See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/257809329

Fatigue and Engineering Properties of Chemically Stabilized Soil for

Pavements

Article  in  Indian Geotechnical Journal · March 2012

DOI: 10.1007/s40098-012-0031-5

CITATIONS READS

13 6,165

3 authors:

B. M. Lekha A. U. Ravi Shankar

National Institute of Technology Karnataka National Institute of Technology Karnataka
12 PUBLICATIONS   175 CITATIONS    112 PUBLICATIONS   779 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Goutham Sarang
VIT Chennai
28 PUBLICATIONS   291 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

departmental View project

PG PROJECT View project

All content following this page was uploaded by B. M. Lekha on 31 January 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Fatigue and Engineering Properties of
Chemically Stabilized Soil for Pavements

B. M. Lekha, A. U. Ravi Shankar &

Goutham Sarang

Indian Geotechnical Journal

ISSN 0971-9555
Volume 43
Number 1

Indian Geotech J (2013) 43:96-104

DOI 10.1007/s40098-012-0031-5

1 23
Your article is protected by copyright and
all rights are held exclusively by Indian
Geotechnical Society. This e-offprint is for
personal use only and shall not be self-
archived in electronic repositories. If you
wish to self-archive your work, please use the
accepted author’s version for posting to your
own website or your institution’s repository.
You may further deposit the accepted author’s
version on a funder’s repository at a funder’s
request, provided it is not made publicly
available until 12 months after publication.

1 23
 Author's personal copy
Indian Geotech J (January–March 2013) 43(1):96–104
DOI 10.1007/s40098-012-0031-5
ORIGINAL PAPER
Fatigue and Engineering Properties of Chemically Stabilized Soil
for Pavements
B. M. Lekha • A. U. Ravi Shankar •
Goutham Sarang
Received: 20 June 2012 / Accepted: 7 November 2012 / Published online: 20 November 2012
 Indian Geotechnical Society 2012
Abstract Soil stabilization is a technique to improve the
weak soils and making them to meet certain requirements of
the specific engineering projects. The type of soils available
in Dakshina Kannada region of Karnataka State is laterite
and Lithomarge clay. Its Plasticity Index is very high due to
the presence of high percentage of silt and clay content. In the
present investigation, an attempt is made to study the
behaviour of laterite with and without adding chemicals. A
chemical named Zycosoil, when added to water and mixed
with soil alters its engineering properties that depend upon
the type of the soil and dosage of chemical. These chemicals
are liquid additives, which act on the soil to reduce the voids
between soil particles and minimize adsorbed water in the
soil for maximum compaction. In the present study, the
effectiveness of Zycosoil in stabilizing the laterite soils of
South Canara district is investigated through laboratory
experiments. Various geotechnical properties are studied
and correlations between different geotechnical properties
and improvement in the soil properties with different per-
centages of chemical additions are derived. The important
properties such as index properties, compaction character-
istics, unconfined compressive strength parameters, Cali-
fornia bearing ratio values and fatigue behaviour were
studied. The results obtained indicate that there is an
improvement in almost all properties with the addition of
Zycosoil.
B. M. Lekha (&)
A. U. Ravi Shankar
G. Sarang
Department of Civil Engineering, N.I.T.K., Surathkal,
Srinivasanagar, P O, Mangalore 575025, India
e-mail: lekhabm@gmail.com
A. U. Ravi Shankar
e-mail: aurshankar@gmail.com
G. Sarang
e-mail: gouthamsarang@gmail.com
123
Keywords Soil stabilization
Laterite soil
Fatigue test

KENPAVE
Introduction
Among the major communication systems, road transport is
the most important facility. It contributes to the economic,
industrial, social, and cultural development of a region or a
nation. It helps primarily in linking production and con-
sumption centres. As a result, raw and finished goods are
utilized in distant places from their centres of production.
The growth of population has created need for better and
economical vehicle operation which requires good highways
having proper geometric design, pavement condition, and
maintenance. Road transport plays a significant role in
India’s economy, carrying 80 % of land transport demand.
The total length of national highway network is about
65,000 km. This accounts for less than 2 % of total road
network, but carries over 40 % of road traffic. Presently, the
pavements of national as well as state highways have not
properly used the soil stabilization techniques. Hence, it is
proposed to study the engineering properties of soil in sub-
base as well as subgrade layers along the existing highways
and select a few soil stabilization methods to improve the
engineering properties. Priority is given to stress deforma-
tion response and permeability characteristics of stabilized
soil, as these are the important factors influencing the per-
formance of highway pavement. Chemical soil stabilization
technique is one of the important methods recently used.
Chemical as soil stabilizers has been used to improve the
strength due to low cost and relatively wide applicability
compared to standard stabilizers. The use of chemical as
stabilizer has been rarely subjected to technical develop-
ments and is presently carried out using empirical guidelines
 Author's personal copy
Indian Geotech J (January–March 2013) 43(1):96–104
based on previous experience. Therefore, it becomes a pri-
mary priority to study and determine the effects of chemicals
on the strength of different soils. In the present study, laterite
soil was stabilized with chemical and shear tests are per-
formed to study the effects of chemical modification on the
soil properties. In a developing country like India, due to
rapidly growing traffic volume, engineers have to come out
with some solutions for better performance of roads keeping
in mind cost effectiveness and sustainability of road network
development. Cost effective roads are very vital for eco-
nomical growth in any country. There is an urgent need to
identify the new materials, improve the road construction
techniques to expand the road network. When poor quality of
soil is available at the construction site, the best option is to
modify the properties of soil, so that it meets the pavement
design requirements. This has led to the development of soil
stabilization techniques. Since the nature and properties of
natural soil vary widely, a suitable stabilization technique
has to be adopted for a particular situation after considering
the soil properties. Soil stabilization by mechanical or
chemical means is widely adopted. Stabilization of soils is an
effective method of improving the properties of soil and
pavement system performance. The objective of any stabil-
ization technique is to increase the strength and stiffness of
soil, decrease plasticity index (PI) and to improve both
workability of soil and constructability of pavement. In order
to stabilize the soils for improving their strength and dura-
bility, certain chemical additives both organic and inorganic,
have also be used in previous research works. Recently, a
chemical named Zycosoil has emerged as a new soil stabi-
lizer, which is used to improve the stability of soil layers for
pavement structures.
Objective of the Study
In the present investigation, an attempt is made to study the
behaviour of laterite soil with and without addition of the
chemical, Zycosoil. The chemical when added to water and
mixed with soil alters the engineering properties depending
upon the type of soil and dosage of chemical. These
chemicals are liquid additives, which act on the soil to
reduce the voids between soil particles and minimize
absorbed water in the soil for maximum compaction. In
this present investigation, the effectiveness of Zycosoil in
stabilizing the laterite soils of South Canara districts is
investigated through laboratory experiments. Some of the
important geotechnical properties, their improvement with
different percentages of chemical additions are derived.
The important properties such as index properties, com-
paction characteristics, Unconfined compressive strength
(UCS), California bearing ratio (CBR) values, and fatigue
behaviour were studied. Pavement analysis was conducted
97
for low volume roads with chemically treated soil using
KENPAVE software.
Chemical Stabilization
Extensive research has been conducted studying the
application of traditional stabilizing additives such as lime,
cement, and fly ash (Santoni et al. 2001). However, little
research has been documented pertaining to the use of
commercial non-traditional stabilization additives such as
emulsions, acids, lignin derivatives, enzymes, tree resins,
silicates etc. Stabilization process may include the blending
of different types of soils or other materials like lime,
cement etc. to achieve a desired gradation; or mixing of
commercially available additives like chemical, enzyme
etc. to alter the texture or plasticity, or act as a binder for
cementation of the soil. The different uses of soil pose
different requirements of mechanical strength and a resis-
tance to environmental forces, controlling method to be
used for the stabilization. Stabilization is being used for a
variety of engineering works, the most common application
being in the construction of road and air-field pavements,
where the main objective is to increase the strength and to
reduce the construction cost by making best use of locally
available materials. In other words, stabilization includes
compaction, preconsolidation, drainage, and many other
such processes. A cement material or a chemical is added
to a natural soil for the purpose of stabilization. The
decreasing availability and increasing cost of construction
materials and uncertain economic climates force engineers
to consider more economical methods for building roads.
Miller and Azad (2000) conducted an experiment to
evaluate the effectiveness of cement kiln dust (CKD) as a
soil stabilizer. The study revealed UCS value of soil
increases with the addition of CKD. Increase in UCS was
inversely proportional to the PI of the untreated soil. Sig-
nificant PI reductions were occurred with CKD treatment,
particularly for soils with high PI.
Hashim et al. (2005) investigated the effect of using rice
husk ash and cement on a stabilization of residual soil. Test
results showed that both cement and rice husk ash decrease
the maximum dry density (MDD) and increase the opti-
mum moisture content (OMC).
Aydogmus et al. (2004) examined some of the mechan-
ical properties when 6 % cement content is added to a
typical cohesive soil with and without geogrid reinforce-
ment. The addition of cement to clayey soil reduces
noticeably the OMC and marginally the MDD for the same
compaction effort. The strength of soil–cement tends to
increase in a linear manner with increasing cement content.
Syed et al. (2007) conducted performance studies on soil
samples collected from various borings with addition of 3,
123
 Author's personal copy
98 Indian Geotech J (January–March 2013) 43(1):96–104

4, and 5 % cement. Results indicate that the MDD for the Table 1 Basic properties of laterite soil
cement stabilized subgrades varied from 105.0 to 126.2 pcf
Sl. no. Property Value
with an average value of 114.0 pcf. They concluded that
stabilizing the in situ subgrade soils with small amounts 1 Specific gravity of soil solids (Gs) 2.65
(4 % by weight) of Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) is a 2 Grain size distribution
technically viable, cost effective, and speedy way to pre- a) Gravel, % 25.0
pare the subgrades for the reconstruction of the airfield b) Sand, % 46.0
pavements. The UCS of stabilized soils increased with c) Silt, % 26.5
addition of cement with respect to curing days. d) Clay, % 2.5
Ravi Shankar et al. (2008) reported that the addition of 3 Consistency limits (%)
Pond ash to laterite soil improved the strength properties and Liquid limit 54
resistance to moisture susceptibility. It also resulted in the Plastic limit 28
reduction of MDD of blend with slight increase in the OMC. Plasticity index 26
Sadek et al. (2008) reported that the MDD increases and 4 IS soil classification Clayey sand (SC)
OMC decreases with the increase in sand and cement 5 Engineering properties
additives. The results showed that the additive admixtures IS light compaction
altered the engineering properties of tropical peat soils. a) Max dry density, cd max 1.68 g/cc
Higher strength was obtained from samples that had been b) O.M.C 18.0 %
cured for 14 days compared with 7 days cured samples. IS Heavy compaction
a) Max dry density, cd max 1.91 g/cc
b) O.M.C 14.0 %
Experimental Program and Test Details 6 CBR value (%)
IS light compaction
Materials Used
a) Unsoaked condition at OMC 14
b) Soaked condition 5
Laterite Soil
IS heavy compaction
a) Unsoaked condition at OMC 14.4
Locally available laterite soil is used for the present study.
b) Soaked condition 7
Laterite soil procured from Surathkal, Karnataka State, was
7 UCS value (kPa)
tested in the laboratory for the properties like specific gravity
IS light compaction 125.0
of soil solids, grain size distribution, consistency limits,
IS heavy compaction 168.0
compaction characteristics, UCS, CBR, and co-efficient of
8 Co-efficient of permeability (cm/s) 2.31 9 10204
permeability values, a summary of which is presented in
Table 1.
The grain size analysis results indicate that the soil con-
tains 25.0 % of gravel, 46.0 % of sand, 26.5 % of silt, and dissolves in water to form a clear-water solution. It forms a
2.50 % of clay. Referring to these results, as per Indian permanent water repellent layer on all types of soils, aggre-
standards (IS: 1498–1970) the soil is classified as clayey sand gates and other inorganic road construction materials. The
(SC). The liquid limit (LL) is 54 %, plastic limit (PL) is reaction leads to permanent siliconization of the surfaces by
28 %, and PI is 26 %. The MDD is found to be 1.68 and converting the water-loving silanol groups to water repellent
1.91 g/cc and OMC is found to be 18 and 14 %, respectively siloxane bonds. It helps in substantial reduction in soil water
for light and heavy compaction. The CBR values of laterite infiltration and erosion (Zydex Industries Product Brochure for
soil at soaked condition for light and heavy compaction are Zycosoil is obtained from www.zydexindustries.com). The
found to be 5 and 7 %, respectively. The UCS values of properties of Zycosoil are presented in Table 2.
laterite soil for light and heavy compactions are found to be
125 and 168 kPa, respectively. The coefficient of perme- Test Details
ability for heavy compaction is 2.31 9 10204 cm/s.
To assess the suitability of Zycosoil as a soil stabilizer,
Chemical Stabilizer both natural soil and chemically stabilized soil were tested
for engineering properties and strength parameters. The
The chemical used for the present investigation to stabilize the CBR and UCS tests were conducted for different curing
laterite soil was Zycosoil manufactured by Zydex Industries, periods. In this investigation, an effort is made to analyze
Gujarat, which is a water soluble compound. Zycosoil the stabilized soil with dosages of 2, 4, 6, and 8 % of the

123
 Author's personal copy
Indian Geotech J (January–March 2013) 43(1):96–104 99

Table 2 Properties of chemical stabilizer deformation of the specimen. The load cell and sample
Property Description
are arranged as shown in Fig. 2.
• In the control unit through the dedicated software, the
Color Clear to pale yellow selected loading stress level, frequency of loading, and
Solid content 41 ± 2 % the type of wave form were fed into the loading device.
Solvent Ethylene glycol • The loading system and the data acquisition system were
Flash point 80 C switched on simultaneously and the process of fatigue
Melting point -2 C load application on the test specimen was initiated.
Density 1.05 g/ml • The repeated loading, at the designated excitation level
Viscosity (25 C) 200–800 cP (i.e. at the selected stress level and frequency) was
Solubility Forms water clear solution, miscible continued till the failure of the test specimen.
with water, methanol, alcohol, • The data acquisition system continuously record the
and acetone
vertical deformation of the test specimen with cycles of
pH value Not applicable loading until the failure and the output is saved in a
result file.
OMC value and for curing period of 0, 1, 2, 4, and 6 weeks.
Chemical dosage calculations are explained in Appendix.
Engineering properties like grain size distribution, At-
terberg’s limits, OMC, and MDD values were determined
as per IS: 2720 (Part 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 10). Grain size
distribution as explained in Table 1 was obtained from
sieve analysis of laterite soil using IS sieves. Liquid limit
was found out using Casagrande’s apparatus. Optimum
moisture content and MDD were found out for both
Standard and Modified Proctor compactions. Permeability
characteristics of the soil were determined in falling head
permeability method using standard test equipment as per
IS: 2720 (part 17)–1986. The UCS tests were conducted on
treated soil samples for both standard and modified proctor
densities. As per IS: 2720 (Part 16–1987) California
bearing ratio tests were conducted for both samples in
soaked and unsoaked conditions. Unconfined compressive
strength and CBR characteristics were checked for chem- Fig. 1 Fatigue testing machine
ically treated soils with different curing periods.

Fatigue Test

The fatigue tests were conducted on Repeated Load Test-

ing Machine shown in Fig. 1. All experiments were con-
ducted on specimens cured for predetermined period. The
loading level in the present study was taken as a fraction of
the UCS value of their respective specimen at the same
condition of chemical dosage. The soil specimens having
standard dosage of chemical with varying curing period
were tested for repeated loading with 50, 40, and 20 % of
their UCS values.

Test Procedure

• The cylindrical specimen (38 mm diameter and 75 mm

height) was mounted on the loading frame and
the deflection sensing transducers (Linear Variable
Deflection Transducer—LVDT) were set to read the Fig. 2 Sample arrangement

123
 Author's personal copy
100
• The failure pattern of the test specimen is visually
observed.
Results and Discussion
The chemical dosages used for stabilizing the laterite soil
are dosage 1, 2, 3, and 4 for different curing periods of 0, 1,
2, 4, and 6 weeks. Effect of dosages on index properties,
strength, and permeability characteristics of laterite soil
during the curing period are studied.
Effect on Consistency Limits
As the percentage of chemical increases, there is an
improvement in Atterberg’s limits of soil as in Table 3. For
pavement construction, soil with lesser LL and PI values
are considered as its good characteristics. For untreated
soil, LL, PL and PI values were 54, 28, and 26 %,
respectively and for further addition of chemical dosage,
LL and PI values were found to be decreasing. This is due
to the chemical reaction causing substantial reduction in
soil water infiltration and chemically treated soils do not
allow absorption of water, resulting in reduced plasticity.
Effect on Compaction
The effects of chemical dosage on MDD and OMC of laterite
soil for light and heavy compaction immediately after mix-
ing are presented in Table 4. As chemical dosage increases,
the MDD increases and OMC decreases for both light and
heavy compactions. While adding the chemical to the soil, it
reduces the voids between the soil particles and minimizes
the adsorbed water in the soil for maximum compaction.
Effect on Permeability
Permeability tests were carried out on laterite soil with
different chemical dosages and the test results are tabulated
in Table 5. The test results indicate that, as the dosage
increases from zero to four, there is a considerable decrease
in permeability. The chemical reaction leads to permanent
siliconization of the surfaces by converting the water-
Table 3 Atterberg’s limits
Dosage LL PL
0 54 28
1 44 32
2 43 29
3 41 27
4 38 27
123
Indian Geotech J (January–March 2013) 43(1):96–104
Table 4 Compaction test results
Dosage Standard proctor compaction Modified proctor compaction
MDD (g/cc) OMC (%) MDD (g/cc) OMC (%)
0 1.68 18 1.91 14
1 1.71 17.5 1.98 13
2 1.74 16.5 1.99 12.5
3 1.85 15 2.01 12
4 1.90 13.5 2.02 11
Table 5 Permeability test results
Dosage Co-efficient of permeability (cm/s)
0 2.31 9 10204
1 2.18 9 10204
2 2.06 9 10204
3 1.98 9 10204
4 1.95 9 10204
loving silanol groups to water repellent siloxane bonds. But
the test results indicate that there is not much variation in
the co-efficient of permeability beyond chemical dosage 2.
Effect on UCS
The samples are cured for 0, 1, 2, 4, and 6 weeks for the
chemically treated samples and the results are tabulated in
Table 6. As the dosage increases, UCS value increases up
to certain level and beyond that it marginally decreases.
The UCS values increases up to 4 weeks curing period and
further curing marginally affects the UCS values for both
light and heavy compaction. The dosage 2 is found to be
optimum for all the cases, and beyond that it will be
marginal. The chemical reacts with the soil particles and
makes the surfaces water proof permanently and stiffen the
soil to increase its strength.
Effect on CBR
California bearing ratio tests were conducted for both un-
soaked and soaked condition with curing periods of 0, 1, 2,
3, 4, and 6 weeks. Since maximum UCS value was
obtained for treated soil with dosage 2, CBR test was
conducted for the same dosage. The results are tabulated in
Table 7. The unsoaked and soaked CBR values of
PI untreated soils are 14.4 and 7.0 %, respectively. There is a
26
considerable increase in the load bearing capacity of the
soil with the increase in curing period. The soaked CBR
12
value is found to be 104.0 % after 4 weeks of curing. Since
14
for the stabilized soils, the CBR test results obtained are
14
not realistic (165, 118 % etc.), this method is not suggested
11
for any chemically treated soil.
 Author's personal copy
Indian Geotech J (January–March 2013) 43(1):96–104 101

Table 6 UCS test results

Curing period (weeks) UCS in kPa
Standard compaction Modified compaction
Dosage Dosage
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

0 154 245 163 159 232 284 264 240

1 258 398 314 302 304 446 365 358
2 374 498 424 415 414 606 518 490
4 548 636 610 602 709 788 762 733
6 546 634 608 599 702 725 749 721

Table 7 CBR test results
Curing period (weeks) Laterite soil
MDD = 1.99 g/cc;
Unsoaked CBR (%)
0 21.0
1 43.0
2 72.0
4 148.0
6 165.0
subjected to cyclic loading with constant amplitude applied
at a frequency of 1 Hz were conducted. The untreated soil
samples were found to be so weak that they could not
OMC = 12.50 %
Soaked CBR (%)
withstand even 20 % stress level for one cycle. For 6 weeks
cured untreated samples also, fatigue life was found to be
14.0 one cycle for all the stress levels. The fatigue lives of treated
29.0 samples (dosage two) for different curing periods are pre-
48.0 sented in Table 8, which shows the enhancement in the
104.0 fatigue behaviour of soil with chemical treatment.
118.0
S–N Curve

The most basic information about the fatigue behaviour of

Table 8 Fatigue test results for optimum usage of chemicals specimens is represented by its S–N curves. S denotes
Curing period ( weeks) Sl. no Stress level stress amplitude and N denotes the number of stress cycles
0.20 0.40 0.50 to complete fracture. In general, S–N curves represent
progressive structural deterioration and gradual breaking of
0 1 873 430 58 bonds. Figure 3 shows the S–N curve obtained by plotting
2 913 489 92 stress level vs. fatigue cycle for chemical stabilized laterite
3 809 411 85 soil samples with different curing periods. Fatigue life is
1 1 946 560 132 found to be the lowest for soil samples without curing and
2 982 582 108 it increases with increase in curing period. Also it is the
3 1,011 612 112 maximum for minimum stress level (20 %) and decreases
2 1 1,041 752 195 with increase in stress level.
2 1,098 791 208
3 1,152 662 214 KENPAVE Software
1 1,346 836 256
2 1,311 892 211 KENPAVE, a computer package for pavement analysis and
3 1,216 765 198 design (Yang 2004) is specifically used for the design of both
6 1 1,639 953 281 rigid and flexible pavements. It offers extensive features that can
2 1,725 892 236 be used to design the pavement subjected to different condi-
3 1,684 842 301 tions. It performs the analysis based on stiffness matrix method.
This package can be used to analyse pavements, consid-
ering different types of loads and stresses likely to be induced
over the pavement. It is being widely used now-a-days, and it
Effect on Fatigue Life was found that the results obtained from KENPAVE are well
with those obtained from other conventional methods.
The experimental studies on fatigue life of laterite soil with Pavement Design Catalogues suggested by IRC: SP:
and without addition of Zycosoil for different curing period 72-2007 (for low volume roads) provides 35 cases with five

123
 Author's personal copy
102
Fig. 3 S–N curve for different 0 weeks curing
curing periods 0.6
0.5
Stress Level
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 500
different subgrade CBR values and seven traffic conditions.
Out of these, cumulative ESAL 30,000–100,000 (five classes)
were considered. Generally in a single layer, 75 mm thick
Water Bound Macadam (WBM) is provided in practical
cases, depending on size of aggregates and for effective
compaction. Considering this fact, in this study, the WBM
thickness is limited to 75 mm for single layer. Wherever the
thickness of WBM is given as 100 mm, only 75 mm thick
WBM is laid and the remaining 25 mm is added to GSB
layer. This is done as per the suggestion by IRC: SP: 72-2007.
Allowable stresses and vertical displacements at every
layer interface of each case were determined using KEN-
PAVE. From the analysis, it is observed that the costly WBM
layer can be replaced by Zycosoil treated laterite soil with
minimum 4 weeks curing period (100 % CBR) of same
thickness. Since providing a bituminous surfacing on the
treated soil is difficult, minimum 75 mm thick bituminous
treated WBM layer is suggested as surface course. The
remaining WBM layers, below the surface course are
replaced by chemically treated soil and the suggested modi-
fications to pavement design catalogue is presented in
Table 9. For cases which are not using WBM as base mate-
rial, usage of chemically treated soil is not recommended.
Conclusions
Based on the tests conducted the following conclusions
have been drawn.
1. The consistency tests conducted on chemically treated
laterite soil shows that the PI value decreases as the
chemical dosage increases.
2. The standard and modified proctor compaction tests
conducted on treated laterite soil indicate that, as the
dosage increases the MDD increases and OMC decreases.
At optimal dosage of two, the MDD was 1.74 g/cc and
OMC 16.5 % for light compaction; similarly, the MDD
was 1.99 g/cc and OMC 12.5 % for heavy compaction.
123
Indian Geotech J (January–March 2013) 43(1):96–104
1 week curing 2 weeks curing 4 weeks curing 6 weeks curing
1000 1500 2000
No. of Cycles
3. At optimum chemical percentage (dosage two) the UCS
value after 4 weeks curing period was found to be 636
and 788 kPa for light and heavy compactions, respec-
tively, whereas for untreated soil, the values were 125
and 168 kPa. The UCS value increases gradually up to
4 weeks period of curing and beyond this there is a
decrease.
4. The test results indicate that there is a continuous
improvement in the CBR value with the higher curing
period. For 4 weeks of curing period, the soaked CBR
value increases to 104 from 7 % (in the case of untreated
soil).
5. The co-efficient of permeability decreases as the
dosage of the chemical increases.
6. The treated soil samples show a tremendous improvement
in fatigue life. Untreated samples were failing in a single
cycle, whereas the minimum fatigue life value found for
treated samples was 58 (for the maximum critical case of
treated sample, i.e. without curing subjected to maximum
stress level of 50 %). For treated soil samples, fatigue life
is found to be increasing with increase in curing period.
After curing treated soil samples for 6 weeks, they
attained about 95, 102, and 248 % increase in fatigue life
for 0.20, 0.40, and 0.50 stress levels.
7. KENPAVE analysis shows that in low volume roads,
costly WBM material for base courses can be replaced by
treated soil with minimum 4 weeks curing periods.
Appendix
Chemical Dosage
The chemical used for the soil is diluted in water at 1:100
concentrations and then mixed with soil in different dos-
ages. The calculations for UCS test sample preparation are
shown in Tables 10 and 11.
 Author's personal copy
Indian Geotech J (January–March 2013) 43(1):96–104 103

Table 9 Suggested modifications to pavement design catalogue for IRC: SP: 72-2007

Subgrade Cumulative ESAL Applications

strength 60,000 1,00,000 2,00,000 3,00,000 6,00,000
(CBR) to to to to to
1,00,000 2,00,000 3,00,000 6,00,000 1,000,000
Very poor
(CBR = 2%) 75 75 75 75 75
75 75 75 75 150
125 125 175 250
100 150 200
150
150 225

Poor
(CBR = 3-4%) 75 75 75 75 75
75 75 75 150 150
175 125 125
100 100 150
150 150
150
Fair
(CBR = 5-6%) 75 75 75 75
275 75 75 75
150 125 150
175 100 100
100
Good
(CBR = 7-9%) 75 75 75 75
225 75 75 75 150
125 150 175
150
Very Good
(CBR =10-15%) 175 75 75 7 75 75
150 75 75 150
125 150
125
All dimensions are in mm.
Bituminous surface treated WBM
Zycosoil treated Laterite soil base with minimum 100% CBR
Gravel Base with minimum 80% CBR
GSB with minimum 25% CBR
Improved subgrade with minimum 10% CBR

Table 10 Dosage calculations for light compaction

Dosages
Quantity of chemical 0 1 (2 % of 2 (4 % of 3 (6 % of 4 (8 % of
weight of water) weight of water) weight of water) weight of water)

MDD 1.68 g/cc 1.71 g/cc 1.74 g/cc 1.85 g/cc 1.90 g/cc
OMC 18 % 17.5 % 16.5 % 15 % 13.5 %
Volume of soil 85.05 cm3 85.05 cm3 85.05 cm3 85.05 cm3 85.05 cm3
Weight of soil 142.88 g 145.44 g 147.99 g 157.34 g 161.60 g
Volume of water 25.72 ml 25.45 ml 24.42 ml 23.60 ml 21.82 ml
Volume of chemical – 0.51 ml 0.98 ml 1.42 ml 1.75 ml

123
 Author's personal copy
104 Indian Geotech J (January–March 2013) 43(1):96–104

Table 11 Dosage calculations for heavy compaction

Dosages
Quantity of chemical 0 1 (2 % of 2 (4 % of 3 (6 % of 4 (8 % of
weight of water) weight of water) weight of water) weight of water)

MDD 1.91 g/cc 1.98 g/cc 1.99 g/cc 2.01 g/cc 2.02 g/cc
OMC 14 % 13 % 12.5 % 12 % 11 %
Volume of soil 85.05 cm3 85.05 cm3 85.05 cm3 85.05 cm3 85.05 cm3
Weight of soil 162.45 g 168.40 g 169.25 g 170.95 g 171.80 g
Volume of water 22.74 ml 21.89 ml 21.16 ml 20.51 ml 18.90 ml
Volume of chemical – 0.44 ml 0.85 ml 1.23 ml 1.51 ml

References heavy compaction (second revision), Bureau of Indian Stan-

Aydogmus T, Alexiew D, Klapperich H (2004) Investigation of
interaction behaviour of cement-stabilized cohesive soil and
PVA geogrids. Geotechnical engineering with geosynthetics,
Proceedings of the third European Geosynthetics Conference,
Munich, Germany. p 3
Hashim EAB, Mahmud HB, Muntohar AS (2005) Stabilization of
residual soil with rice husk ash and cement. J Constr Build Mater
14:448–453
Indian Standard: 1498–1970, Classification and identification of soil
for general engineering purposes, Bureau of Indian Standards,
New Delhi
Indian Standard: 2720 Methods of tests for soils (Part 2)—1973,
determination of water content of soil, Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi
Indian Standard: 2720 Methods of tests for soils (Part 3)—1980,
determination of specific gravity of soil, Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi
Indian Standard: 2720 Methods of tests for soils (Part 4)—1985.
Specification for grain size analysis, Bureau of Indian Standards,
New Delhi
Indian Standard: 2720 Methods of tests for soils (Part5)—1985,
determination of liquid & plastic limit of soil, Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi
Indian Standard: 2720 Methods of tests for soils (Part 7)—1980,
determination of water content—dry density relation of soil
using light compaction, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi
Indian Standard: 2720 Methods of tests for soils (Part 8)—1983,
determination of water content, dry density relation of soil using
dards, New Delhi
Indian Standard: 2720 Methods of tests for soils (Part 10)—1973,
determination of unconfined compressive strength of soil,
Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi
Indian Standard: 2720 Methods of tests for soils (Part 16)—1987,
laboratory determination of C.B.R of soil (second revision),
Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
Indian Standard: 2720 Methods of tests for soils (Part 17)—1986,
determination of permeability of soil, Bureau of Indian Stan-
dards, New Delhi
IRC: SP: 72-2007, Guidelines for the design of flexible pavements for
low volume rural roads, The Indian Roads Congress, New Delhi
Miller GA, Azad S (2000) Influence of soil type on stabilization with
cement kiln dust. J Constr Build Mater 14:89–97
Ravi Shankar AU, Suresha SN, Kashinath B (2008) Characterisation
of lateritic soil modified with pond ash and cement. Journal of
Indian Highways 2008:21–27
Sadek D, Roslan H, Abubakar Alwi (2008) Engineering properties of
stabilized tropical peat soils. vol 13, Bund. EJGE, pp 7–8
Santoni RL, Tingle JS, Webster SL (2001) Non-traditional stabiliza-
tion of silty sand. Technical Report, U.S. Army Engineering
Research and Development Centre, Waterways Experiment
Station, Vicksburg, MS
Syed IM, Fuselier GK, Hewitt M (2007) Innovation in cement
stabilization of airfield subgrades. FAA Worldwide Airport
Technology Conference, New Jersey
www.zydexindustries.com
Yang HH (2004) Pavement analysis and design, 2nd edn. Pearson
Prentice Hall, New Jersey, pp 677–681

123

View publication stats