Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Project File (1) Prakash
Project File (1) Prakash
A Project Report
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the
Degree of
BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY
(CIVIL ENGINEERING)
Submitted to
M.Chandu 18751A0115
V.Geetha 18751A0120
V.Lokeswari 18751A0121
K.Bhuvana Chandra 18751A0107
Mr.P.CHANDRAHAS ,M.tech
Assistant Professor of civil engineering
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the project report entitled
M.CHANDU(18751A0115),V.GEETHA (18751A0120),V.LOKESWARI
2022.
Signature of Head of department signature of the supervisor
partial fulfilment of the requirement for the award of degree Bachelor of Technology in
MANAGEMENT STUDIES In chittoor. comprises only our original work and due
acknowledgement has been made in the text to all other material used.
We also declare that this thesis work is the result of our sincere efforts and that it
has not been submitted to any other university for the award of the degree or any diploma.
M.CHANDU. 18751A0115
V.GEETHA. 18751A0120
V.LOKESWARI 18751A121
ASH” We wish to take this opportunity to express our deep gratitude to all the people who
have extended their cooperation in various ways during our project work. It is our pleasure
and responsibility to acknowledge the help of all those individuals.
We express our deepest gratitude to The Management,,sreenivasa institute o f
technology and management studies,for their support and encouragement in completing
our project work and providing us necessary facilities
We express our deepest gratitude to
Dr.M. S A R A V A N A N , p h . D , Principal,Sreenivasa institute of technology and
management studies,chittoora for his valuable suggestions during preparation of draft this
document.
We are grateful to Mr.U.ANAND ANIL ,Associate Professor & Head, Department
of Civil Engineering for his assistance and encouragement in all respects in carrying
throughout our project work.
We are thankful to P. CHANDRAHAS,,Asst pro, Department of Civil Engineering
for his/her assistance and encouragement in all respects in carrying throughout our project
work.
Finally, we thank one and all who directly or indirectly helped us for successful
completion of our project work.
With Sincerely,
M.Chandu -18751A0115
V.Geetha -18751A0120
V.Lokeswari. -18751A0121
K.Bhuvana Chandra -18751A0107
LIST OF CONTENT
Contents Page No
Chapter-1
1.1. Abstract 1
1.2. Introduction 2
Chapter-2
2.1. Literature review 4
Chapter-3
3.1. Experimental Investigations 7
3.2. Specific Gravity 7
3.3. Grain Size Analysis 7
3.4. Liquid limit 9
3.4.1. Plastic Limit 9
3.4.2. Proctor CompactionTest 9
3.5. California Bearing Ratio Value (CBR) Test 10
3.6. Un Confined Compressive test 10
3.7. Test Results 12
3.8. Conclusion 36
Chapter-4 Reference 37
LIST OF TABLES
1
CHAPTER-01
1.0 INTRADUCTION
Soil is one of the most important and primary media for any construction work. The
strength and durability of any structure depends on the strength properties of soil. The
soil is collected from the newtons engineering college at macherla, India. The red soil
are collected from the newton’s Ground. Improving an onsite soil’s engineering
properties is called soil stabilization. The chemical stabilization of the disturbances soils
in geotechnical engineering applications such as pavement structures, roadways,
building foundations, channel and reservoir linings, irrigation systems, water lines, and
sewer lines to avoid the damage due to the settlement of the soft soil or to the swelling
action of the expansive soils. Geo technical properties of problematic soils such as
expansive soils are improved by various methods. The problematic soil is removed and
replaced by a good quality material or treated using mechanical and/or chemical
stabilization. To reduce the pavement thickness as well as cost. The following
geotechnical design criteria have to be considered during site selection. Design load and
function of the structure. The Type of foundation to be used. Bearing capacity of
subsoil. Stabilization can be used to treat a wide range of sub-grade materials from
expansive clays to granular materials. Expansive soils are known as shrink swell or
swelling soils. Different clays have different susceptibility to swelling. Such soils
expand when they are wetted and shrink when dried. Soil stabilization improves the
engineering properties of soil such as strength, volume stability and durability. The
shear strength and bearing capacity of this soil are very low, while the compressibility
is very high. Expansive soils are highly problematic because of the susceptibility of
these soils to undergo large changes in volume due to fluctuations in the moisture
content. The term expansive soil applies to soils that have the tendency to swell when
their moisture content is increased. Chemical stabilization of soft soils involves
blending a binder into the soil to increase its strength and stiffness through chemical
reactions. Expansive soils are clays that have the tendency to swell and soften when
their moisture content is increased, or shrink and dry-cracked when their moisture
content is decreased. The swelling and shrinkage characteristic of expansive soil depend
upon the percentage of moisture content in it. So the expansive soil undergoes
volumetric changes due to the variation of water content in it. The expansive soil losses
2
its chemical strength during the expansion condition. In the Chemical stabilization it
has a economy, environmental friendly and efficient method for mainly soil treatment.
In soil stabilization with fly ash, additives combined by specific moisture content, the n
apply for improving the soil properties in engineering projects. In case utilized various
methods to improve soil strength etc. The process of soil stabilization helps to achieve
International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue 2186 the required
properties in a soil needed for the pavement construction work. Strength can be
increased by adding additive materials to the sub grade in different proportions.
3
CHAPTER-02
Erdal Cokca (2001): Effect of Fly Ash on expansive soil was studied by Erdal
Cokca,FLY ASH consists of often hollow spheres of silicon, aluminium and iron oxides
and unoxidized carbon. There 1 Research Scholar,eshwari_28@yahoo.co.in 2 Assistant
Professor, robinson@iitm.ac.in 3. Professor, srgandhi@iitm.ac.in Indian Institute of
Technology Madras, Chennai-36 .Fly Ash India 2005, New Delhi Fly Ash Utilizatio n
Programme (FAUP), TIFAC, DST, New Delhi – 110016 are two major classes of Fly
Ash, class C and class F. The former is produced from burning anthracite or bituminous
coal and the latter is produced from burning lignite and sub bituminous coal. Both the
classes of Fly Ash are puzzolans, which are defined as siliceous and aluminous
materials. Thus Fly Ash can provide an array of divalent and trivalent cations
(Ca2+,Al3+,Fe3+etc) under ionized conditions that can promote flocculation o f
dispersed clay particles. Thus expansive soils can be potentially stabilized effectively
by cation exchange using Fly Ash. He carried out investigations using Soma Fly As h
and Tuncbilek Fly Ash and added it to expansive soil at 0-25%. Specimens with Fly
Ash were cured for 7days and 28 days after which they were subjected to Oedometer
free swell tests. And his experimental findings confirmed that the plasticity index,
activity and swelling potential of the samples decreased with increasing percent
stabilizer and curing time and the optimum content of Fly Ash in decreasing the swell
potential was found to be 20%. The changes in the physical properties and swelling
potential is a result of additional silt size particles to some extent and due to chemica l
reactions that cause immediate flocculation of clay particles and the time dependent
puzzolanic and self hardening properties of Fly Ash and he concluded that both high –
calcium and low calcium class C Fly Ashes can be recommended as effective stabilizing
agents for improvement for improvement of expansive soils. Soil Stabilization By
Using Fly Ash
4
S.Bhuvaneshwari and S.R. Gandhi: A study was carried out by S.Bhuvaneshwari and
S.R. Gandhi on the effect of engineering properties of expansive soil through an
experimental programme. Infrastructure projects such as highways, railways, water
reservoirs, reclamation etc. requires earth material in very large quantity. In urban areas,
borrow earth is not easily available which has to be hauled from a long distance. Quite
often, large areas are covered with highly plastic and expansive soil, which is not
suitable for such purpose. Extensive laboratory / field trials have been carried out by
various researchers and have shown promising results for application of such expansive
soil after stabilization with additives such as sand, silt, lime, Fly Ash, etc. As Fly Ash
is freely available, for projects in the vicinity of a Thermal Power Plants, it can be used
for stabilization of expansive soils for various uses. The present paper describes a study
carried out to check the improvements in the properties of expansive soil with Fly Ash
in varying percentages. Both laboratory trials and field tests have been carried out and
results are reported in this paper. One of the major difficulties in field application is
thorough mixing of the two materials (expansive soil and Fly Ash) in required
proportion to form a homogeneous mass. The paper describes a method adopted for
placing these materials in layers of required thickness and operating a “Disc Harrow”.
A trial embankment of 30m length by 6m width by 0.6m high was successfully
constructed and the in-situ tests carried out proved its suitability for construction of
embankment, ash dykes, filling low-laying areas, etc.
Pandian et.al. (2002). Studied the effect of two types of Fly Ashes Raichur Fly Ash
(Class F) and Neyveli Fly Ash (Class C) on the CBR characteristics of the black cotton
soil. The Fly Ash content was increased from 0 to 100%. Generally the CBR/strength
is contributed by its cohesion and friction. The CBR of BC soil, which consists of
predominantly of finer particles, is contributed by cohesion. The CBR of Fly Ash,
which consists predominantly of coarser particles, is contributed by its frictional
component. The low CBR of BC soil is attributed to the inherent low strength, which
is due to the dominance of clay fraction. The addition of Fly Ash to BC soil increases
the CBR of the mix up to the first optimum level due to the frictional resistance from
Fly Ash in addition to the cohesion from BC soil. Further addition of Fly Ash beyond
the optimum level causes a decrease up to 60% and then up to the second optimum level
there is an increase. Thus the variation of CBR of Fly Ash-BC soil mixes can be
attributed to the relative contribution of frictional or cohesive resistance from Fly Ash
5
or BC soil, respectively. In Neyveli Fly Ash also there is an increase of strength with
the increase in the Fly Ash content, here there will be additional puzzolonic reaction
forming cementitious compounds resulting in good binding between BC soil and Fly
Ash particles
Phanikumar and Sharma (2004): A similar study was carried out by Phani kumar and
Sharma and the effect of Fly Ash on engineering properties of expansive soil through
an experimental programme. The effect on parameters like free swell index (FSI), swell
potential, swelling pressure, plasticity, compaction, strength and hydraulic conductivity
of expansive soil was studied. The ash blended expansive soil with FLY ASH contents
of 0, 5, 10,15 and 20% on a dry weight basis and they inferred that increase in FLY
ASH content reduces plasticity characteristics and the FSI was reduced by about 50%
by the addition of 20% Fly Ash. The hydraulic conductivity of expansive soils mixed
with Fly Ash decreases with an increase in Fly Ash content, due to the increase in
maximum dry unit weight with an increase in Fly Ash content. When the Fly Ash
content increases there is a decrease in the optimum moisture content and the maximum
dry unit weight increases. The effect of Fly Ash is akin to the increased compactive
effort. Hence the expansive soil is rendered more stable. The untrained shear strength
of the expansive soil blended with Fly Ash increases with the increase in the ash
content.
6
CHAPTER -03
3.0 EXPERIMENTALINVESTIGATIONS
The following laboratory tests were carried out as per IS: 2720.The test were carried
out on both normal soil and stabilized soil.
3. Atterbegs limits
1. SPECIFIC GRAVITY
Soil is a three-phase material that consists of solid particles and voids which are filled
with water and air. The specific gravity (GS) of a soil refers to the ratio of the solid
particles’ unit weight to the unit weight of water. GS should not be confused with the
soil density since it is a dimensionless unit and expresses the ratio of two particular
densities.
GS is a significant parameter of soil mechanics since it can be associated with the soil’s
mineral composition and weathering. It is also used to derive several important soil
parameters such as the porosity, the dry and saturated density and the degree of
saturation.
The grain size analysis test is performed to determine the percentage of each size of
grain that is contained within a soil sample, and the results of the test can be used to
produce the grain size distribution curve. This information is used to classify the soil
7
and to predict its behavior. The two methods generally used to find the grain size
distribution are:
• Sieve analysis which is used for particle sizes larger than 0.075 mm in diameter
and
• Hydrometer analysis which is used for particle sizes smaller than 0.075 mm in
diameter
Sieve analysis is a method that is used to determine the grain size distribution of soils
that are greater than 0.075 mm in diameter. It is usually performed for sand and gravel
but cannot be used as the sole method for determining the grain size distribution of finer
soil.
Soil at anyplace consists of particles of a range of sizes and shapes, sizes starting from
a couple of microns to a couple of centimeters square measure gift generally within the
same soilsample. The distribution of particles of various sizes determines several
physical properties of the soil like its strength, porousness, density etc.
Particle size distribution is known by 2 ways, initial is sieve analysis that is completed
for coarse grained soils solely and therefore the alternative methodology is alluviation
analysis used for fine grained soil sample. each square measure followed by plotting
the results on a semi- log graph. the share finer N because the ordinate and therefore the
particle diameter i.e. sieve size because the cartesian coordinate on a scale. The curve
generated from the result offers U.S.A. a concept of the kind and gradation of the soil.
If the curve is in a higher place or is a lot of towards the left, it implies that the soil has
a lot of illustration from the finer particles; if it's towards the correct, we are able to
deduce that the soil has a lot of of the coarse grained particles.
The soil could also be of 2 types- well hierarchal or poorly hierarchal (uniformly
graded). Well hierarchal soils have particles from all the dimensions ranges during a
smart quantity. On the opposite hand, it's same to be poorly or uniformly hierarchal if
it's particles of some sizes in excess and deficiency of particles of alternative sizes.
generally the curve features a flat portion additionally which suggests there's Associate
in Nursing absence of particles of intermediate size, these soils also are called gap
hierarchal or skip hierarchal.
8
For analysis of the particle distribution, we have a tendency to generally use D10, D30,
and D60 etc. terms that represents a size in millimetre such ten, half- hour and hr of
particles severally square measure finer than that size. the dimensions of D10
additionally referred to as the effective size or diameter could be a terribly helpful
knowledge. there's a term referred to as uniformity constant conductor that comes from
the magnitude relation of D60 and D10, it offers a live of the vary of the particle size
of the soil sample.
3. ATTERBEGS LIMITS
1. LIQUID LIMIT
It is the water content of the soil between the liquid state and plastic state of the soil. It
are often outlined because the minimum water content at that the soil, although in liquid
state, shows little cutting strength against flowing. it's measured by the Casagrande’s
equipment and is denoted by wL.
.
2. PLASTIC LIMIT
This limit lies between the plastic and semi-solid state of the soil. it's determined by
rolling out a thread of the soil on a flat surface that is non-porous. it's the minimum
water content at that the soil simply begins to crumble whereas rolling into a thread of
roughly 3mm diameter. Plastic limit is denoted by wP.
Compaction is a type of mechanical stabilization where the soil mass is densified with
the application of mechanical energy also known as comp active effort. The mechanical
energy may be produced by the dynamic load, static load, vibration, or by tamping.
During compaction, the soil particles are relocated, and the air volume is reduced. It
may also involve a modification of the moisture content, and in the saturated coarse-
grained soil, moisture content may be pressed out during the process of compaction.
Compaction should not be confused with consolidation; where the density of saturated
soils is increased due to a reduction in the volume of voids brought about by the
expulsion of water under the application of static load. The fundamentals of compaction
were first time presented by RR. Proctor in 1933, in his honor; the standard laboratory
compaction test which is developed is commonly called the Standard Proctor Test.
9
5. CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO VALUE (CBR) TEST
n this method the combination of load penetration test performed in the laboratory or
in-situ along with empirical design charts are analysed to determine the thickness of
pavement and its constituent layers. For designing the flexible pavement this is one of
the most commonly used method. The thickness of the various elements comprising a
pavement is determined by CBR values. The CBR test is a small scale penetration test
in which a cylindrical plunger of 5 cm in diameter is used. Cross-section is penetrated
into sub-grade material, at the rate of 0.05 in per minute i.e 1.25 mm/min. Observations
are taken between the penetration resistance i.e. test load versus the penetration of
plunger. The penetration resistance of the plunger into a standard sample of crushed
stone for the corresponding penetration is called the standard load.
This experiment is employed to work out the unconfined compressive strength of the
soil sample that successively is employed to calculate the loose, undrained shear
strength of unconfined soil. The unconfined compressive strength (qu) is that the
compressive stress at that the unconfined cylindrical soil sample fails beneath easy
compressive take a look at. The experimental setup constitutes of the compression
device and dial gauges for load and deformation. The load was taken for various
readings of strain dial gauge ranging from ε =0.005 and increasing by zero.005 at every
step. The corrected cross-sectional space was calculated by dividing {the space|the
world the realm} by (1- ε) and so the compressive stress for every step was calculated
by dividing the load with the corrected area
.
7. DIRECT SHEAR TEST
This take a look at is employed to search out out the cohesion (c) and therefore the angle
of internal friction (φ) of the soil, these square measure the soil shear strength
parameters. The shear strength is one amongst the foremost necessary soil properties
and it's needed whenever any structure depends on the soil cutting resistance. The take
a look at is conducted by golf stroke the soil at OMC and MDD within the shear bo x
that is formed of 2 freelance elements. a continuing traditional load (ς) is applied to get
one price of c and φ. Horizontal load (shearing load) is redoubled at a continuing rate
10
and is applied until the failure purpose is reached. This load once divided with the world
offers the shear strength ‘τ’ for that exact traditional load.
CHAPTER-04
11
1. EXPERIMENTAL TEST RESULTS
2.SPECIFIC GRAVITY
Soil sample- 1
sample number 1 2 3
Mass of bottle + dry soil + water (W3) gms 401.86 396.29 399.03
Soil sample- 2
sample number 1 2 3
Mass of bottle + dry soil + water (W3) gms 401.86 396.29 399.03
12
Sieve Retained Retained Cumulative Cumulative
retained
size (g) (%) finer (%)
(%)
4.75 0 0 0 100
2.36 12.2 4.07 4.07 95.93
1.18 24.5 8.17 12.24 87.76
0.600 88.2 29.4 41.64 58.36
0.300 102.5 34.17 75.81 24.19
0.15 54.7 18.23 94.04 5.96
0.075 17.1 5.7 99.74 0.26
pan 0.8 0 0 0
120
100
95.93
100
87.76
finer weight in %
80
58.36
60
40
24.19
20
5.96
0.26
13
Sieve Retained Retained Cumulative Cumulative
retained
size (g) (%) finer (%)
(%)
4.75 0 0 0 100
2.36 14.2 4.73 4.73 95.26
1.18 22.5 7.5 12.23 87.77
0.600 85.2 28.4 40.63 59.37
0.300 105.5 35.16 75.79 24.20
0.15 50.7 16.9 92.69 7.31
0.075 21 7 99.69 0.31
pan 0.9 0 0 0
120
100
100 95.26
87.77
finer weight in %
80
59.37
60
40
24.4
20
7.31
0.31
14
3. ATTERBEGS LIMITS
1. LIQUID LIMIT
Sample No. 1 2 3 4
No. Of blows 33 29 24 21
40 39.5
39
37.77
38
moisture content %
37 36.64
36 35.58
35
34
33
33 29 24 21
no of blows
15
4.3.2 PLASTIC LIMIT
Sample No. 1 2
No. Of blows
37.37-18.53 = 18.84
16
4.4. PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST
Sample-2
Test No. 1 2 3 4
Weight of empty mould(Wm) gms 2062 2062 2062 2062
Weight of empty mould + base plate (W') gms 4133 4133 4133 4133
Weight of mould + compacted soil + Base plate
(W1) gms 6174 6261 6427 6347
Weight of Container + Wet Soil (X2) gms 90.21 122.57 113.12 125.00
Weight of Container + dry soil (X3) gms 82.51 110.04 99.74 108.94
Dry density ϒd= ϒt/(1 + (W/100)) gm/cc 1.79 1.86 1.96 1.875
17
1.95
1.9
dry density
1.85
1.8
1.75
1.7
12.18 14.4 17.02 18.1
moisture content
18
Sample-2
Test No. 1 2 3 4
Weight of empty mould + base plate (W') gms 4124 4124 4124 4124
Weight of Container + Wet Soil (X2) gms 84.81 124.16 89.93 154
Weight of Container + dry soil (X3) gms 79.59 114.24 82.05 138.13
Dry density ϒd= Vt/1 + (W/100) gm/cc 1.81 1.86 1.91 1.85
19
1.92
1.9
1.88
dry density
1.86
1.84
1.82
1.8
1.78
1.76
8.79 10.65 12.59 13.61
moisture content
20
4.5. CALIFORNIA BEARING RATIO VALUE (CBR) TEST
FLY ASH 0%
300
250
200
corrected load in kg's
150
100
50
21
FLY ASH 5 %
300
250
200
corrected load in kg's
150
100
50
22
FLY ASH 10 %
300
250
200
corrected load in kg's
150
100
50
23
FLY ASH 15%
250
200
corrected load in kg's
150
100
50
24
CHAPTER-5
5.0 CONCLUSIONS
1Supported relative density of a soil- With mixing of 15% fly ash relative density
Of the soil will increase by 0.4%. Strength of the soil is directly
Proportional to relative density, additional is that the specific gravity additional are
going to be the strength of soil.
2Supported liquid limit of a soil - Soil while not reinforcement and with
reinforcement have
Liquid limit distinction of nighteen.15%.
3Supported liquid limit of a soil - the worth of the shrinkage limit in bolstered soil is a
smaller amount than that of unreinforced soil. Thus with the use of fly ash shrinkage
reduces.
4The worth of shrinkage limit is employed for understanding the swelling and
shrinkage properties of cohesive soil. Lesser is that the shrinkage additional can the
suitableness of fabric for foundation, road and mound amore are going to be the
strength.
36
CHAPTER -06
References: [1]. Chen, F. H. (1988), “Foundations on expansive soils”, Chen &
Associates, Elsevier Publications, U.S.A.
[2]. Erdal Cokca (2001) “Use Of Class C Fly Ashes for the Stabilization – of a n
Expansive Soil” Journal of Geotechnical and Geo environmental Engineering Vol.
127, July, pp. 568-573.
[3]. Eldon J. Yoder(1957), “Principles of Soil Stabilization”,JHRPPublicationIndiana.
[4]. Pradip D. Jadhao and Nagarnaik, P.B (2008), Influence of Polypropylene Fibres
on Engineering Behavior of Soil – Fly Ash Mixtures for Road Construction, Electronic
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 13, Bund.C, pp. 1-11
. [5]. 1.American Society for Testing and Materials, ASTM C618 (2008) Specification
for Fly Ash and Raw or Calcined Natural Pozzolanic for Use as a Mineral Admixture
in Portland Cement Concrete. Annual Book of ASTM Standards, ASTM,
Philadelphia, USA.
37