Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:4753–4760
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-020-01324-3 (0123456789().,-volV)
( 01234567
89().,-volV)
ORIGINAL PAPER
Strength and Drainage Characteristics of Poor Soils
Stabilized with Construction Demolition Waste
Abhishek Sharma . Ravi Kumar Sharma
Received: 17 November 2019 / Accepted: 27 April 2020 / Published online: 12 May 2020
 Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020
Abstract This paper presents a laboratory investi-
gation on the use of construction demolition waste in
poor clayey soil to improve its strength and drainage
characteristics. Various laboratory tests such as dif-
ferential free swell, Atterberg’s limits, compaction,
unconfined compressive strength (UCS), California
bearing ratio (CBR), and permeability have been
conducted on un-stabilized and Construction Demo-
lition Waste (CDW) stabilized clayey soil. The
outcomes revealed that the addition of CDW in poor
soil reduced both maximum dry density and optimum
moisture content. The UCS, CBR, and permeability
got improved on adding optimum content of CDW in
poor clayey soil. The secant modulus also increased on
addition of the CDW in virgin soil. The regression
analysis performed for different tests showed good
agreement of laboratory results with predicted values.
Thus, it can be revealed that using CDW in stabiliza-
tion of poor clayey soil will not only solve the problem
of its disposal but will also be cost effective and
protect the environment.
A. Sharma (&)  R. K. Sharma
National Institute of Technology, Hamirpur,
Himachal Pradesh, India
e-mail: abhishek1@nith.ac.in
R. K. Sharma
e-mail: rksnithp61@gmail.com
Keywords Soil stabilization  Unconfined
compressive strength  California bearing ratio 
Permeability  Regression analysis
1 Introduction
Expansive soils are considered as poor soils due to
their very high swelling and shrinkage potential on
altering water content. Cracks are often observed on
the structures resting over these types of soils which
lead to instability of structures and induce large
settlements in structures. Due to scarcity of land and
rapid development in construction sector, engineers
are forced to construct the structures over these soils.
The construction of bridges, subways, retaining walls
and embankments on poor soil is a very challenging
task. These sites require soil stabilization by using
different additives to improve the sub-grade and
strength characteristics of poor soils. The soil stabi-
lization can be accomplished by using physical and
chemical alteration techniques. The physical alter-
ation technique comprises sand cushions (Satya-
narayna 1966; Phanikumar and Suri 2009) and the
cohesive non-swelling (CNS) layer technique (Katti
1978). The chemical alteration technique comprises
mixing of chemicals such as Portland cement, fly ash,
lime, CaCl2 and construction demolition waste (Rao
1984; Hunter 1988; Sankar 1989; Petry and Little
123
4754 Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:4753–4760

1992; Kumar 1996; Rolling and Rolling 1996; Desai
and Oza 1997; Rolling et al. 1999; Phanikumar 2000;
Cocka 2001; Phanikumar and Reddayya 2001;
Phanikumar and Sharma 2004; Hoyos et al. 2004;
Acosta et al. 2003; Priyadarshee et al. 2015; Sharma
and Hymavathi 2016; Sharma and Sharma 2019).
Due to growth in construction sector and in order to
provide modern aesthetic appearance to old structures,
dismantling of the old buildings generates a lot of
waste in the form of construction demolition waste.
This waste is dumped in the dumping sites or in unused
land or disposed of haphazardly along road sides. This
involves transportation expenditure thereby increasing
the overall cost of the project and also creates
environmental issues. If this material is used in soil
stabilization for improving strength and drainage
characteristics of poor soils, then its disposal problem
will be solved besides being eco-friendly. The con-
struction demolition waste (CDW) is a cost-free
material and contains different types of construction
materials such as concrete, bricks, tile waste, steel,
floor waste etc. and it must be segregated before using
it in soil stabilization. Some of the researchers have
studied the applications of CDW as aggregates in
pavements (Da Conceição et al. 2011; Ransinchung
et al. 2012; Brook and Cetin 2012; Sharma and
Hymavathi 2016). Ransinchung et al. (2012) revealed
that addition of cement and fine crushed concrete
cubes in clayey soils, decreased the plasticity index of
the composite whereas the unconfined confined
strength (UCS), California bearing ratio (CBR) and
split tensile strength (STS) was increased. (Brook and
Cetin 2012) reported a reduction in thickness of
pavement on adding CDW and cement kiln dust in
poor local soils thereby improving the performance of
sub-grade and sub-base layers of highway. (Sharma
and Hymavathi 2016) conducted a laboratory com-
parative study on the use of fly ash, CDW and lime
which showed that MDD and differential free swell
2 Material Used
2.1 Soil
The soil used in the laboratory study was brought from
Alipur village, Haryana, India and was classified as
CH confirming to Unified Soil Classification System
(USCS) according to ASTM D2487-11.The gradation
curve for clayey soil is given in Fig. 1.The geotech-
nical properties of soil used in the study are given in
Table 1.
2.2 Construction and Demolition Waste
The construction demolition waste used in the present
study for stabilizing the poor clayey soil was procured
from dismantled columns of an old building nearby
Hamirpur city, HP. The material was packed in jute
bags and transported to laboratory for further process-
ing. In the laboratory, CDW was dried out in oven at a
temperature of 105 C and then pulverized till the
resulting material reaches particle size range of
4.75–0.075 mm. The CDW waste was kept inside
tightly closed polythene bags to avoid any changes in
moisture content. The gradation curve for CDW used
in the experimental study is presented in Fig. 1. The
properties of CDW used in the study are given in
Table 1.
100
90 Clay
CDW
80
Percentage finer (%)

70
decreased whereas pH value, UCS and CBR increased.
60
The present study is an attempt to improve the 50
geotechnical properties of poor clayey soils by adding 40
CDW. Different geotechnical based laboratory tests 30
have been carried out on virgin soil and mixture of soil 20
and CDW. 10
0
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
Particle size (mm)

Fig. 1 Gradation curve for different materials

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:4753–4760 4755

Table 1 Geotechnical properties of materials used 60

DFS = 0.0027 (CDW)3-0.0764 (CDW)2-1.8506 (CDW) + 50.454

Property Clay CDW 50

Specific gravity, G 2.65 2.54 40

DFS (%)
Max. dry density, MDD (g/cc) 1.67 1.53
30
Optimum moisture content, OMC (%) 20.00 13.00
Liquid limit (%) 53.20 – 20
Plastic limit (%) 27.80 –
10
Plasticity index (%) 25.40 –
Coefficient of uniformity, Cu – 0.86 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Coefficient of curvature, Cc – 1.534
Percentage of CDW (%)
Classification CH SP
DFS (%) 49.90 – Fig. 2 Differential free swell index of various mixes

differential swell value on increasing the percentage of

CDW is due presence of more coarser particles in soil
3 Results and Discussion
with increasing CDW content which resulted in
reduction in surface activity, thus reducing differential
3.1 Gradation Curve
free swell. The reduction in differential free swell
index on addition of CDW is also noticed by earlier
The gradation curve for soil has been obtained by
investigators (Sharma and Hymavathi 2016).
conducting wet sieve and hydrometer analysis con-
firming to ASTM standards. The gradation curve for
3.3 Atterberg’s Limit Tests
CDW has been obtained by performing dry sieve
analysis. It can be seen from gradation curve of virgin
Crushed construction demolition waste is added to the
soil that about 90% particles are finer than 0.075 mm
clayey soil in various percentages of 4, 8, 12, 16, 20,
and around 20% particles are finer than 0.002 mm.
24 and 28% and tests have been conducted to
The activity of the soil has been obtained by dividing
determine the Atterberg’s limits. Figure 3 shows the
plasticity index with percentage of particles finer than
graph for various consistency limits and correspond-
0.002 mm size. It has been observed that the plasticity
ing CDW percentages added to the clayey soil. With
index of soil is 25.40% revealing that soil is of high
the increase in CDW percentage in virgin soil, the
plasticity (Table 1). The activity of the soil has been
liquid limit of various composites decreased. The
obtained as 1.27 which shows soil is active in nature
and contains expansive minerals. The gradation curve
of CDW reveals that the coefficient of uniformity and 60
coefficient of curvature is 1.76 and 0.86 respectively Liquid limit

which designates CDW as poor graded in nature with 50 Plastic limit

Consistency limits (%)

particles almost lying in the range of fine sand. Plasticity index

40

3.2 Differential Free Swell Tests 30

The differential free swell has been determined 20

according to IS:2720-40 (1977) for virgin soil alone
and soil mixed with varying percentages of CDW. The 10

free swell index of virgin soil is 49.9% (Fig. 2). With

0
the addition of CDW to the virgin soil, the differential 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
free swell decreased continuously and attained zero CDW (%)
value at 24% CDW proportion. The decrease in
Fig. 3 Atterberg’s limit tests

123
4756 Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:4753–4760

liquid limit of virgin soil is 53.2% which reduced to a 25.00

1.50
value of 38.4% on addition of 24% CDW in virgin soil. 20.00
The plastic limit of the CDW mixed soil increased

MDD (g/cm3)
OMC (%)
constantly on increasing the percentage of CDW up to 15.00 1.00

24% and further addition of CDW beyond 24% OMC

10.00 MDD
decreased plastic limit of the composite slightly. The 0.50
plasticity index of CDW mixed clay composite at 24% 5.00

CDW content is 7.6% which lies in the range of 6- 8% 0.00 0.00

considered to be appropriate for sub grade soils. The
reduction in liquid limit on addition of crushed
construction demolition waste to poor soils is mainly
due to the non- plastic nature of crushed demolition
particles. The decrease in liquid limit and plasticity
index on increasing CDW content has been experi-
enced by a few researchers (Sharma and Hymavathi
2016).
3.4 Compaction Characteristics
The compaction tests carried out for determin-
ing MDD and OMC of virgin soil, construction
demolition waste, and various mixes of virgin soil
and CDW are presented in Fig. 4. The maximum dry
density of virgin soil and corresponding optimum
moisture content is found to be 1.672 g/cc and 20%
respectively; the maximum dry density of CDW and
corresponding optimum moisture content is found to
be 1.534 g/cc and 13% respectively. On increasing
percentage of CDW in virgin soil, there is decrease in
the value of both optimum moisture content and
maximum dry density as shown in Fig. 5. On increas-
ing CDW content up to 24%, the maximum dry
density decreased from 1.672 to 1.565 g/cc and the
17
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00
CDW (%)
Fig. 5 OMC and MDD variation for varying CDW percentage
optimum moisture content decreased from 20 to 16%
as shown in Fig. 5. The decrease in MDD value may
be due to lower value of specific of CDW in
comparison to virgin soil and due to the aggregation/
flocculation of un-reacted cement as it offers resis-
tance to densification. The reason for decrease in OMC
value on addition of CDW is the presence of sand
particles possessing lower specific area when com-
pared to virgin soil. The decrease in MDD and OMC
value with increasing content of CDW has been
reported by (Sharma and Hymavathi 2016).
3.5 Unconfined Compressive Strength Tests
The results of varying percentages of CDW on stress-
strain characteristics of soil after 28 days are pre-
sented in Fig. 6. The UCS value of virgin soil after
28-days is 476.55 kPa; the UCS value of CDW
stabilized soil after 28-days curing is 709.03 kPa for
4% CDW content, 832.62 kPa for 8% CDW content,
922.07 kPa for 12% CDW content, 1034.36 kPa for
16% CDW content, 1191.39 kPa for 20% CDW

1800 Clay: CDW:: 76: 24

Maximum dry desnity (kN/m3)

16.5 Clay: CDW:: 80: 20

Clay: CDW:: 84: 16
1500
Clay: CDW:: 88: 12
16
Clay: CDW:: 92: 8
1200 Clay: CDW:: 96: 4
Stress (kPa)

15.5 Clay:: 100

900
Clay:: 100
Clay: CDW:: 96: 4
15
Clay: CDW:: 92: 8 600
Clay: CDW:: 88: 12
Clay: CDW:: 84: 16
14.5 300
Clay: CDW:: 80: 20
Clay: CDW:: 76: 24
CDW:: 100
14 0
5 10 15 20 25 30 0.000 0.010 0.020 0.030 0.040 0.050 0.060
Water content (%) Strain

Fig. 4 Compaction characteristics Fig. 6 Stress–strain curve for 28 days curing period

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:4753–4760 4757

content and 1352.68 kPa for 24% CDW content. Thus, 6

from the above results it is revealed that the addition of 5

Predicted CBR value

CDW in virgin soil increased the UCS value of the 4
composite. The increase in the UCS value on mixing
3
CDW at various percentages may be attributed to the
pozzolanic reaction among virgin soil and CDW 2

particles. Similar behaviour indicating the increase in 1

UCS values with increasing construction demolition
waste content in clayey soil is observed by (Ransinch-
ung et al. 2012; Sharma and Hymavathi 2016).
3.6 California Bearing Ratio Tests
Soaked California bearing ratio tests have been
conducted on virgin soil and soil mixed with various
proportions of CDW. The curves for load versus
penetration values of different composites are shown
in Fig. 7. The CBR value of virgin soil is 1.62; the
CBR value is 2.07 for soil stabilized with 4% CDW
content; 2.60 for soil stabilized with 8% CDW
content; 2.92 for soil stabilized with 12% CDW
content; 3.38 for soil stabilized with 16% CDW
content; 4.26 for soil stabilized with 20% CDW
content and 5.04 for soil stabilized with 24% CDW
content. It is revealed from the above results that on
adding CDW in virgin soil, the CBR values increased.
This increase in CBR value may be attributed to the
presence of fine sand particles in CDW which helped
in mobilizing angle of shearing resistance thus result-
ing in improved strength of the composite. The
regression analysis has been performed to validate
the results of experimental CBR values obtained in the
laboratory. The coefficient of determination, R2 is
found to be 0.9745 for Eq. 1. The observed CBR
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Observed CBR value
Fig. 8 Observed and predicted CBR values curve
values and predicted CBR values plotted in Fig. 8
show good validation of results.
CBR ¼ 1:480 þ 13:74CDW ð1Þ
where CDW is construction demolition waste.
3.7 Permeability Tests
Permeability tests have been performed to assess the
drainage characteristics of virgin soil and various
composites of virgin soil and CDW. The coefficient of
permeability of virgin soil is 3.65 9 10–8 cm/sec. On
adding construction demolition waste to the virgin
soil, the coefficient of permeability goes on increasing.
For Clay: CDW mix in the ratio 96: 4, the coefficient
of permeability is found to be 4.23 9 10–8 cm/sec;
5.09 9 10–8 cm/sec for composite mix of 92:8;
5.98 9 10–8 cm/sec for composite mix of 88: 12;
6.67 9 10–8 cm/sec for composite mix of 84: 16;
7.45 9 10–8 cm/sec for composite mix of 80: 20;
8.02 9 10–8 cm/sec for composite mix of 76:24 as
shown in Fig. 9. The increase in coefficient of
permeability on addition of CDW is due to coarser

200
Clay: CDW:: 76: 24
Coeffiecent of permeabilty × 10-8 (cm/sec)

Clay: CDW:: 80: 20 9

Clay: CDW:: 84: 16
160 Clay: CDW:: 88: 12 8
Clay: CDW:: 92: 8
Clay: CDW:: 96: 4 7
Clay:: 100 6
Load (kg)

120
5

80 4
3
2
40
1
0
0 0% 4% 8% 12% 16% 20% 24%
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 CDW (%)
Penetration (mm)
Fig. 9 Coefficient of permeability for varying CDW
Fig. 7 Load versus penetration curve for various mixes percentages

123
4758 Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:4753–4760

particles of CDW and its higher coefficient of 6000

Clay: CDW:: 76: 24
Clay: CDW:: 80: 20
permeability compared to that of soil. The validity of 5000 Clay: CDW:: 84: 16
Clay: CDW:: 88: 12
results of permeability tests obtained from laboratory

Secant modulus (MPa)

Clay: CDW:: 92: 8
Clay: CDW:: 96: 4
testing have been checked through the regression 4000 Clay:: 100

analysis. The observed values and the predicted values 3000

are found to be nearly same as shown in Fig. 10. The
2000
coefficient of determination is found to be 0.9968 for
Eq. 2. 1000

k ¼ 3:61 þ 0:189CDW ð2Þ 0

0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
Strain

3.8 Variation of Secant Modulus with Strain Fig. 11 Secant modulus versus strain curves for varying CDW
percentages
Secant modulus versus strain curves (obtained from
UCS plots) for virgin soil and soil modified with 7000

Observed Secant Modulus (MPa)

crushed construction demolition waste are depicted in 6000
Fig. 11. For a specific strain value, secant modulus 5000
increased with increase in CDW content in virgin soil. 4000
The secant modulus for virgin soil is 2621.05 kPa for a
3000
strain of 0.006 which increased to a value of
2000
5190.53 kPa with increasing strain to 0.0086. The
1000
percentage increase in secant modulus of virgin soil on
addition of CDW is 21.58% for 4% CDW content; 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
51.92% for 8% CDW content; 61.23% for 12% CDW Predicted Secant Modulus (MPa)

content; 62.14% for 16% CDW content; 67.81% for

Fig. 12 Predicted and observed secant modulus values
20% CDW content and 98.03% for 24% CDW content
respectively. values. The choice of a suitable model greatly depends
Figure 12 presents the regression analysis per-
on the findings of the investigators, comprising
formed to validate the results of secant modulus
incorporation of applicable concept and familiarity
obtained from laboratory test data with predicted with the subject under consideration, and vigilant
values. The relation developed between secant mod-
inspection of scatter plots, residual plots and regres-
ulus, strain and CDW in Eq. 5 gives coefficient of
sion diagnostics (Dielman 2001). The formation of
determination, R2 as 0.954 which revealed that the scatter plots matrix will provide a relevant information
observed values are in good agreement with predicted
about the dependent and independent variables of the
equation (Dielman 2001).
The generalized equation for results of secant
9
8
modulus can be written as:
7
Y ¼ C1  X1C2  C3X2
Predicteed values

ð3Þ
6
5 This nonlinear regression model can be trans-
4 formed to linear model as:
3
log10 Y ¼ log10 C1 þ C2 log10 X1 þ X2 log10 C3 ð4Þ
2
1 By analyzing the scatter plot matrix obtained from
0 the laboratory data, a non-linear multivariable power
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Observed values model is chosen to express the secant modulus as:

Fig. 10 Predicted and observed coefficient of permeability Es ¼ 2467:59ðeÞ0:31  1:03CDW ð5Þ

values

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:4753–4760
where Es is the secant modulus, e is the strain, CDW is
construction demolition waste.
4 Conclusions
The geotechnical properties have been evaluated by
performing various tests on virgin soil and soil mixed
with varying percentages of crushed construction
demolition waste. The various conclusions drawn
from the present study are summarized as below:
• The addition of 24% crushed construction demo-
lition waste decreases the differential free swell to
zero. Addition of CDW beyond 24% does not
cause any change in DFS.
• The liquid limit of the soil decreases from 53.2 to
38.4% on addition of 24% crushed construction
demolition waste. The plastic limit of the CDW
mix composite increases constantly up to 24%
CDW content and beyond 24% of CDW mix in
virgin soil decreases the plastic limit. The plasticity
index of CDW mix composite is 7.6 for 24% CDW
mix.
• The maximum dry density decreases on addition of
CDW. The optimum moisture content also
decreases with increase in CDW. This decrease is
mainly due to the existence of fine sand in
construction demolition waste.
• The unconfined compressive strength after curing
periods of 28 days increased on addition of CDW.
The percentage increase in 28 days UCS value on
adding 24% CDW content in virgin soil is 184%.
• The soaked California bearing ratio of soil
increased with addition of CDW. The percentage
increase in soaked CBR value on addition of 24%
CDW content is 143%.
• The coefficient of permeability increases with
increasing content of CDW in virgin soil. Thus, the
modified soil poses good drainage characteristics.
The regression analysis performed on observed
values shows good agreement with the predicted
values.
• The secant modulus obtained from results of UCS
values shows increase in modulus value on
increasing CDW content. The secant modulus
improved by 98% on adding 24% CDW in virgin
soil.
4759
• The above results reveal that CDW can be used as
stabilizer to improve strength and drainage char-
acteristics of poor soils. The use of CDW will not
only prove to be economical but will also lead to
healthy environment.
It can be inferred from the obtained results that the
inclusion of 24% CDW content in poor soils is an
efficient method to improve their geotechnical char-
acteristics and thus can be effectively used in low
density roads, sub-base pavements, shallow founda-
tions etc.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest The author confirms that there no conflict
of interest to declare for this publication.
References
Acosta HA, Edil TB, Benson CH (2003) Soil stabilization and
drying using fly ash. Geotech Eng Rep 3:6
ASTM D2487-11 Standard practice for classification of soils for
engineering purposes (unified soil classification system).
American Society for Testing of Materials Pennsylvania
PA, USA
Brooks RM, Cetin M (2012) Application of construction
demolition waste for improving performance of sub-grade
and sub-base layers. Int J Res Rev Appl Sci 12(3):375
Cokca E (2001) Use of class C fly ashes for the stabilization of
an expansive soil. J Geotech Geoenviro Eng
127(7):568–573
Da Conceição LF, Dos Santos MR, Vasconcelos KL, Bernucci L
(2011) Laboratory evaluation of recycled construction and
demolition waste for pavements. Constr Build Mater
25(6):2972–2979
Desai ID, Oza BN (1997) Influence of anhydrous calcium
chloride on shear strength of clays. Sympon Expans Soils
1:17–25
Dielman TE (2001) Applied regression analysis for business and
economics. Duxbury/Thomson Learning, Pacific Grove
Hoyos LR, Puppala AJ, Chainuwat P (2004) Dynamic properties
of chemically stabilized sulfate rich clay. J Geotech
Geoenviro Eng 130(2):153–162
Hunter D (1988) Lime-induced heave in sulfate-bearing clay
soils. J Geotech Eng 114(2):150–167
IS:2720-40 (1977) Determination of Free Swell Index of Soils.
Indian Standard Methods of Test for Soils, BSI, New Delhi
Katti RK (1978) Search for solutions to problems in black cotton
soils. IIT, Mumbai
Kumar V (1996) Fly ash utilization: a mission mode approach.
Ash Ponds Ash Disposal Syst, pp 283
Petry TN, Little DN (1992) Update on sulfate-induced heave in
treated clays problematic sulfate levels. Transp Res
Record, pp 51–55
123
4760
Phanikumar BR (2000) Use of fly ash in treating problematic
expansive soils. In: Proceedings of workshop on environ-
mental geotechnology Indian geotechnical society.
pp 36–39
Phanikumar BR, Reddayya S N (2001) Swelling characteristics
of fly ash-treated expansive soils. In: Proceedings of
international symposium on suction, swelling, permeabil-
ity, and structure of clays, IS Shizuoka. pp 121–123
PhaniKumar BR, Sharma RS (2004) Effect of fly ash on engi-
neering properties of expansive soils. J Geotech Geoenvi-
ron Eng 130(7):764–767
Phanikumar BR, Suri S (2009) Expansive soils-problems and
remedies. In: Indian geotechnical conference. pp 907–913
Priyadarshee A, Gupta D, Kumar V, Sharma V (2015) Com-
parative study on performance of tire crumbles with fly ash
and kaolin clay. Int J Geosyn Ground Eng 1(4):38
Ransinchung RNGD, Kumar P, Sharma P (2012) Stabilization
of clayey soil with fines from waste crushed concrete cubes
for construction of pavements. In: Proceedings of inter-
national conference on engineering and Info Tech (ICEIT)
Toronto, Canada. pp 24–28
Rao AS (1984) A study of swelling characteristics and behavior
of expansive soils. In: Doctoral dissertation Ph.D. thesis,
Kakatiya University, Warangal, India
123
Geotech Geol Eng (2020) 38:4753–4760
Rollings MP (1996) Geotechnical materials in construction.
McGraw-Hill Professional Publishing, New York
Rollings RS, Burkes JP, Rollings MP (1999) Sulfate attack on
cement-stabilized sand. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng
125(5):364–372
Sankar NB (1989) Use of lime-soil piles for in-situ stabilization
of black cotton soils. Proc Ind Geotech Conf 1:149–153
Satyanarayna B (1966) Swelling pressure and related mechan-
ical properties of black cotton soils. In: Doctoral disserta-
tion, Ph.D. thesis, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore
Sharma RK, Hymavathi J (2016) Effect of fly ash, construction
demolition waste and lime on geotechnical characteristics
of a clayey soil: a comparative study. Environ Earth Sci
75(5):377
Sharma A, Sharma RK (2019) Effect of addition of construc-
tion–demolition waste on strength characteristics of high
plastic clays. Innov Infra Sol 4:27. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s41062-019-0216-1
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with
regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.