SULPHONATED OIL FOR STABILISATION OF

EXPANSIVE SOILS
-International Journal of Pavement Engineering

Presented by-
Raj Ranjan Gupta(2021PGCEGE12)
Vivek Kumar(2021PGCEGE14)
1
CONTENTS

1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Material Properties
4. Methods
5. Result
6. Conclusion
2
ABSTRACT

 The efficiency of a commercially manufactured sulphonated oil (SO) agent in

treating a highly expansive soil.
 A total of six SO to water mass concentrations, i.e. 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25
and 2.5%, were examined.
 The test program included swell– load oedometer, unconfined compressive
strength.
 The reduction in swelling potential and swelling pressure was dependent on
SO concentration.

3
INTRODUCTION-
 Expansive soils continue to be a major problem in pavement construction
practice.
 Such soils often require modification – a process referred to as soil
stabilization.
 Chemical stabilisation by means of traditional cementitious agents.
 Their application often presents a series of concerning disadvantages.
 In this context, non-traditional chemical stabilisers such as polymer-based
additives, sulphonated oils, lignin derivatives, resins, silicates and calcium
chloride geopolymers.

4
 Sulphonated oils also referred to as sulphonated hydrocarbons.
 Obtained by treating fatty oils/acids with concentrated sulphuric acid.
 A typical sulphonated oil molecule, commonly expressed as R–(SO2)OH–.

5
MATERIAL PROPERTIES
 Physical and mechanical properties of the expansive soil.
Properties Value
Specific gravity, Gs 2.76
Clay (<2 μm) (%) 41.15
Silt (2–75 μm) (%) 42.75
liquid limit, LL (%) 85.30
Plastic limit, PL (%) 26.05
Plasticity index, PI (%) 59.25
Shrinkage limit, SL (%) 10.34
Maximum dry unit weight, γdmax 14.95
(kn/m3)
Optimum moisture content, ωopt (%) 23.40
Unconfined compressive strength, qu 422
(kPa) 6
Cont..

 Chemical composition of the expansive soil.

Properties Values

Acidity, pH 8.40

EC (dS/m) 10.25

Na+ (meq/l) 142.00

K+ (meq/l) 0.34

Ca2+ (meq/l) 31.00

Mg2+ (meq/l) 6.15

Cl− (meq/l) 49.00

7
Cont..
Properties of the sulphonated oil

Properties Values
Specific gravity, Gs 1.05
Molecular weight, M (gr/mol) 380
Physical state Highly viscous liquid
Appearance Reddish Brown
Odour Slightly pungent
Solubility in water (at 20 °C) 100%
Flammability Non-flammable
Vapour pressure (mmHg) 20
Freezing point (°C) −10
Acidity, pH 3.10
Chemical formulation R–(So2)oH– 8
METHODS
1. Sample Preparation
 Standard Proctor compaction
tests were carried out on
natural soil and various soil–SO
mixtures.
 A choice of the sample’s initial
placement condition on the
dry side of Proctor optimum is
undesirable.
 The wet of optimum condition
will give rise to relatively
lower swelling behaviour.
 All samples were prepared by
static compaction at their
respective optimum moisture
content and maximum dry unit 9
weight values
2. Swell load test
 Samples were subjected to
a series of swell–load
oedometer tests
 During the first stage,
flooded with water and
allowed to swell under a
low nominal overburden
stress of σ′0 = 1 kPa.
 During the second stage,
the swollen sample was
gradually loaded to arrest
the built-up swelling
strain.

10
Cont..
3. Unconfined compressive
strength test
 Unconfined compressive
strength (UCS) tests were
carried out in different
samples of SO
concentration.
 Samples were loaded at a
rate of 1 mm/min.
 Axial stress and its
corresponding axial strain
were recorded to a point
in which maximum axial
stress required for sample
failure
11
RESULT
 At t = 1440 min, for instance, the natural soil displayed a swelling strain of
εsw(t) = 22.15%, while the samples stabilised with 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25 and
2.5% SO resulted in εsw(t) = 14.50, 13.45, 9.00, 7.00, 6.45 and 5.30%.

12
Cont..
 SO-stabilisation altered the compression strain– effective stress locus, resulting in a
major downward shift over.

13
Cont..
 Variations of swelling pressure Ps against swelling potential Sp for the tested
samples.

14
Cont..

 Stress–strain curves obtained from UCS tests carried out on natural soil and
various SO-stabilised samples

15
CONCLUSION

For SO concentrations equal or less than 1.25%, the stress–strain

relationship obtained from UCS tests dis- played a rather strong
direct relationship between SO con- centration and both strength and
stiffness of the stabilised soil. However, 2.5% SO adversely affected
the stress–strain relationship, resulting in a rather significant
decrease in both the strength and stiffness compared to that of lower
SO concentrations, while still maintaining a slight advan- tage over
natural soil.

16
Thank You

17