.C 6.0%

O.M.C 16.0%

M.D.D 1.67g/cm3

L.L 42.00%

P.L 9.8%

P.I 32%

S.L 12%

UNIT WEIGHT 18.62KN/m3

APPARENT COHESION 14KN/m2

ANGLE OF REPOSE 19

C.B.R VALUE 2.5mm TOP 30.72

C.B.R VALUE 2.5mm BOTTOM 38.94

C.B.R VALUE 5.00mm TOP 38.36

C.B.R VALUE 5.00mm BOTTOM 7.54

TABLE 4.1

NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT RESULTS.

MOISTURE 6.00% 8.90% 8.00% 3.00% 9.50% 12.00%

CONTENT(%)
% OF RICEHUSK 0 2 4 6 8 10
ASH AND LIME

TABLE4.2

ATTERBERG LIMIT TEST RESULT.

% RHA & LIME LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC LIMIT SHRINKAGE PLASTIC INDEX
% % LIMIT % %
0% 42 9.8 12 32
2% 21 13.8 13 17
4% 42 27.4 11.4 14.6
6% 17 9.4 10.4 7.9
8% 26 18.5 13.3 7.5
10% 42 9.9 12 32
TABLE4.3

SPECIFIC GRAVITY TEST RESULT.

SPECIFIC 2.9 2.6 1.8 1.5 1.0 2.2

GRAVITY(g)
% RHA & 0 2 4 6 8 10
LIME

TABLE4.5

COMPACTION TEST RESULT.

% RHA & LIME MAXIMIUM DRY DENSITY OPTIMUM MOITURE

(g/cm3) CONTENT (%)
0 1.67 16
2 1.67 18.5
4 1.53 21.5
6 1.57 18
8 1.73 17.5
10 1.52 22
TABLE4.6

CALIFORNIA BEARING TEST RESULT.

% RHA & C.B.R C.B.R VALUE C.B.R VALUE C.B.R

LIME VALUE AT AT BOTTOM AT TOP VALUE AT
TOP 2.5mm 5.0mm BOTTOM
2.5mm 5.0mm
0 30.72 38.94 38.36 7.54
2 47.22 47.90 61.05 7.54
4 3.35 4.45 6.54 7.54
6 15.53 28.88 28.91 7.54
8 30.72 38.94 38.38 7.54
10 37.36 60.70 40.40 7.54

TABLE4.7

SHEAR BOX TEST RESULT.

% RHA & ANGLE OF REPOSE APPARENT UNIT WEIGHT

LIME Ø COHESION (KN/m3)
(KN/m2)
0 19 14 18.62
2 15 11 15.33
4 22 20 12.04
6 25 22 12.26
8 17 18 10.11
10 37 4 8.63
4.2 DISSCUSSION OF RESULT

From the above figure 4.1, it was observed that the natural moisture content of
the clayey soil decreased from 6% to 3% , with the addition of 6% rice husk ash and
lime.

From figure 4.6, it was observed that the C.B.R value of the soil at the top
increased from 30.72 to 37.36 and bottom from 38.94 to 60.70 with the addition
of 10% rice husk ash and lime
 CHAPTER FIVE

5.0 CONCLUSION
From the result of the test carried out on the natural state of the clayey soil, it was
observed that the soil had low bearing capacity ,high moisture content, high dry
density and shrinkage limit 42% making it unsuitable con construction purpose .

For the stabilized soil, properties of the clayey soil improved from poor bearing
capacity to high which is needed for construction purpose, reduced moisture
content which helps to check water logging or damping

From the test carried out was noticed that the clay soil is an A-6 kind of soil with
regards to AASHITO classification, thus for good performance of the soil it should
be stabilized with 10% of rice husk ash and lime in order to achieve high load
bearing capacity .
5.1 RECOMMENDATION

Having carried out the test on the sample I wish to make the following
recommendations.

1. It is recommended that 10% of rice husk ash and lime should be used to
stabilize A-6 clayey order to achieve better engineering properties.

2. It is recommended the rice husk ash and lime stabilized soil can be used for
low cost housing.

3. It is recommended that rice husk ash and lime should be used as stabilizing
agent to encourage local production of these materials.
 REFEFERENCES

1. BRITISH STANDARD 1994 (1990) Method of test for stabilization o soil 168PP.5s

2. BRITISH STANDARD INSTITUTION (B. S.1377) April (1975)

Method of testing soil for civil engineering
Purpose “British Standard institution
London England.

3. GRAHAM W. (1984) The field description of engineering soil and

The field description of engineering soil and
rock “second edition I. T. Publishers London
(PP 425 -430)

4. HAKKEEN K.L (2004) Stabilization of clay soil using engine oil

and lime
H.N.D project (unpublished) submitted to
Civil Engineering Department.
Kaduna polytechnic.

5. LITTLE A. L. (1969). General report :- definition , formation and

Classification of soil proc. Spec .sess.
Engineering properties of lateritic soils. 7th
international conference on soil.

6. NELSON AND MILLER (1992) Principle and practice of soil mechanics

“Second edition I .T London (page 261-268).
 CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

DETERMINATION OF MOISTURE /DENSITY RELATIONSHIP OF CLAY SOIL

USING 0% RICE HUSK ASH AND LIME

Wt. of mould and wet soil (W2)……..gr 4030.7 4148.3 4321.3 4277.6
Wt. of mould empty (W1)……….…....gr 2250.5 2250.5 2250.5 2250.5
Wt. of wet soil (W2-W1)……………....gr 1780.2 1897.8 2070.8 2027.1
Bulk Density g b= (W2-W1)/X g/cm3 8.7166 1.9026 2.0761 2.0323

Container No. 79 84 121 84

Wt. of soil and container………………....gr 36.20 35.60 33.50 36.00
Wt. of wet soil and container….……….gr 33.50 32.90 30.30 32.50
Wt. of container………………………..……..gr 5.40 4.60 5.40 5.50
Wt. of moisture (Wm)………………..…….gr 2.70 2.70 3.20 3.50
Wt. of dry soil (Wd)……………………...….gr 28.10 28.30 24.90 27.00
Moisture contents (100Wm/Wd)…..…% 9.61 9.54 12.85 12.96
Average moisture content (m)………..% 9.57 12.91
Dry density gd = (100δb/(100+m)) g/cm 3 7.95 1.69

FROM THE GRAPH PLOTTED,

MAX. DRY DENSITY =1.67g/cm3

1.7

1.65

1.6
dry density g/cm3

1.55

1.5

1.45

1.4

1.35
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
moisture content %
 DETERMINATION OF MOISTURE/DENSITY RELATIONSHIP OF CLAY SOIL
USING 2% RICE HUSK ASH AND LIME

Wt. of mould and wet soil (W2)……..gr 3581 3790 3850 3781
Wt. of mould empty (W1)……….…....gr 1840 1840 1840 1840
Wt. of wet soil (W2-W1)……………....gr 1741 1950 2010 1941
Bulk Density gb= (W2-W1)/X g/cm3 1.7454 1.9550 2.0151 1.9459

Container No. 204 89 99 99 66

Wt. of soil and container………………....gr 28.30 26.90 29.90 31.50 30.70
Wt. of wet soil and container….……….gr 24.60 23.50 26.20 27.50 25.70
Wt. of container………………………..……..gr 4.70 4.70 4.70 5.40 4.60
Wt. of moisture (Wm)………………..…….gr 3.70 3.40 3.70 4.00 5.00
Wt. of dry soil (Wd)……………………...….gr 19.90 18.80 21.50 22.10 21.10
Moisture contents (100Wm/Wd)…..…% 18.59 18.09 17.21 18.10 23.70
Average moisture content (m)………..% 18.34 17.65 23.26
Dry density gd = (100δb/(100+m)) g/cm 3 1.47 1.66 1.63

1.70

1.65

1.60
dry density g/cm3

1.55

1.50

1.45

1.40

1.35
17.00 18.00 19.00 20.00 21.00 22.00 23.00 24.00 25.00 26.00 27.00
moisture content %
 DETERMINATION OF MOISTURE/DENSITY RELATIONSHP OF CLAY SOIL
USING 4% RICE HUSK ASH AND LIME

Wt. of mould and wet soil (W2)……..gr 3311 3421 3620 3688 3648
Wt. of mould empty (W1)……….…....gr 1840 1840 1840 1840 1840
Wt. of wet soil (W2-W1)……………....gr 1471 1581 1780 1848 1808
Bulk Density gb= (W2-W1)/X g/cm3 1.4747 1.5850 1.7845 1.8527 1.8126

Container No. 203 92 121 29 76 12 87 83 44 3A

Wt. of soil and container………………....gr 33.90 34.90 35.10 30.90 29.60 27.30 39.50 36.90 40.90 44.60
Wt. of wet soil and container….……….gr 30.50 31.80 30.80 27.50 25.70 23.50 33.30 31.10 33.50 36.40
Wt. of container………………………..……..gr 5.50 5.60 5.60 5.40 4.90 4.80 5.60 5.50 4.60 4.70
Wt. of moisture (Wm)………………..…….gr 3.40 3.10 4.30 3.40 3.90 3.80 6.20 5.80 7.40 8.20
Wt. of dry soil (Wd)……………………...….gr 25.00 26.20 25.20 22.10 20.80 18.70 27.70 25.60 28.90 31.70
Moisture contents (100Wm/Wd)…..…% 13.60 11.83 17.06 15.38 18.75 20.32 22.38 22.66 25.61 25.87
Average moisture content (m)………..% 12.72 16.22 19.54 22.52 25.74
Dry density gd = (100δb/(100+m)) g/cm 3 1.31 1.36 1.49 1.51 1.44

1.55

1.50

1.45
dry density g/cm3

1.40

1.35

1.30

1.25

1.20
12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00 24.00 26.00 28.00
moisture content %
 USING 6% OF RICE HUSK ASH AND LIME

Wt. of mould and wet soil (W2)……..gr 3451 3650 3718 3679
Wt. of mould empty (W1)……….…....gr 1840 1840 1840 1840
Wt. of wet soil (W2-W1)……………....gr 1611 1810 1878 1839
Bulk Density gb= (W2-W1)/X g/cm 3 1.6151 1.8146 1.8828 1.8437

Container No. 30A 77 94 304 64 86

Wt. of soil and container………………....gr 30.80 22.60 27.50 31.90 31.00 38.90
Wt. of wet soil and container….……….gr 27.90 20.60 24.30 28.10 26.70 33.30
Wt. of container………………………..……..gr 5.40 4.70 4.70 5.30 4.70 5.40
Wt. of moisture (Wm)………………..…….gr 2.90 2.00 3.20 3.80 4.30 5.60
Wt. of dry soil (Wd)……………………...….gr 22.50 15.90 19.60 22.80 22.00 27.90
Moisture contents (100Wm/Wd)…..…% 12.89 12.58 16.33 16.67 19.55 20.07
Average moisture content (m)………..% 12.73 16.50 19.81
Dry density gd = (100δb/(100+m)) g/cm 3 1.43 1.56 1.57

1.60

1.55
dry density g/cm3

1.50

1.45

1.40

1.35
12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00 24.00 26.00
moisture content %
 Wt. of soil and container………………....gr 29.42 33.10 35.60
Wt. of wet soil and container….……….gr 26.20 30.10 31.20
Wt. of container………………………..……..gr 4.70 4.70 4.70
Wt. of moisture (Wm)………………..…….gr 3.22 3.00 4.40
Wt. of dry soil (Wd)……………………...….gr 21.50 25.40 26.50
Moisture contents (100Wm/Wd)…..…% 14.98 11.81 16.60
Average moisture content (m)………..% 13.39 16.44
Dry density gd = (100δb/(100+m)) g/cm3 1.66 1.73

FROM THE GRAPH PLOTTED,

MAX. DRY DENSITY =1.73g/cm3
OPT. MOISTURE CONTENT = 17.5%

1.74
1.72
1.70
1.68
dry density g/cm3

1.66
1.64
1.62
1.60
1.58
1.56
1.54
12.00 14.00 16.00 18.00 20.00 22.00 24.00
 Dry density gd = (100δb/(100+m)) g/cm3 1.31 1.37 1.50

FROM THE GRAPH PLOTTED,

MAX. DRY DENSITY =1.52g/cm3
OPT. MOISTURE CONTENT = 22%

1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
dry density g/cm3

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
moisture
12 content % 14 16 18 20 22 24
APPENDIX
a
COMPACTION TEST GRAPH
APPENDIX b
California bearing ratio graphs
APPENDIX C
ATTERBERG LIMITS GRAPHS