Abiola & Ore Project

GEOTECHINCAL AND MICROSTRUCTURE ANALYSIS OF 8000C OF
CALCINED COW BONE ASH ON STABILIZED LATERITIC SOIL
(The Federal Polytechnic Offa Borrow Pit)
PRESENTED
BY
TAJUDEEN SAKIRU OLAMIDE CE/HND/F21/1578
ADELEKE OREOLUWA CE/HND/F21/1538
SUBMITTED TO
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING,
FEDERAL POLYTECHNIC OFFA, KWARA STATE, P.M.B 420 OFFA,
KWARA STATE
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF
HIGHER NATIONAL DIPLOMA (HND) IN CIVIL ENGINEERING
JANUARY, 2024
CERTIFICATION
This is to certify that this project work was carried out by TAJUDEEN SAKIRU OLAMIDE and
ADELEKE OREOLUWA with matriculation numbers CE/HND/F21/1578 and
CE/HND/F21/1538, of the Department of Civil Engineering, School of Natural Resources and
Engineering Technology, Federal Polytechnic, Offa.
------------------------------------ ---------------------------
--- TAJUDEEN SAKIRU OLAMIDE DATE
CE/HND/F21/1578
------------------------------------ ---------------------------
--- ADELEKE OREOLUWA DATE
CE/HND/F21/1538
------------------------------------ ---------------------------
---ENGR. OYENIYAN W. O. DATE
PROJECT SUPERVISOR
------------------------------------ ---------------------------
---
ENGR. DR. OYELEKE M. O. DATE
HEAD OF DEPARTMENT
ii
DEDICATION
This project is dedicated to Almighty GOD
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to express our sincere gratitude to all those who contributed to the successful
completion of this project. Their support and assistance played a pivotal role in shaping the
outcomes and enriching the overall experience.
First and foremost, we give thanks to Almighty GOD, who guides us through the entire
programme. We extend my heartfelt thanks to ENGR. OYENIYAN W.O. whose guidance and
expertise provided the necessary direction and insights throughout the project.
We are indebted to our head of department ENGR. OYELEKE M.O. for providing the
necessary resources, facilities, and encouragement, creating an environment conducive to
research and innovation.
Furthermore, we want to acknowledge the support of our parents, friends and family who stood
by us during the ups and downs of this project. Their encouragement and understanding were a
constant source of motivation.
Thank you all for being an integral part of this journey.
iv
ABSTRACT
The aim of this research is to investigate the geotechnical and microstructural analysis of
calcined cow bone into lateritic soil as a stabilizing agent, with the goal of improving the
engineering properties and suitability of the stabilized soil for construction purposes. The
lateritic soil was extracted from a depth of 1.5m below the ground surface. The sample was
collected from Federal Polytechnic Offa, Kwara state, Nigeria. Calcined cow bone was obtained
from meat processing facilities (Owode market, Offa, Kwara State). The bone was undergo a
calcination process (At the Science Laboratory Technology Department, The Federal
Polytechnic Offa) to remove organic components, resulting in a calcined material with a distinct
composition. Microstructure analysis such as XRF, SEM, XRD, and FITR was conducted to
determine the composition of the calcined cow bone, including calcium carbonate content and
phosphorus levels. The laboratory tests carried out are natural moisture content, sieve analysis,
specific gravity, Atterberg limit, compaction, CBR using 0%, 4%, 8%, 12%, 16%, and 20%
replacement of CBA. The study concludes that cow bone ash (CBA) is a good additive in
Stabilization of Lateritic soils provided that the 8% additive threshold of CBA is not exceeded.
The study concludes that cow bone ash (CBA) is a good additive in Stabilization of Lateritic
soils provided that the 8% additive threshold of CBA is not exceeded. Therefore, we
recommended that the stabilization of lateritic soil samples using cow bone ash (CBA) be
investigated for potential application in road construction
v
TABLE OF CONTENT
Pages
Title Page i
Certification ii
Dedication iii
Acknowledgement iv
Abstract v
Table of contents vi
List of tables viii
List of figures ix
List of plate x
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of study 1
1.2 Statement of Problem 2
1.3 Aim and Objectives of the study 3
1.4 Significant of the study 3
1.5 Justification of the Study 4
1.6 Scope of the Study 5
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Soil Stabilization Techniques 6
2.1.1 Methods of Soil Stabilization 6
vi
2.1.3 Cement as a Soil Stabilizers 7
2.1.4 Mechanical Stabilization 7
2.1.5 Physical Stabilization 8
2.1.6 Chemical Stabilization 8
2.1.7 Challenges and Environmental Implications 8
2.1.8 Importance of Interaction Understanding 9
2.2 Unconventional Stabilizing Agents 9
2.2.1 Rationale for Unconventional Stabilizers 9
2.3 Components of lateritic soil 10
2.3.1 Uses of lateritic soil 10
2.3.2 Properties of lateritic soil 10
2.3.3 Previous Works on Stabilization of Lateritic soil 11
2.4 Soil Structure 12
2.4.1 Type of soil structure 14
2.4.2 Improving soil structure 14

2.4.3 Soil structure dynamics 15
2.4.4 Calcined Cow Bone Ash (CCBA) 16
2.4.5 Calcined Cow Bone Ash as a Soil Stabilizer 17
2.4.6 Calcined Cow bone ash properties 18
2.5 Utilization of Agricultural Waste 18
2.5.1 Waste Utilization 18
2.5.2 Strength Improvement 18
2.6 Research Gaps and Significance 19
2.6.2 Microstructure analysis 19
vii
2.6.3 Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) 19
2.6.4 Precautions of SEM analysis 19
2.6.5 X-ray Diffraction (XRD) 19
2.7 Summary of Previous Literatures 20
CHAPTER THREE
MATERIALS AND METHODS
3.1 Materials 23
3.1.1 Lateritic soil 23
3.1.2 Calcined cow bone 23
3.1.5 Water 23
3.2 Test 24
3.2.1 Natural Moisture Content Test 24
3.2.2 Sieve Analysis 25
3.2.3 Specific gravity test 25
3.2.4 Atterberg Limits Test 26
3.2.5 Compaction Test 27
3.2.6 CBR Test 27
3.2.7 Microstructure Analysis 28
3.3 Method 29
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Result and Discussion 30
viii
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Conclusion 72
5.2 Recommendations 72
References 74
Appendix 76
ix
LIST OF TABLE
Table 4.1: Chemical composition (XRF) of Calcined cow bone ash (800oC) 31
Table 4.2: Particle size distribution 36

Table 4.3: Specific Gravity of soil sample 38
Table 4.4: Specific Gravity of Cow Bone Ash (CBA) 38
Table 4.5: Natural moisture content of soil sample 39
Table 4.6: Atterberg Limit Test 39
Table 4.7: Dry density 41
Table 4.8: Moisture content 41
Table 4.9: Compaction test 42
Table 4.10: of CBR @ 0% Unsoaked 44
Table 4.16: of CBR @ 0% Soaked 56
Table 4.21: CBR @ 20% Soaked 66
x
LIST OF FIGURE
Figure 4.1: EDS microanalysis of bone ash 32

Figure 4.2: SEM micrograph of cow bone ash (800ºC calcined) 33
Figure 4.3: XRD patterns of cow bone ash (800ºC calcined) 34
Figure 4.4: FTIR spectra of cow bone ash (800ºC calcined) 35
Figure 4.5: Particle size distribution 37
Figure 4.6: Liquid limit 40
Figure 4.12: Atterberg limit test 42
Figure 4.13: Compaction test 46
Figure 4.14: California Bearing Ratio of unsoaked soil at 0% of CBA 50
Figure 4.20: California Bearing Ratio of soaked soil at 0% of CBA 62
xi
xii
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of study
Lateritic soil is described as weathered tropical or subtropical residual soil that is typically
covered in solidifications rich in sesquioxide ( Oyelami & Van Rooy, 2016). High temperatures and
moisture content in the soil are said to cause remarkable chemical weathering that forms well-
graded residual soils (Dauda, et al, 2019). Environmentally friendly and abundant in nature,
lateritic soils are a great resource.
Any of the zonal soils that were produced under the humid tropical forest vegetation are known a
s lateritic soils.Reddish friable clay Bhorizons and red, reticulately mottled lateritic parent materi
al are found beneath granular, dark reddish brown surface soils in lateritic soils (Helgren &
Butzer,2019). Lateritic soils have been the most broadly known and utilized construction material
in building and road construction
Soil stabilization can likewise be viewed as the alteration of soils to improve their physical
properties. Stabilization can build the shear strength of a soil or potentially control the
shrinkswell properties of a soil, thereby improving the load bearing capacity of a sub-grade to
support pavements and foundations (Hostler, 2019). Soil stabilization accomplishes various goals
that are significant in acquiring a dependable structure from locally accessible earth materials
and these include; better mechanical qualities, better attachment between particles which
decrease the porosity and changes in volume because of moisture changes, improved protection
from wind, erosion and rain. Soil stabilization techniques include mechanical, physical and
chemical stabilization (Sugawara & Nikaido, 2018). Availability and cost have affected the options
of construction and building material generally. In most non-industrial nations, owning a house
1
is generally troublesome because of significant expense of construction materials and to solve
this threat, better approaches of producing building materials from locally accessible materials
effortlessly should be investigated (Sugawara & Nikaido,2018).
In Nigeria, millions of tonnes of cow bones are produced each year, and from these bones, bone
ash is made (Sefiu, 2018). The existing waste disposal method, which involves open-air burning
and careless disposal on any location, is bad for both human and environmental health. The
environment benefits from the extensive use of calcined cow bone ash (CBA) disposal in road
construction, such as stiff pavement construction, in a variety of ways. By reducing landfill costs,
reducing contamination caused by these wastes, and increasing butchers' financial bases when
these wastes are sold, this application will improve waste management at a low cost and
encourage further production. Additionally, the manufacture of calcined cow bone ash uses less
energy than the production of Portland cement and recycles the previous work done calcined cow
bone ash focused on the morphology and shear strength of stabilized lateritic soil. In this
research, calcined cow bone ash utilized as the stabilizing agents for the lateritic soil. The major
chemical constituent of the calcined cow bone ash is calcium oxide/ calcium phosphate.
Therefore, this research is aimed at studying the behaviour of calcined cow bone ash on the
geotechnical properties of lateritic soil as an alternative stabilizer in road construction
applications.
1.2 Statement of Problem
In regions where suitable construction materials are scarce, the utilization of locally available
resources for soil stabilization has gained considerable attention. One such potential resource is
calcined cow bone, a byproduct of the agricultural industry. This study aims to investigate the
geotechnical and microstructural effects of incorporating calcined cow bone into lateritic soil as
2
a stabilizing agent, with the goal of improving the engineering properties and suitability of the
stabilized soil for construction purposes. It also prevents future problems like swelling, cracks
and damping that might lead to failure of the structure built with untreated lateritic soil. It
likewise forestalls future issues like expanding, damping and cracks that may prompt structural
failure of untreated lateritic soil. Calcined bone ash was chosen to tackle the issue of
Environmental pollution. This research has the potential for making sustainable construction
from locally available earth materials (lateritic soil) stabilized with cattle bone ash.
1.3 Aim and Objectives of the study
This study aims to investigate the geotechnical and microstructural analysis of calcined cow
bone into lateritic soil as a stabilizing agent, with the goal of improving the engineering
properties and suitability of the stabilized soil for construction purposes. The specific objectives
are as follow;
i. To analyze the micro structural changes in the stabilized soil using techniques such as
scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and X-ray diffraction (XRD).
ii. To determine the geotechnical properties of lateritic soil stabilized with calcined cow
bone.
iii. To determine the optimal proportion of calcined cow bone for achieving the desired
improvement in geotechnical properties.
1.4 Significant of the study
Soil Stabilization: Lateritic soils are commonly found in tropical regions and are often
challenging to use in construction due to their poor engineering properties. Stabilization methods
aim to improve the strength, durability, and overall performance of such soils. Incorporating
3
additives like calcined cow bone can potentially enhance the soil's properties and make it suitable
for construction purposes.
Waste Utilization: The use of calcined cow bone in soil stabilization provides a sustainable way
to utilize organic waste material. Cow bones are a byproduct of the meat industry and can be
repurposed to enhance soil properties instead of being discarded, contributing to waste reduction
and environmental sustainability.
Strength Improvement: Adding calcined cow bone to lateritic soil can enhance its strength and
load-bearing capacity. This is crucial for applications like road construction, foundations, and
embankments, where the soil needs to withstand significant loads without undergoing excessive
deformation.
Microstructure Analysis: Investigating the microstructure of the stabilized soil helps understand
the mechanisms through which the additives interact with the soil particles. This analysis can
provide insights into the bonding and agglomeration processes that contribute to improved
geotechnical properties.
1.5 Justification of the Study
The study is essential for understanding soil properties is crucial for ensuring the stability and
safety of engineered structures. Different soil types have varying load-bearing capacities, which
influence the design of foundations and support systems. Accurate soil data helps optimize
engineering designs, leading to cost-effective construction. By tailoring designs to specific soil
conditions, excess material and resources can be minimized. Knowledge of soil properties aids in
assessing the environmental impact of construction projects. It helps to avoid detrimental effects
on soil structure, groundwater, and nearby ecosystems. Geotechnical data supports urban
planning and infrastructure development. Identifying regions with challenging soil conditions
4
allows for better allocation of resources and the implementation of suitable construction
techniques.
1.6 Scope of the Study
This research focuses specifically on the geotechnical and microstructure of calcined cow bone
as a stabilizing agent for laterite soil. The study will encompass laboratory-based
experimentation to assess the impact of varying proportions of calcined cow bone on the physical
properties of stabilized soil samples. The results will provide insights into the potential benefits
and limitations of using calcined cow bone as a stabilizing agent for road pavement
5
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
The literature review provides an overview of relevant studies and research related to soil
stabilization techniques, the properties of calcined cow bone, and previous investigations into its
potential application in engineering practices. This chapter aims to establish the existing
knowledge base, identify gaps in research, and contextualize the current study within the broader
field of soil stabilization and sustainable construction practices.
2.1 Soil Stabilization Techniques
Soil stabilization is a fundamental process in civil engineering that aims to enhance the
engineering properties of natural soils, making them suitable for various construction
applications, including road pavements. Stabilized soils exhibit improved strength, reduced
compressibility, and enhanced resistance to moisture-induced damage. Soil stabilization from an
expansive perspective fuses the different techniques used for changing soil properties to improve
its engineering qualities and execution (Afrin, 2017). Stabilization is utilized for different
engineering works, the most application being in road construction and airfield pavements, with
the primary goal of building the strength and solidness of soil and decrease cost of construction
by utilizing locally accessible materials (Hostler, 2018). The treatment of normal soil to improve
its engineering properties or any means by which soil materials are improved and made more
stable is soil stabilization. Further reasons for soil stabilization are conservation of energy, dust
control, soil waterproofing and improved durability (Amu & Adetuberu, 2019).
2.1.1 Methods of Soil Stabilization
Different types of soil stabilization have been used for thousands of years. They include
chemical, physical and polymer soil stabilization (Das, 2020). A stabilized soil will have vast
6
improved weight bearing capacity, and be significantly more resistant to being damaged by frost,
water, or inclement conditions (Makusa, 2012).
2.1.3 Cement as a Soil Stabilizers
The primary response in a soil/cement mixture results from the hydration of the two anhydrous
calcium silicates (3CaO. SiO2 (C3S)) and (2CaO. SiO2 (C2S)), the significant constituents of
cement, which form two new compounds: calcium hydroxide (hydrated lime called portlandite)
and CSH, the principle binder of concrete. Cement will make actual connections between
particles, expanding the soil quality; then lime needs silica and alumina from clay particles to
create pozzolanic responses (Kerali, et al, 2018). Cement stabilization methods is predominantly
controlled by hydrolysis and hydration. Cement stabilization brings about reduced density,
expanded compressive strength, reduced plasticity, reduced volume, and change in attributes of
expansive clays when contrasted with the characteristic soil (Kerali, 2018).
2.1.4 Mechanical Stabilization
This is the most seasoned technique for soil stabilization wherein the actual property of the soil is
adjusted for better gradation, strength and different attributes. Mechanical stabilization is broadly
utilized in road construction and demands an earlier examination of the soil to decide the ideal
water content for better soil compressibility. Mechanical stabilization involves compaction of the
soil to influence its resistance, compressibility, penetrability and porosity (Lemougna, et al.,
2011).
The soil is mechanically treated so that almost all air can be removed and this adds to an
expansion in its density. With mechanical stabilization, the particle size distribution that makes
up the material isn't affected; however its structure is changed in light of the fact that the
particles are reallocated (Lemougna, et al., 2011).
7
2.1.5 Physical Stabilization
Physical stabilization is the alteration of soil particle size distribution and plasticity through
expansion or deduction of various soil divisions to change its actual properties and for better
structural property of the soil (Adams, 2015). Physical stabilization may likewise include
introduction of synthetic or plant fibers, animals and minerals into the soil. This strategy is
utilized when there are reasons not to influence the particle size distribution of the soil or if the
material is sensitive to movements prompted by factors like water action, thermal expansion, etc.
(Lemougna,et al 2011).
2.1.6 Chemical Stabilization
Chemical stabilization is a mechanism to improve expansive soils which includes the utilization
of chemical compounds and emulsions as compaction help to soils, as binders and water anti-
agents, and as a method for adjusting soil behavior (Das, 2020). It additionally includes profound
blending and grouting (Das, 2020). Regular chemical stabilization agents are Portland cement,
lime, asphalt, biomass ashes, calcium chloride, sodium chloride, and paper mill wastes. Soil
conditions, stabilizer properties, and construction types (roads, houses, and so on) decide the
adequacy of these added substances. Moreso, choosing a specific added substance relies upon
accessibility, cost, advantages, and reasonableness of its application. The conduct of every one of
these admixtures boundlessly from the others; each has its specific use and alternately, each has
its own constraints (Gidigasu, 2013). Chemical stabilization can be accomplished through
different combinations.
2.1.7 Challenges and Environmental Implications
While chemical stabilizers offer effective results, their production processes often involve
significant energy consumption and contribute to greenhouse gas emissions. The mining and
8
extraction of these materials can lead to resource depletion and environmental degradation.
Moreover, their high costs and environmental impacts have prompted the search for alternative
stabilizing agents that can achieve similar or improved outcomes with reduced negative
consequences
2.1.8 Importance of Interaction Understanding
Effective soil stabilization involves understanding the interactions between stabilizing agents and
soil particles. Kukreti and Ranjan (2018) conducted a critical review of waste material utilization
for soil stabilization, emphasizing the significance of comprehending the physical and chemical
interactions that influence soil behavior. The success of these unconventional stabilizers relies on
how well they integrate with the soil matrix, affecting properties such as compaction, strength,
and permeability.
2.2 Unconventional Stabilizing Agents
The exploration of unconventional stabilizing agents has gained traction as researchers and
engineers seek alternatives that are more sustainable, cost-effective, and environmentally
friendly compared to traditional stabilizers. This section delves into the concept of
unconventional stabilizing agents, their potential advantages, and their significance in modern
construction practices.
2.2.1 Rationale for Unconventional Stabilizers
The limitations of traditional stabilizers, such as cement and lime, have driven the exploration of
unconventional materials. Unconventional stabilizers encompass a diverse range of materials,
including industrial byproducts, agricultural waste, and natural fibers. These materials hold
promise for modifying soil properties while addressing environmental concerns associated with
traditional stabilizers.
9
2.3 Components of lateritic soil
Lateritic soil typically consists of a mixture of clay, sand, silt, and various types of oxides, such
as iron and aluminum oxides. When lateritic soil is stabilized, additional materials like cement,
lime, or in this case, calcined cow bone ash, are added to improve its engineering properties.
These components work together to enhance the strength, stability, and durability of the
stabilized soil.
2.3.1 Uses of lateritic soil
Lateritic soils have various uses due to their unique properties. They are commonly used in
construction as a building material, particularly for road construction, as they provide good
stability and strength. Lateritic soils are also used for making bricks, as they can be easily
molded and have good compressive strength. Additionally, these soils are used in agriculture as
they are rich in iron and aluminum oxides, which can provide essential nutrients for plant
growth.
2.3.2 Properties of lateritic soil
i. When lateritic soil is stabilized, its properties are improved in several ways.
ii. Stabilization helps to increase the strength and load-bearing capacity of the soil, making
it more suitable for construction purposes.
iii. It also reduces the soil's susceptibility to erosion and improves its resistance to water
penetration.
iv. Stabilization can enhance the durability and longevity of the soil, making it more suitable
for long-term use.
10
2.3.3 Previous Works on Stabilization of Lateritic soil
The impact of Calcined Cow bone ash on soil shear strength was explored by (Ayininuola &
Shogunro, 2013) and results acquired demonstrated that calcined cow bone ash contained high
portion of calcium oxide and phosphate that assumed a captivating function in expanding the
shear strength of the soil.
Stabilization of lateritic soil with egg shell powder and sodium silicate used as filler material in
road construction was analysed by (Oke & Olowoyo, 2019) and the outcomes obtained from the
research showed that an ideal mix of 12% Egg Shell Powder and 8% sodium silicate can be
utilized to balance out lateritic soil material for use as fill material for the construction of light
traffic roads. The precedence of applying the Egg Shell Powder is the reduction in the adverse
natural effect of egg shell waste. Peak Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) were recorded
at7-and 28-days curing periods separately at an ideal mix of 12% Egg Shell Powder and 8%
sodium silicate content individually.
(Ramonu et al, 2018) did a research to determine the effect of yam peel ash on geotechnical
properties of lateritic soil as an alternative stabilizing agent for subgrade in road construction.
Yam Peel Ash was used as replacement by weight of dry soil at different percentages. The CBR
values obtained from the results of untreated lateritic soil was 29% while the optimum CBR
values obtained for the stabilized lateritic soil was 40% at 6% Yam Peel Ash content. The effect
of Yam Peel Ash stabilization on the geotechnical properties of lateritic soil improved the
physical Engineering characteristics of the lateritic soils as evidence by the results of the test.
(Achampong et al, 2013) researched on the chemical stabilization of lateritic soils for road
construction by considering the case study of the lateritic soils at Legon in Ghana. They found
that only 6% lime inclusion was the most appropriate for stabilizing the soil. However, the
11
outcomes were contrasted with the details of the Ghana Highway Authority (GHA). A review of
the stabilization of lateritic soils with some agricultural waste products by (Adedokun &
Oluremi, 2019) showed their effectiveness in improving geotechnical properties of lateritic soils.
The wastes considered include calcinations of saw dust ash (SDA), coconut husk ash (CHA),
millet husk ash (MHA), corn stalk ash (CSA), rice husk ash (RHA), bagasse ash (BA) and locust
bean pod ash (LPBA). It was established that these ashes are good pozzolanic materials. Also,
increase in ash contents led to a significant decrease in the liquid limit, plasticity index, swelling
index and shrinkage limit of soils. The maximum dry density of soil increased from 0 to 4%
substitutions of SDA, CHA and CCA while it decreased with the addition of ashes from other
wastes. Additionally, CBR and UCS generally increased with increasing amount of the
stabilizers whereas soil permeability and swell potential decreased as the ash content increased.
Ash produced from these wastes can be used to improve the geotechnical properties of soil and
to synthesize a stable soil mix, that are suitable for highway construction purposes.
(Abiola et al,2018) studied the geotechnical Properties of Lateritic Soil Stabilized with calcined
Periwinkle Shells ash and concluded that Calcined Periwinkle Shell ash (CPSA) could be
considered as good stabilizer for clayey or lateritic soil, and its uses as a stabilizer could also
provide a big relief to the environmental pollution caused by its indiscriminate dumping.
2.4 Soil Structure
Soil structure describes the arrangement of the solid parts of the soil and of the pore spaces
located between them (Marshall & Holmes, 2019). Aggregation is the result of the interaction of
soil particles through rearrangement, flocculation and cementation. It is enhanced by:Masoom
the precipitation of oxides, hydroxides, carbonates and silicates; the products of biological
activity (such as biofilms, fungal hyphae and glycoproteins); ionic bridging between negatively
12
charged particles (both clay minerals and organic compounds) by multivalent cations; and
interactions between organic compounds (hydrogen bonding and hydrophobic bonding). (Dexter,
2018)
The quality of soil structure will decline under most forms of cultivation, the associated
mechanical mixing of the soil compacts and shears aggregates and fills pore spaces; it also
exposes organic matter to a greater rate of decay and oxidation. A further consequence of
continued cultivation and traffic is the development of compacted, impermeable layers or 'pans'
within the profile. (Young and Young, 2011)
The decline of soil structure under irrigation is usually related to the breakdown of aggregates
and dispersion of clay material as a result of rapid wetting. This is particularly so if soils are
sodic; that is, having a high exchangeable sodium percentage (ESP) of the cations attached to the
clays. High sodium levels (compared to high calcium levels) cause particles to repel one another
when wet, and the associated aggregates to disaggregate and disperse. The ESP will increase if
irrigation causes salty water (even of low concentration) to gain access to the soil.
A wide range of practices are undertaken to preserve and improve soil structure. For example,
the NSW Department of Land and Water Conservation advocates: increasing organic content by
incorporating pasture phases into cropping rotations; reducing or eliminating tillage and
cultivation in cropping and pasture activities; avoiding soil disturbance during periods of
excessive dry or wet when soils may accordingly tend to shatter or smear; and ensuring sufficient
ground cover to protect the soil from raindrop impact. In irrigated agriculture, it may be
recommended to: apply gypsum (calcium sulfate) to displace sodium cations with calcium and so
reduce ESP or sodicity, avoid rapid wetting, and avoid disturbing soils when too wet or dry.
13
2.4.1 Type of soil structure
Platy – The units are flat and plate like. They are generally oriented horizontally.
Prismatic – The individual units are bounded by flat to rounded vertical faces. Units are
distinctly longer vertically, and the faces are typically casts or molds of adjoining units. Vertices
are angular or subrounded; the tops of the prisms are somewhat indistinct and normally flat.
Columnar – The units are similar to prisms and bounded by flat or slightly rounded vertical
faces. The tops of columns, in contrast to those of prisms, are very distinct and normally
rounded.
Blocky – The units are block like or polyhedral. They are bounded by flat or slightly rounded
surfaces that are casts of the faces of surrounding peds. Typically, blocky structural units are
nearly equidimensional but grade to prisms and plates. The structure is described as angular
blocky if the faces intersect at relatively sharp angles and as subangular blocky if the faces are a
mixture of rounded and plane faces and the corners are mostly rounded.
Granular – The units are approximately spherical or polyhedral. They are bounded by curved or
very irregular faces that are not casts of adjoining peds.
Wedge – The units are approximately elliptical with interlocking lenses that terminate in acute
angles. They are commonly bounded by small slickensides.
Lenticular —The units are overlapping lenses parallel to the soil surface. They are thickest in the
middle and thin towards the edges. Lenticular structure is commonly associated with moist soils,
texture classes high in silt or very fine sand (e.g., silt loam), and high potential for frost action.
2.4.2 Improving soil structure

The benefits of improving soil structure for the growth of plants, particularly in an agricultural
setting, include: reduced erosion due to greater soil aggregate strength and decreased overland
14
flow; improved root penetration and access to soil moisture and nutrients; improved emergence
of seedlings due to reduced crusting of the surface; and greater water infiltration, retention and
availability due to improved porosity. (Cockroft, & Olsson, 2020)
Productivity from irrigated no-tillage or minimum tillage soil management in horticulture usually
decreases over time due to degradation of the soil structure, inhibiting root growth and water
retention. There are a few exceptions, why such exceptional fields retain structure is unknown,
but it is associated with high organic matter. Improving soil structure in such settings can
increase yields significantly. The NSW Department of Land and Water Conservation suggests
that in cropping systems, wheat yields can be increased by 10 kg/ha for every extra millimetre of
rain that is able to infiltrate due to soil structure. (Cockroft, and Olsson, 2020).
2.4.3 Soil structure dynamics
Soil structure is inherently a dynamic and complex system that is affected by different factors
such as tillage, wheel traffic, roots, biological activities in soil, rainfall events, wind erosion,
shrinking, swelling, freezing and thawing. In turn, reciprocally soil structure interacts and affects
the root growth and function, soil fauna and biota, water and solute transport processes, gas
exchange, thermal conductivity and electrical conductivity, traffic bearing capacity, and many
other aspects in relation with soil. Ignoring soil structure or viewing it as "static" can lead to poor
predictions of soil properties and might significantly affect the soil management.( Logsdon et al.,
2013)
2.4.4 Calcined Cow Bone Ash (CCBA)
Bone ash usually obtained by crushing animal bones. Olutaiwo and Yekini, (2018) posited that
the 20% usage of CBA in partial replacement of cement in concrete production gives additional
15
environmental benefits, as it provides an alternate and effective solution to the disposal of cow
bone wastes.
Cow bone ash is a material that is obtained from the calcination of cow bones. It is rich in
calcium and phosphorus, which are beneficial for plant growth. Cow bone ash can be used as a
fertilizer to provide essential nutrients to plants, especially for crops that require higher levels of
calcium and phosphorus. Additionally, it can also be used in the production of activated carbon,
ceramics, and as a source of calcium in various industrial processes. Cow bone ash has a long
history of use in various cultures and industries. It has been utilized for centuries in agriculture as
a natural fertilizer due to its high calcium and phosphorus content. In addition, cow bone ash has
been used in the production of ceramics, where it acts as a flux to lower the melting point of clay
and enhance the strength of the final product. Its use in activated carbon production is also well-
documented, where it serves as a precursor material for creating porous carbon structures with
high adsorption capabilities.
Cow bone ash is primarily composed of calcium phosphate, which is the main component of
bones. It also contains trace amounts of other minerals, such as calcium carbonate, magnesium
carbonate, and potassium carbonate. These components contribute to the nutrient content and
beneficial properties of cow bone ash.
2.4.5 Calcined Cow Bone Ash as a Soil Stabilizer
Calcind Cow Bone ash is grey-white powdery ash acquired from the burning (calcination) of
bones. Normal calcined cow bone ash consists of about 55.82% calcium oxide, 42.39%
phosphorus pentoxide, and 1.79% water [S. Mussi,2020]. It is essentially made out of calcium
phosphate. Calcined Cow Bone ash is made from cow bones. Calcination is a high-temperature
heating process within the sight of environmental oxygen. The final result being unadulterated
16
bone mineral, a compound identified with hydroxyapatite. Any utilization of calcined cow bone
ash in sand and clay stabilization will be represented by the physical and chemical composition
of the ash. Calcined bone ash at a temperature of 1100°C contains the accompanying oxides:
CaO (55.25%), P2O5 (41.65%), MgO (1.40%), CO2 (0.43%), SiO2 (0.09%), FeO (0.08%) and
AlO (0.06%). When bones are burned (calcinations), a white powdery residue known as cow
born ash (CBA) is left behind. P2O3 and CaO2 in the form of calcium phosphate Ca2(PO4)2 or
modified hydroxyapatite (Ca2(PO4)2OH) make up the majority of the ash's chemical makeup
(Ayininuola & Sogunro, 2013). Calcium oxide and phosphorus pent oxide are present in amounts
of 32.1% and 28.8%, respectively. Bone is calcined at a temperature of around 1100°C, cooled,
ground, and sieved through a 325-mesh screen to produce bone ash. Bovine bones may also be
used to make cow bone ash by burning them at 100°C for 6–12 hours, and then putting them in a
furnace with a temperature setting of 1000°C. A calcium phosphate mineral called
hydroxyapatite makes up the leftover material or residue (Milburn & Parsons, 2004). Lateritic
soil is used to build roads in this tropical region of the globe. Most tropical highways utilize it as
the subgrade, while low-cost roads with low to medium traffic use it as the foundation.
Additionally, they are used as construction materials in Nigeria's rural regions for plastering and
block molding.
2.4.6 Calcined Cow bone ash properties
i. It is rich in calcium and phosphorus, which are essential nutrients for plant growth.
ii. It can be used as a fertilizer to improve soil fertility and promote healthy plant
development.
iii. Cow bone ash also has high heat resistance, making it suitable for use in ceramics and
pottery.
17
iv. It can be used in the production of activated carbon, where its porous structure allows for
effective adsorption of contaminants.
v. Cow bone ash has a wide range of uses.
vi. It can be used as a natural fertilizer to provide essential nutrients to plants.
vii. It is also used in the production of ceramics, where it acts as a flux to lower the melting
point of clay.
viii. Additionally, cow bone ash is utilized in the production of activated carbon, which is
used for water and air purification.
ix. Its high calcium and phosphorus content make it valuable in various industrial processes
as well.
2.5 Utilization of Agricultural Waste
Agricultural waste materials, such as rice husk ash and sugarcane bagasse ash, have garnered
attention for their potential to improve soil properties. Little and Hills (2007) emphasized the
2.5.1 Waste Utilization
The use of calcined cow bone in soil stabilization provides a sustain enable way to utilize organic
waste material. Cow bones are a byproduct of the meat industry and can be repurposed to
enhance soil properties instead of being discarded, contributing to waste reduction and
environmental sustainability.
2.5.2 Strength Improvement: Adding calcined cow bone to lateritic soil can enhance its
strength and load-bearing capacity. This is crucial for applications like road construction,
foundations, and embankments, where the soil needs to withstand significant loads without
undergoing excessive deformation.
18
2.6 Research Gaps and Significance
The investigation into the effects of calcined cow bone on the physical and geotechnical
properties of stabilized laterite soil for road pavement construction holds substantial significance
due to its potential to address existing research gaps and contribute to sustainable construction
practices. This section outlines the research gaps identified and highlights the significance of
filling these gaps through the proposed study.
2.6.2 Microstructure analysis: is a branch of materials science and engineering that involves
studying the structure of materials at the microscopic level. It focuses on the arrangement,
distribution, and characteristics of the constituents, phases, and defects within a material.
Microstructure analysis is essential for understanding how a material's properties and behavior
are influenced by its internal structure. This analysis plays a crucial role in fields such as
metallurgy, ceramics, polymers, composites, and more.
2.6.3 Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM): Use SEM to examine the microstructure of the
stabilized soil. This can reveal changes in particle arrangement, the presence of new phases, and
interactions between calcined cow bone and soil particles.
2.6.4 Precautions of SEM analysis
Handle the samples with care to avoid damage or contamination. Maintain a clean environment
to prevent the introduction of unwanted particles. Follow proper safety protocols, such as
wearing appropriate personal protective equipment. Use the correct voltage and beam current
settings to prevent sample damage or instrument malfunction.
2.6.5 X-ray Diffraction (XRD): Conduct XRD analysis to identify any mineralogical the
interaction between calcined cow bone and soil minerals.
19
2.7 Summary of Previous Literatures
Lateritic soils have been the most broadly known and utilized construction material in building
and road construction. In tropical parts of the world, lateritic soils are utilized as a road making
material and they form the structure of subgrade of most tropical roads. Moreso, in rural regions
of Nigeria, they are utilized as building material for plastering and moulding of bricks (Taiwo &
Adeboye, 2020) Lateritic soils are characterized as sustainable building and construction
materials that fix current problems without jeopardizing people's ability to address their own
issues satisfactorily in the future (Taiwo & Adeboye,2020). Structures built of earth materials are
the most widely recognized moderate accommodation since earth materials are readily accessible
anyplace on the planet (Meriani, 2014).
The American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) states the following as the reasons for
soil stabilization: increasing the strength of existing soil to enhance its load-bearing capacity,
improving soil permeability and enhancing the resistance of soil to weathering process and
traffic utilization etc. (Obianyo, 2020).
Soil stabilization is the process of changing some of the soil properties by chemical or
mechanical process. This is done to produce soil with improved and desired engineering
properties (Makusa, 2014).
Soil stabilization can likewise be viewed as the alteration of soils to improve their physical
properties. Stabilization can build the shear strength of a soil or potentially control the
shrinkswell properties of a soil, thereby improving the load bearing capacity of a sub-grade to
support pavements and foundations (Hostler, 2015).
Soil stabilization accomplishes various goals that are significant in acquiring a dependable
structure from locally accessible earth materials and these include; better mechanical qualities,
20
better attachment between particles which decrease the porosity and changes in volume because
of moisture changes, improved protection from wind, erosion and rain. Soil stabilization
techniques include mechanical, physical and chemical stabilization (Sugawara & Nikaido, 2014).
Availability and cost have affected the options of construction and building material generally. In
most non-industrial nations, owning a house is generally troublesome because of significant
expense of construction materials and to solve this threat, better approaches of producing
building materials from locally accessible materials effortlessly should be investigated
(Sugawara & Nikaido, 2014).Lateritic soil comprises of high plastic clay; soil plasticity may
cause cracks and damage on structural foundations, pavement, roadway or any other construction
projects. It is in this way significant to comprehend the actions of lateritic soil and subsequently
sort out the strategy for soil stabilization (Mohd Yunus, et al 2015). Recycling or utilizing solid
waste generated by most Agro-based and manufacturing industries is extremely rewarding.
Concerns about massive waste generation, resource preservation, and material costs have
heightened interest in solid waste reuse (Cr istelo, et al., 2012). Material. Recovery from the
conversion of agricultural and industrial wastes into useful materials not only benefits the
environment, but it may also help to preserve natural resources. As a result, it is not surprising
that research into the effective utilization of various types of solid waste has received increased
attention in recent decades. Studies have also shown the recent use of egg shells which are also
rich in calcium, as soil stabilizers (Alobile, et al., 2020).
Aziz, & Mukri, (2016) investigated how to decide the best percentage of geopolymer to use to
boost the compaction parameter of lateritic soil. They discovered that a lateritic soil mix with
15% geopolymer provided the best value of dry density and moisture content of soil with heavy
and regular effort. Bone ash is the white, powdery ash that results from the calcination (burning)
21
of bones. Calcium phosphate is the main component. Tricalcium phosphate in the form of
hydroxyapatite Ca5(OH)(PO4)3 is contained in bone ash. The special cellular structure of bones,
which is preserved by calcination, is one of the most significant properties of bone ash. Bone ash
is non-wetting, chemically inert, free of organic matter, and has a high heat transfer resistance.
(Sefiu , 2018)
22
CHAPTER THREE
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This chapter outlines the materials and methodology employed in the study, both in the field and
practical settings as well as in laboratory experiments. The selections of materials, experimental
procedures, are described in detail to ensure the study's reliability and accuracy.
3.1 Materials
3.1.1 Lateritic soil
Lateritic soil is widely available and abundant in Nigeria, and it is also employed in many
geotechnical engineering works. The lateritic soil was extracted from a depth of 1.5m below the
ground surface. The sample was collected from Federal Polytechnic Offa, Kwara state, Nigeria.
3.1.2 Calcined cow bone
Calcined cow bone was obtained from meat processing facilities (Owode market, Offa, Kwara
State). The bone was undergo a calcination process (At the Science Laboratory Technology
Department, The Federal Polytechnic Offa) to remove organic components, resulting in a
calcined material with a distinct composition. Microstructure analysis was conducted to
determine the composition of the calcined cow bone, including calcium carbonate content and
phosphorus levels.
3.1.5 Water
The water used in this work was sourced from a bore hole located within the Federal Polytechnic
Offa, Kwara State. The physical examination of the water to be must shows that the water is
clean, free from impurities and fit for drinking as recommended by the standard BS EN 1008
(2012). Also it must satisfy ASTM C1602-12 requirement of water for use in concrete mixture.
23
3.2 Test
Geotechnical analysis involves studying the mechanical and physical properties of soils to
understand how they behave under different conditions. When using calcined cow bone ash to
stabilize lateritic soil, some of the geotechnical aspects to consider include:
The following tests; natural moisture content, sieve analysis, specific gravity, Atterberg limit,
compaction, CBR.
3.2.1 Natural Moisture Content Test
The moisture content test was utilized to determine the amount of water in the lateritic soil
sample to its oven dry mass. The moisture content in a soil represents the different properties of
soil for example permeability, compaction, particle size and so on. Percentage moisture content
was ascertained as explained in ASTM D 2216 - Standard Test Method for Laboratory
Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil, Rock, and Soil Aggregate Mixtures.
Moisture content of some soils is used to establish the tie between soil properties and behavior.
Fine-grained soils consistency relies more on its moisture content and is also a means of
expressing phase relationships of air, water, and solids in a specified mass of soil. To carry out
this test, the moisture can and cover number will be recorded. The mass of unfilled, clean, and
dry moisture can with its cover (MC) was weighed and recorded. Wet soil was put in the
moisture can and the cover fastened. The mass of the moisture can (presently containing the wet
soil) with the cover (MCMS) was determined and recorded. The cover was taken out and the
moisture can (containing the wet soil) was placed in the drying oven set at a temperature of 105
°C. The oven was left overnight and then the moisture can will be removed from the oven. The
cover on the moisture can cautiously remove and safely replaced with glove and will be
permitted to cool to room temperature. The mass of the moisture can and cover (containing the
24
dry soil) (MCDS) was determined and recorded then water moisture content of the laterite was
then determined.
3.2.2 Sieve Analysis
This test was determines the particle size distribution of soil from the coarse sand size down to
fine clay size. The data from particle size distribution test is used to determine suitability of soil
for road construction, air field etc. In this research, a known mass of material, the amount being
dictated by the biggest size of aggregate, was placed on the top of a stack of sieves (the top sieve
had the biggest screen aperture and the screen aperture sizes reduced with each sieve down to the
base sieve which had the smallest aperture size screen for the kind of material determined) and
shaken by mechanical means for a while. Materials held on every one of the sieve will be
weighed. The combined technique necessitated that each sieve starting at the top be set in a
formerly weighed pan (known as the tare weight), weighed, the next sieve's contents will be
added to the pan, and the total weighed. This was repeated until all sieves and the base pan
equally added and weighed.
3.2.3 Specific gravity test
Specific gravity of soil is the ratio of the weight of soil in air of a given volume at a standard
temperature to the weight in air of an equal volume of distilled water at the same stated
temperature. To carry out this test, the density bottle along with the stopper, are both dried and
cooled in the desiccator and then weighed to the nearest 0.001g (W 1). The soil sample, which had
been dried, is transferred to the density bottle directly from the desiccator in which it was cooled.
The bottles and contents together with the stopper are weighed to the nearest 0.001g (W 2). The
soil is covered with air-free distilled water from the glass wash bottle and left for a period of
10minutes for soaking. Water is added to fill the bottle to about half. Entrapped air is removed
25
by heating the density bottle on a water bath or a sand bath. The bottle is kept without the stopper
in a vacuum desiccator for about 10minut until there is no further loss of air. The soil in the
density bottle is gently stirred with a clean glass rod, and adhering particles carefully washed off
from the rod with some drops of distilled water until no more soil particles are lost. The process
is repeated till no more air bubbles are observed in the soil-water mixture. The constant
temperature in the bottle is observed and recorded. The dry soil in the density bottle is inserted
and weighed (W3). The bottle is emptied, cleaned thoroughly and the density bottle is filled with
distilled water at the same temperature. The dry soil is again inserted in the bottle to wiped dry
and weighed (W4)
Density of Materials
Specific Gravity=
Density of Water
3.2.4 Atterberg Limits Test
The Atterberg Limits test was conducted to ascertain the plastic and liquid limits of fine grained
soil. The test was conducted as stated in ASTM D 4318 - Standard Test Method for Liquid Limit
(LL), Plastic Limit (PL), and Plasticity Index (PI) of Soils. The Atterberg limits are dependent on
the soil moisture. The PL is the water content, in percent, at which a soil can no longer be
deformed by rolling into 3.2 mm (1/8 in.) diameter threads without disintegrating. The liquid
limit (LL) on the other hand is the moisture content that characterizes the point at which a soil
changes from a plastic to a viscous fluid state. The shrinkage limit is the moisture content which
characterizes where the soil volume won't diminish further if the moisture content is decreased.
The Plasticity index (PI) is the measure of the plasticity of a soil. It is the size of the scope of
water contents at which the soil displays plastic properties. Soil descriptions dependent on PI
include: Non plastic (PI=0), slightly plastic (PI 17). Soils with a high PI was in general be clay,
those with a lower PI are oftentimes silt while those with a PI of zero (nonplastic) was in general
26
have almost no silt/clay. Different soil engineering properties have been related to the liquid and
plastic limits, and these Atterberg limits are additionally used to group a finegrained soil
according to the Unified Soil Classification System or AASHTO system.
Plastic limit determination:
Soil sample weighing 20g was taken from the material passing the 425μm test sieve and then
mixed with water till it became homogenous and plastic to be shaped to ball. The ball of soil was
rolled on a glass plate until the thread cracks at approximately 3mm diameter. Therefore, the
moisture contents were determined.
3.2.5 Compaction Test
Compaction test is used in determining the optimal moisture content at which a soil will achieve
its maximum dry density. That is to study the moisture-density relationship of compacted
lateritic soil. To carry out this test, air-dried lateritic soil sample of known weight passing
through No. 4 sieve was compacted at known moisture content in a cylindrical mould of standard
dimensions using a compactive effort of specific weight and frequency. Specimens are prepared
so that the estimated moisture content is recorded. The moisture content is varied for at least two
percent each and the moisture content increment not exceeding four percent. The process is
repeated for various moisture contents and the dry densities are determined for each. The
graphical relationship of the dry density to moisture content is then plotted to create a
compaction curve. The maximum dry density (MDD) is the peak point of the curve and its
corresponding moisture content which is also known as the optimal moisture content (OMC)
3.2.6 CBR Test
California Bearing Ratio (CBR) value is the resistance to a penetration of 2.5 mm of a standard
cylindrical plunger of 50 mm diameter expressed as a percentage of the known resistance of the
27
plunger to 2.5 mm in penetration in crushed aggregate (taken as 13.2 kN). The strength of a
subgrade, sub base and base course materials for road construction is expressed in terms of their
CBR value. To carry out this test, a known mass of material passed through 20mm sieve and
retained on 4.75mm sieve is mixed thoroughly with water (OMC recorded). The equipment is
shown in Plate. 8. The extension collar and the base plate is fixed to the mould, the spacer disc
inserted over the base, and filter paper placed over the spacer disc. The mix is compacted in at
least three layers, each layer given 55 blows with a 6.5kg rammer and the collar is removed then
excess soil trimmed out afterwards. After compacting, the mould is turned upside down then the
base plate and spacer disc is removed. The mould plus compacted soil is weighed to determine
the dry density. Next, the stress and strain dial gauge is set to zero, and the mould assembly with
surcharge weight placed on the penetration test machine, but in no case in excess of 4kg so that
full contact of the piston on the sample is established. Load on the piston is applied so that the
penetration rate is about 1.25mm/min. Load readings at penetration of 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0,
4.0, 5.0, 7.5, 8.0mm observed and recoded. Mould is detached from the loading equipment and
about 20 to 50grams of soil from the top layer used to determine the moisture content. CBR
values are usually calculated for penetration of 2.5mm and 5mm respectively.
3.2.7 Microstructure Analysis:
Microstructure analysis involves examining the microscopic properties of materials to
understand their structure and behavior at a smaller scale. In this context, it would involve
studying the interaction between the calcined cow bone ash and the lateritic soil:
(Scanning Electron Microscopy) SEM, X Ray Diffration (XRD), X Ray Florecent (XRF) and
Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) analysis included.
28
3.3 Method
The cow bone was wash to remove (diets and other impurities) and air dry for about two weeks.
The dried cow bone was calcined at a temperature of 800 0C for 1hr 45minutes (following the
recommendation in an electric furnace. The calcined cow bone was grounded to fine powder and
sieve through sieve No. 40 (with 0.425 mm sieve opening). The resulting calcined cow bone ash
(CBA) was keep in an airtight container to prevent moisture gain and any form of contamination.
The oxide compositions was determine using X Ray Diffration (XRD), X Ray Florecent (XRF),
Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR),Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM). Index
properties including specific gravity (G), particle size distribution, Atterberg’s limits (Liquid
limit, LL and Plastic Limit, PL),Compaction, Califonia Bearing Ratio (CBR) of the soil samples
was determine according to Brithish Standard, ASTM D 422, and ASTM D 4318, respectively.
The index properties results was use to classify the soil according to American Association of
State Highway and Transport Officials (AASHTO) and Unified Soil Classification System
(USCS) classification systems. Geotechnical properties such as compaction properties (optimum
moisture content, OMC and maximum dry density, MDD), California bearing ratio (CBR) of the
soil samples was determine. The soil samples was compact according to the Bristhish Standard
1377 method. Soil sample was compact into a CBR mould in five layers, applying 55 blows of a
6.5 kg rammer to each layer. The OMC and MDD of the compact soil sample were determined.
The CBR of the soil samples was determine according to Bristhish Standard 1377, respectively.
Samples use to determine the CBR was remold using the corresponding OMC and compact in
five layers as explained earlier. A fixed, 4% of Calcined Cow Bone (based on the optimum
obtained and varying percentages (0, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20%) of CCBA by weight of dry soil was add
to the soil sample and the aforementioned properties determined.
29
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Structure and Composition of Samples
The cow bone used in this study was obtained from abattoir at Owode market, Offa, Kwara
State. The cow bone was calcined at 800ºC using Muffle Furnace. The chemical compositions of
bone ash used for the study was shown in table 4.1 below. The mineralogical compositions of
the lateritic soil samples used for this research were analysed using X-ray Diffraction (XRD)
test. The XRD test was carried out by using the Rigaku Miniflex 600 XRD machine with range
10–70 at a rate of 2 degrees/min and Cu K radiation. The chemical compositions of bone ash
were obtained using Thermo Scientific X-ray Fluorescence (XRF) Epsilon Spectrometer. XRF
analysis was done using the standard method with Montana soil SRM 2710 as a Thermo Fisher
Scientific standard reference material. Thermo Scientific Fourier-transform infrared
spectroscopy (FTIR) Nicolet is 5 Spectrometer was used in the characterization of the bone ash.
The morphology and chemical composition of the samples was obtained using the Evo/LS10
ZEISS Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM).
30
Table 4.1: Chemical composition (XRF) of Calcined cow bone ash (800oC)
Element Element Element Atomic Weight
Number Symbol Name Conc. Conc.
20 Ca Calcium 58.65 65.65
15 P Phosphorus 31.06 26.87
12 Mg Magnesium 3.34 2.14
11 Na Sodium 2.62 1.78
13 Al Aluminium 1.65 1.24
14 Si Silicon 1.38 1.09
16 S Sulfur 0.69 0.62
17 Cl Chlorine 0.47 0.46
22 Ti Titanium 0.15 0.16
19 K Potassium 0.00 0.00
26 Fe Iron 0.00 0.00
The chemical composition of the bone ash used for the study is shown in Tables 4.1. The result
shows that the major constituent of bone ash is calcium with the 58.65% amount of atomic
concentration and 65.65% of weight concentration.
31
Figure 4.1: EDS microanalysis of bone ash
The result of EDS analysis on the bone ash in Figure 4.1 shows that calcium is the major
constituent, which explains the improved strength obtained as a result of the pozzolanic reactions
that took place when bone ash was mixed with lateritic soil and water. The calcium oxide present
in bone ash reacts with water to form calcium hydroxide: {CaO (s) + H2O (l) → Ca (OH)2 (s)}.
32
Figure 4.2: SEM micrograph of cow bone ash (800ºC calcined)
The Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) of the cow bone ash is shown in figure 4.2. The
morphology indicated the presence of spongy-like materials due to the presence of oxides of
phosphorus in the CBA. The cow-bone ash was observed to be crystalline. The CBA's surface
morphology indicates a significant distribution of well-developed porous and rough surface with
cracks as seen in figure 4.2. The light colored particles of bone ash are due to the presence of
CaO. The cow bone ash SEM showed irregularly shaped fluorapatite particles with different
sizes.
33
Figure 4.3: XRD patterns of cow bone ash (800ºC calcined)
The phase composition of the cow bone ash (CBA) presented by mineralogical analysis X-ray
diffractograms are shown in Figure 4.3. From the XRD patterns, fluorapatite is the predominant
mineral present in cow bone ash. Fluorapatite is a phosphate mineral with the formula
Ca5(PO4)3F (calcium fluorophosphate). Fluorapatite is a hard crystalline solid. It is highly
resistant to both mechanical and chemical weathering resulting in its durability. Fluorapatite is
harder and more acid resistant than the enamel's hydroxyapatite and carbonated hydroxyapatite.
With fluorapatite being able to resist pH levels down to 4.5 compared to 5.5 for hydroxyapatite.
(pH 7 is neutral, the lower the pH the more acidic).
34
Figure 4.4: FTIR spectra of cow bone ash (800ºC calcined)
Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) identifies chemical bonds in a molecule by
producing an infrared absorption spectrum. The spectra produce a profile of the CBA, a
distinctive molecular fingerprint that are used to screen and scan CBA as shown in figure 4.4.
FTIR spectroscopy of CBA indicated that is fluorapatite, with a diagnostic peak at 1435.7cm -1,
mainly indicating replacement of F by OH, and a minor peak at 424.9cm -1, showing that some Cl
has been replaced by OH. The main vibrational bonds in the apatite samples were characterized
by the FTIR transmittance spectrum, further identifying the starting material as fluorapatite.
35
Table 4.2: Natural moisture content of soil sample
Sample A B C
Weight of Empty Container(M1) (g) 8 8 8
Weight of Wet soil + Container(M2) (g) 58 58 58
Weight of Dry Soil + Container(M3) (g) 47.45 42.48 46.50
Mass of water (M2-M3) (g) 10.55 15.52 11.50
Moisture Content (%) 22.2 36.5 24.7
Average Moisture Content (%) 27.8
The natural moisture content test value was 27.8% which shows that the laterite soil samples had
high natural moisture content and would definitely retain water.
36
Table 4.3: Particle size distribution
Sieve Mass of Mass of each Mass of % Cumulative %
Diameter sieve M1 (g) sieve + Soil Soil (g) % retained

Retained Passing
(mm) retained (M2)
(g)
19.00 - - - - - 100
13.20 449 490 41 2.73 2.73 97.27
12.50 631 648 19 1.27 4.0 96.00
10.00 623 707 84 5.60 9.6 90.40
9.50 543 561 18 1.20 10.8 89.20
6.30 536 767 231 15.40 26.2 75.80
4.70 473 619 138 9.20 35.4 64.60
2.36 546 865 319 21.70 56.67 43.33
0.3 382 592 210 14.0 70.67 29.33
0.063 374 769 395 26.33 97.00 3.00
Pan 45 3.00 100.00 0
37
Particle size distribution
100
90
80
Cummulative % passing
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Particle size (mm)
Figure 4.5: Particle size distribution
The result from the sieve analysis is as shown in Figure 4.5 above. The sieve analysis (particle
size distribution) and classification for the lateritic soil sample used in this research were
determined using British standards. Based on the size of particles that are more ascendant in the
soil, soils are generally classified as gravel, sand, silt or clay. Classification based on BS 1377:
Part 2: 1990: indicated that the particle size distribution curve observed in Figure 4.5 was that of
silt soil.
38
Table 4.3: Specific Gravity of soil sample
Mass of Empty bottle, M1 (g) 353
Mass of bottle +dry Soil, M2 (g) 1257
Mass of bottle +Soil +Water, M3 (g) 403
Mass of bottle +Soil +Water filled up to brim, M4 (g) 1289
Specific gravity, Gs 2.77
The specific gravity value was 2.77 which show that the lateritic soil sample has a good amount
of clay mineral because clay has higher specific gravity as compared to sand soil.
Table 4.4: Specific Gravity of Cow Bone Ash (CBA)

Mass of Empty bottle, M1 (g) 353
Mass of bottle + CBA, M2 (g) 1257
Mass of bottle + CBA +Water, M3 (g) 403
Mass of bottle + CBA +Water filled up to brim, M4 (g) 1265
Specific gravity, Gs 1.19
39
Liquid Limit test for Poly sample with different percentage of replacement
Liquid Limit @0%

12
10
Moisture content (%)
8 LL = 50.5%
6
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
No of Blows
Figure 4.6: Liquid limit at 0% replacement of CBA
Liquid Limit @4%

12
10
4
LL = 40.3%
2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
No of Blows
40
Liquid Limit @12%

50
40
30
20
LL= 40.05%
10
0
20 25 30 35
No of blows
41
Liquid Limit @16%
30
20
LL= 38.4%
10
0
22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
No of Blows
Liquid Limit @20%

50
40
30
20 LL= 36.2%
10
0
20 25 30 35
No of Blows
42
Table 4.6: Atterberg Limit Test
% Replacement 0% 4% 8% 12% 16% 20%
Liquid Limit Test 50 40.3 40.17 40.05 38.4 36.2
Plastic Limit Test 23.4 25.1 24.5 23.8 23.2 22.7
Plastic Index 26.6 15.2 15.67 16.25 15.2 13.5
Atterberg Limit Test

60
50
40
Liquid Limit Test
30 Plastic Limit Test
Plastic Index
20
10
0
0% 4% 8% 12% 16% 20%
% replacement
Figure 4.12: Atterberg limit test
Effect of cow bone ash on the Atterberg limits behavior of lateritic soil sample is presented in
Figure 4.6. The liquid limits of lateritic soil sample decreasing while plastic limit increases with
increase in cow bone ash to 8% addition content respectively. The plasticity index of the sample
reduced as the CBA contents increases. The soil sample in its natural state has plasticity index
43
value less than 11% show the sample as silt materials. The sample was classified according to
AASHTO (1986) as A-7-5.
Table 4.7: Dry density
% Replacement 0% 4% 8% 12% 16% 20%
Weight of Empty Container(M1) (g) 2800 2800 2800 2800 2800 2800
Weight of Sample + Mould (M2) (g) 5000 4800 4600 4400 4200 4000
Weight of Mould (g) 125 125 125 125 125 125
Weight of Sample (M3) (g) 2200 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200
Dry Density (g/cm3) 1.93 1.62 1.65 1.55 1.30 1.04
Table 4.8: Moisture content
% Replacement 0% 4% 8% 12% 16% 20%
Weight of Empty Container(W1) (g) 7 7 7 10 10 14
Weight of Wet soil + Container(W2) (g) 21 19 24 26 17 25
Weight of Dry Soil + Container(W3) (g) 19 17 22 24 15 23
Weight of Dry Soil Only(W3-W1) (g) 12 10 15 14 5 9
Moisture Loss(W2-W1) (g) 14 12 17 16 7 11
Moisture Content (%) 16.52 17.58 14.50 15.37 13.75 14.92
Table 4.9: Compaction test
44
% Replacement Maximum Dry Density Optimum Moisture
Content
0% 1.93 16.52
4% 1.62 17.58
8% 1.65 14.50
12% 1.55 15.37
16% 1.30 23.75
20% 1.04 14.92
45
Compaction Test
2.5
Maximum Dry Density (g/cm3)
1.5
0.5
0
16.52 17.58 14.5 15.37 23.75 14.92
Optimum Moisture Content (%)
Figure 4.13: Compaction test
Figure 4.7 indicate the result of compaction test. The maximum dry density (MDD) and optimum
moisture content (OMC) of soil sample decreases beyond the natural sample with the addition of
cow bone ash with respect to addition contents. Peak value of 1.93g/m 3 for MDD was observed
for stabilized soil sample at 0% cow bone ash content. Further decrease in MDD could be caused
by coating of the sample by the additive which led to formation of large particles with larger
voids and density. Addition of CBA also led to general decrease in values of OMC. This
decrease may be due to self-desiccation whereby all available water was used and thereby
leading to low hydration.
46
Table 4.10: of CBR @ 0% Unsoaked
Top Base
Penetration Dial Load(kN) Dial Load(KN)

(mm)
0.5 20 0.42 30 0.64
1.0 40 0.85 58 1.23
1.5 61 1.29 75 1.59
2.0 72 1.53 90 1.91
2.5 90 1.91 112 2.37
3.0 115 2.44 146 2.97
3.5 135 2.86 163 3.46
4.0 160 3.39 182 3.86
4.5 180 3.82 200 4.24
5.0 210 4.45 212 4.49
5.5 240 5.09 240 5.09
6.0 260 5.51 280 5.94
6.5 282 5.98 311 6.59
7.0 311 6.59 330 6.99
7.5 318 6.74 352 7.46
8.0 330 6.99 385 8.16
Corrected load (kN) Corrected CBR (%)
47
Penetratio Top Base Top Base
n (mm)
2.5 1.91 2.37 2.5 14.43 17.90
5.0 4.45 4.49 5.0 22.29 22.49
CBR @ 0% Unsoaked
9
5
Load (kN)
Top
4
Base
3
Series6
2
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Penetration (mm)
Figure 4.14: California Bearing Ratio of unsoaked soil at 0% of CBA
CBR value @ 2.5mm = 16.17
@5.0mm = 22.39
48
Top Base

(mm)
0.5 22 0.42 35 0.74
1.0 43 0.91 62 1.31
1.5 63 1.34 84 1.78
2.0 84 1.78 110 2.33
2.5 122 2.59 120 2.54
3.0 130 2.76 150 3.18
3.5 150 3.18 170 3.60
4.0 180 3.82 192 4.07
4.5 211 4.47 230 4.88
5.0 220 4.66 244 5.17
5.5 250 5.30 265 5.62
6.0 270 5.72 280 5.94
6.5 300 6.36 310 6.57
7.0 315 6.68 330 6.99
7.5 330 6.99 350 7.42
8.0 350 7.42 370 7.84
49
n (mm)
2.5 2.59 2.54 2.5 19.56 19.18
5.0 4.66 5.17 5.0 23.35 25.90
CBR @ 4% Unsoaked
9
5
Load (kN)
Top
Base
4
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Penetration (mm)
@5.0mm = 24.63
50
Top Base

(mm)
0.5 24 0.51 39 0.83
1.0 52 1.10 68 1.44
1.5 63 1.34 89 1.89
2.0 76 1.61 114 2.42
2.5 117 2.48 152 3.22
3.0 137 2.90 173 3.67
3.5 158 3.35 199 4.22
4.0 181 3.84 242 5.13
4.5 206 4.37 301 6.38
5.0 228 4.83 333 7.06
5.5 253 5.36 342 7.25
6.0 268 5.68 350 7.42
6.5 299 6.34 360 7.63
7.0 310 6.57 374 7.93
7.5 319 6.76 385 8.16
8.0 332 7.04 394 8.35
51
n (mm)
2.5 2.48 3.22 2.5 18.73 24.32
5.0 4.83 7.06 5.0 24.19 35.37
CBR @ 8% Unsoaked
9
8
7
6
5
Load (kN)
Top
4 Base
3
2
1
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Penetration (mm)
@5.0mm = 29.78
52
Top Base

(mm)
0.5 21 0.45 27 0.57
1.0 58 1.23 52 1.10
1.5 76 1.6 78 1.65
2.0 95 2.01 90 1.91
2.5 114 2.42 120 2.54
3.0 150 3.18 140 2.97
3.5 175 3.71 159 3.37
4.0 190 4.03 170 3.61
4.5 215 4.56 213 4.52
5.0 230 4.88 242 5.13
5.5 260 5.51 275 5.83
6.0 280 5.94 300 6.36
6.5 317 6.72 320 6.78
7.0 340 7.21 335 7.10
7.5 350 7.42 360 7.63
8.0 370 7.84 380 8.06
53
n (mm)
2.5 2.42 2.54 2.5 18.28 19.18
5.0 4.88 5.13 5.0 24.45 25.70
CBR @ 12% Unsoaked

9
5
Load (kN)
Top
Base
4
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Penetration (mm)
@5.0mm = 25.08
54
Top Base

(mm)
0.5 19 0.40 25 0.53
1.0 39 0.83 52 1.10
1.5 58 1.23 70 1.48
2.0 79 1.68 93 1.97
2.5 89 1.89 115 2.44
3.0 112 2.37 125 2.65
3.5 135 2.86 170 3.60
4.0 148 3.14 192 4.07
4.5 172 3.65 215 4.56
5.0 205 4.35 242 5.13
5.5 230 4.88 273 5.79
6.0 270 5.72 295 6.25
6.5 290 6.15 310 6.57
7.0 300 6.36 335 7.10
7.5 315 6.68 370 7.84
8.0 340 7.21 375 7.95
55
n (mm)
2.5 1.89 2.44 2.5 14.27 18.43
5.0 4.35 5.13 5.0 21.79 25.70
CBR @ 16% Unsoaked

9
5
Load (kN)
Top
Base
4
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Penetration (mm)
@5.0mm = 23.75
56
Top Base

(mm)
0.5 18 0.38 25 0.53
1.0 39 0.83 58 1.23
1.5 60 1.27 75 1.59
2.0 71 1.51 91 1.93
2.5 93 1.97 117 2.48
3.0 115 2.44 135 2.86
2.5 140 2.97 168 3.56
4.0 172 3.65 192 4.07
4.5 194 4.11 220 4.66
5.0 211 4.47 255 5.41
5.5 235 4.98 275 5.83
6.0 260 5.51 301 6.38
6.5 290 6.15 315 6.68
7.0 310 6.57 330 6.99
7.5 320 6.78 345 7.31
8.0 340 7.21 370 7.84
57
n (mm)
2.5 1.97 2.48 2.5 14.88 18.73
5.0 4.47 5.41 5.0 22.39 27.10
CBR @ 20% Unsoaked

9
5
Load (kN)
Top
Base
4
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Penetration (mm)
@5.0mm = 24.75
Table 4.16: of CBR @ 0% Soaked
Top Base
58
(mm)
0.5 22 0.47 35 0.74
1.0 43 0.91 60 1.27
1.5 63 1.34 78 1.65
2.0 75 1.59 95 2.01
2.5 95 2.01 115 2.44
3.0 118 2.50 149 3.16
3.5 138 2.93 166 3.52
4.0 164 3.48 185 3.92
4.5 183 3.88 203 4.30
5.0 214 4.54 215 4.56
5.5 245 5.19 243 5.15
6.0 263 5.58 283 5.99
6.5 288 6.04 314 6.66
7.0 314 6.66 333 7.06
7.5 400 8.48 355 7.53
8.0 335 7.10 388 8.23
59
n (mm)
2.5 2.01 2.44 2.5 15.18 18.43
5.0 4.54 4.56 5.0 22.85 22.85
CBR @ 0% Soaked
9
5
Load (kN)
Top
Base
4
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Penetration (mm)
Figure 4.20: California Bearing Ratio of soaked soil at 0% of CBA
@5.0mm = 22.85
60
Top Base

(mm)
0.5 22 0.47 35 0.74
1.0 43 0.91 62 1.31
1.5 63 1.34 84 1.78
2.0 84 1.78 110 2.33
2.5 122 2.59 120 2.54
3.0 130 2.76 150 3.18
3.5 150 3.18 170 3.60
4.0 180 3.82 192 4.07
4.5 211 4.47 230 4.88
5.0 220 4.66 244 5.17
5.5 250 5.30 265 5.62
6.0 270 5.72 280 5.94
6.5 300 6.36 310 6.57
7.0 315 6.68 330 6.99
7.5 330 6.99 350 7.42
8.0 350 7.42 370 7.84
61
n (mm)
2.5 2.65 2.63 2.5 19.02 19.86
5.0 4.71 5.22 5.0 25.05 26.15
CBR @ 4% Soaked
9
5
Load (kN)
Top
Base
4
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Penetration (mm)
@5.0mm = 25.60
62
Top Base

(mm)
0.5 25 0.53 40 0.85
1.0 54 1.15 70 1.48
1.5 65 1.38 90 1.91
2.0 77 1.63 115 2.44
2.5 120 2.54 155 3.29
3.0 139 2.95 175 3.71
3.5 160 3.39 201 4.26
4.0 183 3.88 244 5.17
4.5 208 4.41 304 6.45
5.0 221 4.69 335 7.10
5.5 254 5.38 344 7.29
6.0 255 5.41 352 7.46
6.5 300 6.36 363 7.69
7.0 313 6.64 378 8.01
7.5 320 6.78 387 8.20
8.0 334 7.08 395 8.37
63
n (mm)
2.5 2.54 3.29 2.5 19.18 24.85
5.0 4.69 7.10 5.0 23.49 35.57
CBR @ 8% Soaked
9
5
Load (kN)
Top
Base
4
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Penetration (mm)
@5.0mm = 29.53
64
Top Base

(mm)
0.5 23 0.49 29 0.62
1.0 60 1.27 55 1.17
1.5 78 1.65 80 1.69
2.0 98 2.08 92 1.95
2.5 116 2.46 122 2.59
3.0 153 3.24 143 3.03
3.5 176 3.73 160 3.39
4.0 192 4.07 172 3.65
4.5 217 4.60 215 4.56
5.0 233 4.94 245 5.19
5.5 263 5.58 277 5.87
6.0 284 6.02 302 6.40
6.5 319 6.76 322 6.83
7.0 342 7.25 337 7.14
7.5 353 7.48 362 7.67
8.0 372 7.89 382 8.09
65
n (mm)
2.5 2.46 2.59 2.5 18.58 19.56
5.0 4.94 5.19 5.0 24.75 26.00
CBR @ 12% Soaked

9
5
Load (kN)
Top
Base
4
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Penetration (mm)
@5.0mm = 25.38
66
Top Base

(mm)
0.5 20 0.42 27 0.57
1.0 40 0.85 53 1.12
1.5 60 1.27 72 1.53
2.0 80 1.69 95 2.01
2.5 90 1.91 117 2.48
3.0 115 2.44 127 2.69
3.5 137 2.90 173 3.67
4.0 150 3.18 195 4.13
4.5 175 3.71 218 4.62
5.0 207 4.39 245 5.19
5.5 233 4.94 276 5.85
6.0 273 5.79 297 6.29
6.5 300 6.36 313 6.64
7.0 307 6.72 337 7.14
7.5 318 6.74 373 7.91
8.0 343 7.27 378 8.01
67
n (mm)
2.5 1.91 2.48 2.5 8.99 18.73
5.0 4.39 5.19 5.0 21.99 26.00
CBR @ 16% Soaked

9
5
Load (kN)
Top
Base
4
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Penetration (mm)
@5.0mm = 23.99
Table 4.21: CBR @ 20% Soaked
68
Top Base

(mm)
0.5 20 0.42 27 0.57
1.0 40 0.85 60 1.27
1.5 62 1.31 78 1.65
2.0 73 1.55 94 1.99
2.5 95 2.01 118 2.50
3.0 117 2.48 137 2.90
3.5 144 3.05 170 3.60
4.0 175 3.71 195 4.13
4.5 196 4.16 223 4.73
5.0 214 4.54 258 5.47
5.5 238 5.05 279 5.92
6.0 263 5.58 303 6.42
6.5 292 6.19 218 6.74
7.0 313 6.64 333 7.06
7.5 323 6.85 378 7.38
8.0 342 7.25 372 7.89
69
n (mm)
2.5 2.01 2.50 2.5 15.18 18.88
5.0 4.54 5.47 5.0 22.75 27.41
CBR @ 20% Soaked

9
5
Load (kN)
Top
Base
4
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Penetration (mm)
@5.0mm = 25.08
The results of the soaked and unsoaked California bearing ratio (CBR) for the lateritic soils at
varying percentages of CBA addition are as shown in from Figures 4.8 to 4.19. Figures show that
70
increasing addition of CBA leads to increasing CBR for the soils. The study reveals that the CBR
value which is an indication of the strength of the soil use as a subgrade or base course material
was higher for the lateritic soil. The lateritic soil has peak CBR value of 35.37 at 8% CBA
addition. Figure reveals that increasing addition of CBA leads to increasing strength (CBA) of
the unsoaked and soaked lateritic soils. Peak CBR values for the unsoaked soils were obtained at
8% CBA addition. The result also revealed that increasing CBR value could be attributed to the
reaction between the high calcium content present in CBA and the fine particles of the soil
thereby aiding stabilization. The increasing CBR values of the soil on addition of CBA could
also be because of the formation of cementitious compounds between the CBA and calcium
compounds present in the soil samples while the decrease may be associated with excess CBA
addition beyond the peak CBR values.
71
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Conclusion
In conclusion, the interpretation of results from the application of particle size analysis,
Atterberg limits of soils, and compaction test, along with chemical analysis of Cow Bone Ash
(CBA), led to the following evidence. Lateritic soil samples were classified as silt by the Unified
Soil Classification System. We were able to ascertain the impact of CBA on the California
bearing ratio of the soils due to the geotechnical characteristics of the lateritic soils utilised in
this investigation. For lateritic soils, the maximum amount of CBA that would allow for an
increase in soaked CBR value was revealed to be 35.57 at 8%, whereas unsoaked CBR value was
27.10 at 20%. Cow bone ash addition at 0%, 4%, 8%, 12%, 16%, and 20% with the soil samples
show that the OMC laterite soil was correspondingly reduced. These variations range
respectively from 14.50% to 23.75%. Also, addition of CBA (4%-8%) to both soil samples
resulted in an improvement in maximum dry density values (MDD). The study concluded that
calcined cow bone ash (CBA) is a good additive in Stabilization of Lateritic soils provided that
the 8% additive threshold of CBA is not exceeded.
5.2 Recommendations
Laterite materials are inexpensive and, in developing nations, can be strengthened by combining
them with other locally sourced stabilizing materials due to their energy efficiency. This study
suggests that the stabilization of lateritic soil samples using cow bone ash (CBA) be investigated
for potential application in road construction. The following things should be taken into
consideration:
1. Studying the best materials and techniques for stabilizing laterite soil in order to apply it
to roads in this area should take a lot of work.
72
2. Roadway builders should use appropriate test protocols that accurately assess these
stabilizing materials.
3. The suitability of lateritic soil for the development of additional roadways should be
appropriately evaluated.
73
REFERENCES
Ayininuola, and A. O. Sogunro A.O,(2013) “Bone ash impact on soil shear strength”
International Journal of Environmental and Ecological Engineering, vol. 7 no. 11, pp.
772-776, 2013.
Aziz, and M. Mukri, (2016) “The effect of Geopolymer to the compaction parameter of laterite
soil,” Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, vol. 24 no. 5, pp. 1588-1593, 2016.
Meriani S, (2014) “Available technologies for local building materials.”
Obianyo I. I, Onwualu A. P, and A. B. O. Soboyejo, “Mechanical behaviour of lateritic soil
stabilized with bone ash and hydrated lime for sustainable building applications,” Case
Stud. Constr. Mater., vol. 12, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.cscm.2020.e00331.
Makusa G. P, 2014 “STATE OF THE ART REVIEW SOIL STABILIZATION METHODS
AND MATERIALS IN ENGINEERING PRACTICE.”
Hostler F. S, 2015 “Soil Stabilization,” Ind. Eng. Chem., vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 27–33, 1964,
doi:10.1021/ie50652a005.
Mohd Yunus N. Z., Y. C. Yung, N. T. Wei, N. Abdullah, N. Mashros, and M. A. Abdul Kadir,
“Shear strength behaviour of canlite-treated laterite soil,” J. Teknol., vol. 72, no. 3, pp.
91–97, 2015, doi: 10.11113/jt.v72.4019.
Sefiu Y. O, O.(2018), “Utilizing Cow Bone Ash (CBA) as Partial Replacement for Cement in
Highway Rigid Pavement Construction,” Int. J. Civ. Eng., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 13–19, 2018,
doi: 10.14445/23488352/ijce-v5i2p104
Sugawara C E. and H. Nikaido, “Properties of AdeABC and AdeIJK efflux systems of
Acinetobacter baumannii compared with those of the AcrAB-TolC system of Escherichia
coli,” Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., vol. 58, no. 12, pp. 7250–7257, 2014, doi:
10.1128/AAC.03728-14. “Properties of AdeABC and AdeIJK efflux systems of
74
Acinetobacter baumannii compared with those of the AcrAB-TolC system of Escherichia
coli,” Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., vol. 58, no. 12, pp. 7250–7257, 2014, doi:
10.1128/AAC.03728-14.
Cristelo, S. Glendinning, T. Miranda, D. Oliveira, and R. Silva, (2012) “Soil stabilization using
alkaline activation of fly ash for self-compacting rammed earth construction,”
Construction and Building Materials, vol. 36, pp. 727-735, 2012
Diamond, and E. B. Kinter, (1965) “Mechanisms of soil-lime stabilization,” Highway Research
Record, vol. 92, pp. 83- 102, 1965.
Fadele, and O. Ata, (2018) “Water absorption properties of sawdust lignin stabilised compressed
laterite bricks,” Case Studies in Construction Materials, vol. 9, pp. 1-10, 2018. 28
Fakorede, C. M. Ikumapayi, A. A. Adeniji, and A. Adanikin, (2019) “The Effect of Curing
Media on Compressive Strength of Microbial Laterite Concrete,” American Scientific
Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences, vol. 61 no. 1, pp. 92-102,
2019.
Hamdi, N., & Srasra, E. (2013), Hydraulic conductivity of compacted clay soils used as landfill
liners for an acid waste, Waste Management, 33(1), 60-66.
Ikumapayi, and E. O. Fakorede, (2019) “Quality Assurance of Available Portland Cements in
Nigeria,” International Journal of World Policy and Development Studies, vol. 5 no. 6,
pp. 53-63, 2019.
75
APPENDIX
Plate 1: Cow bone Ash
Plate 2: Muffle Furnace for calcined
76
Plate 3: Calcine of cow bone
Plate 4: Laterite soil sample
77
Plate 5: Conducting of sieve analysis test using vibration machine
Plate 6: Atterberg limit test
78
Plate 7: Compaction test
Plate 8: California bearing ratio test
79
File Location:C:\Users\Public\Documents\Agilent\MicroLab\Results\RED COVER 800C_2023-10-
04T1341-21.a2r
Sample ID:RED COVER 800C Method

Name:C:\Users\Public\Documents\Agilent\MicroLa
b\Methods\2021 Recent.a2m
Sample Scans:32 User:CSL
Background Scans:32 Date/Time:10/04/2023 1:39:51 PM
Resolution:8 Range:4000 - 400
System Status:Good Apodization:Happ-Genzel
Peak Number Wavenumber (cm-1) Intensity
1 424.91651 59.82767
2 465.91723 46.38129
3 495.73593 37.45160
4 559.10068 39.70163
5 600.10139 45.24888
6 872.19705 80.17030
7 1017.56323 19.31504
8 1412.66104 85.91635
9 1453.66176 85.63411
80
Path: C:\WallPaper\4-10-2023\800°C Solution.rmrsln Solution
Quantitative analysis report
General information
Analysis date 2023-10-04 12:04:34 Measurement start time 2023-10-04 11:52:12

Analyst Administrator Operator Administrator
Sample name 800°C Comment
Measured data name C:\WallPaper\4-10-2023\800°C_20231004_112533_G05_S05_… Memo
Multiple Profile
800° C_20231004_112533_G05_S05_
M05
Intensity, cps
Fluorapatite
Hatrurite, syn
Lime, syn
Quartz
Calcite, syn
2θ, °
Plot of results
Table of results
Dataset / Weight Fraction, wt% Value, Unit Fluorapatite Hatrurite, syn Lime, syn Quartz Calcite, syn
800°C_20231004_112533_G05 0 61(3) 19.1(16) 8.3(12) 8.8(8) 2.6(2)
_…
Path: C:\WallPaper\4-10-2023\800°C
Solution.rmrsln Solution
800°C_20231004_112533_G05_S05_M05-Evaluation report (800°C_20231004_112533_G05_S05_M05)
General information
Analysis date 2023-10-04 12:04:34 Measurement start time 2023-10-04 11:52:12

Analys
t Administrator Operator Administrator
Sample name 800°C Comment
Measured data C:\WallPaper\4-10-2023\800°C_20231004_112533_G05_S05_…
name Memo
Peak list
Asymmetr
No. 2θ, ° d, Å Height, cps FWHM, ° Int. I., cps° Int. W., ° y Decay(ηL/mL) Decay(ηH/mH) Size, Å
1 26.21(2) 3.397(3) 339(53) 0.19(3) 98(6) 0.29(6) 1.4(5) 0.8(4) 1.1(7) 453(79)
2 29.29(3) 3.047(3) 183(32) 0.65(5) 168(11) 0.9(2) 1.9(3) 0.0(3) 1.5(3) 132(10)
3 32.116(8) 2.7848(7) 1078(112) 0.16(2) 313(31) 0.29(6) 1.5(4) 1.2(2) 1.4(2) 548(84)
4 32.521(15) 2.7510(12) 528(60) 0.26(4) 254(35) 0.48(12) 1.5(4) 1.2(2) 1.4(2) 330(55)
5 33.24(2) 2.6930(18) 786(116) 0.18(3) 246(8) 0.31(6) 1.1(6) 1.2(3) 1.2(4) 471(80)
6 34.368(17) 2.6073(12) 261(50) 0.12(3) 63(6) 0.24(7) 0.7(6) 1.5(6) 1.5(5) 744(219)
7 40.18(3) 2.2426(13) 244(45) 0.22(6) 97(7) 0.40(10) 4(4) 1.2(4) 1.3(8) 398(108)
8 42.259(9) 2.1369(5) 150(30) 0.10(3) 19(4) 0.12(5) 5(8) 0.0(9) 1.5(6) 887(256)
9 46.986(13) 1.9323(5) 288(47) 0.21(4) 73(8) 0.25(7) 0.8(8) 0.8(4) 0.0(6) 440(87)
10 48.406(8) 1.8789(3) 180(35) 0.08(3) 23(4) 0.13(5) 3(5) 0.8(7) 1.5(7) 1124(455)
11 49.727(16) 1.8320(6) 351(67) 0.13(3) 89(7) 0.25(7) 0.7(5) 1.3(5) 1.5(3) 722(153)
12 50.736(14) 1.7979(5) 228(46) 0.10(3) 44(8) 0.19(7) 0.7(5) 1.3(5) 1.5(3) 961(335)
13 51.58(9) 1.771(3) 76(15) 0.68(19) 103(16) 1.4(5) 0.7(5) 1.3(5) 1.5(3) 136(38)
14 64.38(6) 1.4460(11) 102(25) 0.24(9) 40(6) 0.40(16) 2(3) 1.2(9) 0.9(14) 411(155)
15 65.36(5) 1.4265(9) 97(18) 0.23(8) 36(6) 0.37(13) 2.0(12) 0.8(8) 1.5(11) 436(162)
800°C_20231004_112533_G05_S05_M05-Evaluation report (Solution) Page 1 of 3

Path: C:\WallPaper\4-10-2023\800°C
Path: C:\WallPaper\4-10-2023\800°C Solution.rmrsln
Solution.rmrsln Solution
Solution
No. 2θ, ° Phase Name Chemical Formula Card No Norm. I. Profile Type
1 26.21(2) Hatrurite, syn: 7 1 -3 Ca3 ( Si O4 ) O 04-009-5560 31.27 Split pseudo-Voigt Distributi… Degree of Orientation
2 29.29(3) Fluorapatite: 3 -2 0,Hatrurite, s… ( Ca9.8 Fe0.2 ) ( P O… 01-073-9797,04-00… 53.69 Split pseudo-Voigt

3 32.116(8) Fluorapatite: 3 -2 1,Hatrurite, s… ( Ca9.8 Fe0.2 ) ( P O… 01-073-9797,04-00… 100.00 Split pseudo-Voigt - -
4 32.521(15) Hatrurite, syn: 12 0 -1,Lime, sy… Ca3 ( Si O4 ) O,Ca O 04-009-5560,00-00… 81.27 Split pseudo-Voigt
5 33.24(2) Fluorapatite: 3 0 0,Hatrurite, sy… ( Ca9.8 Fe0.2 ) ( P O… 01-073-9797,04-00… 78.64 Split pseudo-Voigt - -
8 42.259(9) Hatrurite, syn: 3 3 3 Ca3 ( Si O4 ) O 04-009-5560 5.97 Split pseudo-Voigt
12 50.736(14) Fluorapatite: 2 3 1,Hatrurite, sy… ( Ca9.8 Fe0.2 ) ( P O… 01-073-9797,04-00… 13.96 Split pseudo-Voigt
13 51.58(9) Fluorapatite: 4 -5 0,Hatrurite, s… ( Ca9.8 Fe0.2 ) ( P O… 01-073-9797,04-00… 32.88 Split pseudo-Voigt - -
14 64.38(6) Fluorapatite: 0 3 4,Hatrurite, sy… ( Ca9.8 Fe0.2 ) ( P O… 01-073-9797,04-00… 12.93 Split pseudo-Voigt
No. 2θ, ° Ring Factor β Cluster

- -
1 26.21(2) - -
2 29.29(3) - -
- -
3 32.116(8) - -
4 32.521(15) - -
- -
5 33.24(2) - -
6 34.368(17) - -
- -
7 40.18(3) - -
8 42.259(9) - -
- -
9 46.986(13) - -
10 48.406(8) - -
- -
11 49.727(16) - -
12 50.736(14) - -
- -
13 51.58(9) - -
14 64.38(6) - -
- -
15 65.36(5) - -
Qualitative Analysis Results
Phase name Formula Figure of merit Phase reg. detail Space Group DB Card Number
Fluorapatite ( Ca9.8 Fe0.2 ) ( P O4 )6 ( F1.… 0.755 S/M(PDF-4 Minerals 2024) 11 : P1121/m 01-073-9797
Hatrurite, syn Ca3 ( Si O4 ) O 1.234 S/M(PDF-4 Minerals 2024) 8 : C1m1 04-009-5560
Lime, syn Ca O 2.867 Import(PDF-4 Minerals 2024) 225 : Fm-3m 00-004-0777
Quartz Si O2 3.013 Import(PDF-4 Minerals 2024) 154 : P3221 00-001-0649
Calcite, syn Ca C O3 1.823 Import(PDF-4 Minerals 2024) 167 : R-3c:H 00-005-0586

Abiola &amp; Ore Project

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Abiola &amp; Ore Project

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GEOTECHINCAL AND MICROSTRUCTURE ANALYSIS OF 8000C OF

CALCINED COW BONE ASH ON STABILIZED LATERITIC SOIL

(The Federal Polytechnic Offa Borrow Pit)

TAJUDEEN SAKIRU OLAMIDE CE/HND/F21/1578

ADELEKE OREOLUWA CE/HND/F21/1538

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING,

FEDERAL POLYTECHNIC OFFA, KWARA STATE, P.M.B 420 OFFA,

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF

HIGHER NATIONAL DIPLOMA (HND) IN CIVIL ENGINEERING

ADELEKE OREOLUWA with matriculation numbers CE/HND/F21/1578 and

CE/HND/F21/1538, of the Department of Civil Engineering, School of Natural Resources and

Engineering Technology, Federal Polytechnic, Offa.

This project is dedicated to Almighty GOD

outcomes and enriching the overall experience.

necessary resources, facilities, and encouragement, creating an environment conducive to

research and innovation.

constant source of motivation.

Thank you all for being an integral part of this journey.

List of tables viii

1.1 Background of study 1

1.2 Statement of Problem 2

1.3 Aim and Objectives of the study 3

1.4 Significant of the study 3

1.5 Justification of the Study 4

1.6 Scope of the Study 5

2.1 Soil Stabilization Techniques 6

2.1.1 Methods of Soil Stabilization 6

2.1.4 Mechanical Stabilization 7

2.1.5 Physical Stabilization 8

2.1.6 Chemical Stabilization 8

2.1.7 Challenges and Environmental Implications 8

2.1.8 Importance of Interaction Understanding 9

2.2 Unconventional Stabilizing Agents 9

2.2.1 Rationale for Unconventional Stabilizers 9

2.3 Components of lateritic soil 10

2.3.1 Uses of lateritic soil 10

2.3.2 Properties of lateritic soil 10

2.3.3 Previous Works on Stabilization of Lateritic soil 11

2.4 Soil Structure 12

2.4.1 Type of soil structure 14

2.4.2 Improving soil structure 14

2.4.4 Calcined Cow Bone Ash (CCBA) 16

2.4.5 Calcined Cow Bone Ash as a Soil Stabilizer 17

2.4.6 Calcined Cow bone ash properties 18

2.5 Utilization of Agricultural Waste 18

2.5.1 Waste Utilization 18

2.5.2 Strength Improvement 18

2.6 Research Gaps and Significance 19

2.6.2 Microstructure analysis 19

2.6.4 Precautions of SEM analysis 19

2.6.5 X-ray Diffraction (XRD) 19

2.7 Summary of Previous Literatures 20

MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1.1 Lateritic soil 23

3.1.2 Calcined cow bone 23

3.2.1 Natural Moisture Content Test 24

3.2.2 Sieve Analysis 25

3.2.3 Specific gravity test 25

3.2.4 Atterberg Limits Test 26

3.2.5 Compaction Test 27

3.2.6 CBR Test 27

3.2.7 Microstructure Analysis 28

Table 4.2: Particle size distribution 36

Table 4.7: Dry density 41

Abiola & Ore Project

Abiola & Ore Project