MANAGEMENT OF MUNICIPAL SOLID

WASTE ASH IN SOIL STABILIZATION

Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements
for the degree of
MASTER OF ENGINEERING (CIVIL)

(With Construction Engineering and Management Subjects)

By

SHAIKH MOHAMMED WASIM MOHAMMED NASIM

Roll No. ANJUMAN 18

Under the guidance of

Dr. R. B. MAGAR

Department of Civil Engineering,

Anjuman-I-Islam's Kalsekar Technical Campus,
Sector- 16, Khandagaon, New Panvel- 410206
University of Mumbai
(2015-2016)
 Dissertation Report
On
MANAGEMENT OF MUNICIPAL SOLID
WASTE ASH IN SOIL STABILIZATION
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

Of the degree of

Master of Engineering (Civil)

(With Construction Engineering and Management Subjects)

by

Shaikh Mohammed Wasim Mohammed Nasim

Roll No. Anjuman 18

Guide

Dr. R. B. Magar

Department of Civil Engineering

Anjuman-I-Islam's Kalsekar Technical Campus
Sector- 16, Khandagaon, New Panvel- 410206
University of Mumbai
(2015-2016)
 ANJUMAN-I-ISLAM’S KALSEKAR TECHNICAL CAMPUS

Sector-16, Khandagaon, New Panvel-410206

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify dissertation report entitled “Management of Municipal Solid Waste Ash in
Soil Stabilization” is a bonafide work of Shaikh Mohammed Wasim Mohammed Nasim
(Roll No. Anjuman 18) submitted to the University of Mumbai in partial fulfilment of the
requirements for the award of the degree of Master of Engineering in Civil Engineering with
specialization in Construction Engineering and Management course conducted by University
of Mumbai in Anjuman-I-Islam’s Kalsekar Technical Campus, New Panvel.

Dr. R. B. Magar

(Guide)

Dr. R. B. Magar Dr. Abdul Razak Honnutagi

(Prof. and Head of Department) (Director)

i
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that dissertation report entitled “Management of Municipal Solid Waste Ash
in Soil Stabilization” is the own work of Shaikh Mohammed Wasim Mohammed Nasim
(Roll No. Anjuman 18) in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of
Master of Engineering in Civil Engineering with specialization in Construction Engineering
and Management, in the Department of Civil Engineering of Anjuman-I-Islam’s Kalsekar
Technical Campus, New Panvel under my supervision during the period of 2014-2016.

Dr. R. B. Magar

Professor and Head

Department of Civil Engineering

Anjuman-I-Islam’s Kalsekar Technical Campus.

ii
 Declaration

I declare that this written submission entitled “Management of Municipal Solid Waste
Ash in Soil Stabilization” represents my ideas in my own words and where others' ideas or
words have been included, I have adequately cited and referenced the original sources. I also
declare that I have adhered to all principles of academic honesty and integrity and have not
misrepresented or fabricated or falsified any data/fact in my submission. I understand that any
violation of the above will be cause for disciplinary action by the Institute and can also evoke
penal action from the sources which have thus not been properly cited or from whom proper
permission has not been taken when needed.

Shaikh Mohammed Wasim

Roll No. Anjuman 18

Date:

Place: New Panvel

iii
 Dissertation Approval for M.E

This dissertation entitled Management of Municipal Solid Waste Ash in Soil Stabilization by
Shaikh Mohammed Wasim Mohammed Nasim is approved for the degree of Master of
Engineering in Civil Engineering with specialization in Construction Engineering and
Management Subjects.

Examiners

1.____________________________

2.____________________________

Date:

Place: New Panvel

iv
 Acknowledgement

I consider myself lucky to work under guidance of such talented and experienced people
who guided me all through the completion of my dissertation.

I express my deep sense of gratitude to my guide Dr. R. B. Magar, Professor and Head
of Civil Engineering Department, and Prof. Umesh Jadhav, Assistant Professor for his generous
assistance, vast knowledge, experience, views & suggestions and for giving me their gracious
support. I owe a lot to them for this invaluable guidance in spite of their busy schedule.

I am grateful to Dr. Abdul Razak Honnutagi, Director for his support and co-operation
and for allowing me to pursue my Master’s Degree Programme besides permitting me to use the
laboratory infrastructure of the Institute.

I am thankful to to my course coordinator Prof. Fauwaz Parkar, for his support at

various stages.

Last but not the least my thanks also goes to other staff members of Civil Engineering
Department, Anjuman-I-Islam’s Kalsekar Technical Campus, Panvel, library staff for their
assistance useful views and tips.

I also take this opportunity to thank my beloved parents and brothers for their support and
encouragement at every stage of my life.

Date: Shaikh Mohammed Wasim

v
 ABSTRACT

This report presents the analysis of municipal waste ash in soil stabilization for different
engineering properties. As solid waste disposal being a major environmental problem, because of
unviability of lands for disposal. Due to fast growth in construction industry, land is not available
as per construction requirements. For dealing with these problems, solid waste can be
incinerating to reduce its volume by 80%, and further can be used as soil stabilization material. It
enhances the soil properties and also solves the problem of solid waste disposal in city. This
work deals with estimation of engineering properties of soil i.e. shear test, maximum dry density
vs. optimum moisture content and permeability. Experimental work shows that use of 10%
MSW ash by weight of soil can improve the properties at larger extends. The foundation of a
building or road is an essential part for effective transmission of load to the subsoil present
beneath it. The quality of soil has large impact on type of structure and its design. The expansive
soils are examples of weak soils, which encountered in foundation engineering for bridges,
highways, buildings, embankments etc. Expansive soil undergoes volume changes when they
come in contact with water. They show alternate swelling and shrinkage properties. It expands
during rainy season and shrinks during summer season. Solid waste term includes all those solid
and semi-solid materials that are discarded by the community.

Improper management of solid wastes causes adverse effects on the ecology which may
lead to cause possible outbreak of diseases and epidemics. Solid wastes are broadly classified in
to three group’s namely Industrial waste, Agricultural waste, and Municipal waste apart from
other categories of wastes. Soil stabilization is a procedure in which existing properties of soil
are improved by means of addition of cementing materials or chemicals. One of the more
common methods of stabilization includes the mixing of natural coarse grained soil and fine
grained soil to obtain a mixture that develops adequate internal friction and cohesion and thereby
provides a material that is workable during placement. Stabilization of soil can be carried out by
using mechanical stabilization, cementing stabilization and chemical stabilization.
Rearrangement of soil particles by some of mechanical compaction is referred as “Mechanical
Stabilization”; Today world faces a serious problem in disposing the large quantity of Municipal

vi
waste. The disposal of Municipal waste without proper attention creates impact on
environmental health. It disturbs ecosystem, causes air pollution, water pollution etc.

As solid waste disposal being a major environmental problem, as lands for disposal is not
so far available and environmental hazard is also major problem. On the other hand, due to fast
growth in population, construction’s land availability as per construction requirements is not
available, especially as Mumbai’s outskirt is marshy in nature.

The experimental work is carried out to find the effect of varying proportions of waste
materials on shear strength, compaction and permeability of soil. Pursuant to this, following
objectives are proposed in the present investigation.
1) To use municipal waste ash as a stabilizing material and to solve the problem of waste
disposal.
2) To evaluate the strength characteristics of soil for different proportions of ash in replacement
of 5%, 10%, 15% and 20%
3) To study the results of replacement and concentration on future use.
This study contributes in improvement of soil properties by using waste ash. As soil and
waste is variable material in characteristics from place to place, this experimental research work
will be applicable for particular region soil with particular type of Municipal solid waste. For
different area’s soil and different waste, we can have different Optimum percentage of waste ash
which will enhance soil properties. Use of solid waste ash as stabilizing material, is cheap as well
as eco-friendly method of soil stabilization, which will solve the waste disposal problems as well
as enhances soil properties. Different percentage of Municipal solid waste ash (MSWA) is used
as 5%, 10%, 15% and 20%, but at 10% of addition of MSWA, soil showed improved properties
like shear, permeability and compaction. It also shows that adding higher percentage doesn’t
improve but degrades the soil properties.

After experimental investigation of municipal solid waste ash, it can be concluded that
the stabilized soil is suitable for site conditions. Use of proper proportion of municipal solid
waste ash gives desirable permeability and compaction. Shear strength also increased by some
extent. Moreover, the stabilization by this technique works out to be the economical & viable
option, owing to the fact that it enhances soil engineering property. This also makes the
environment nuisance free.

vii
 Table of Content

 Certificate i
 Certificate ii
 Declaration iii
 Dissertation Approval for M. E iv
 Acknowledgement v
 Abstract vi
 Table of Content viii
 List of Figures xi
 List of Tables xii
 Abbreviation Notation and Nomenclature xiii

1 Introduction 1-12
1.1 General 1
1.2 Soil stabilization 7
1.3 Needs and advantages 7
1.4 Municipal solid waste ash 7
1.5 Constituents of MSW 8
1.6 Present Scenario of MSW in Mumbai 9
1.7 Objectives of work 11
1.8 Scope of work 12
1.9 Organisation of Dissertation 12
2 Literature Review 13-32
2.1 General 13
2.2 Overview of literature 13
2.3 Summary 32
3 Method and Methodology 33-67
3.1 General 33

viii
3.2 Mechanism of stabilization 35
3.2.1 Traditional stabilization 36
3.2.2 By product stabilization 39
3.2.3 Non-traditional stabilization 40
3.3 Soil classification 41
3.4 Guidelines for soil stabilization 42
3.5 Guidelines for stabilizer selection 43
3.5.1 Lime stabilization 44
3.5.2 Cement stabilization 45
3.5.3 fly ash stabilization 46
3.5.4 In situ stabilization 47
3.5.4.1 Deep mixing method 48
3.5.4.2 Quality control and Quality Assurance 50
3.5.4.3 Application 50
3.5.4.4 Mass stabilization 51
3.5.5 Ex situ stabilization 53
3.6 Additional test involved in stabilization selection 53
3.7 Validation of stabilization selection 54
3.7.1 Lime stabilization 54
3.7.2 Cement stabilization 54
3.8 Methods 56
3.8.1 Mechanical method of stabilization 56
3.8.2 Additive method of stabilization 56
3.9 Soil properties 57
3.9.1 Atterberg limits 57
3.9.1.1 Shrinkage limit 58
3.9.1.2 Plastic limit 58
3.9.1.3 Liquid limit 58

ix
 3.9.2 Particle size Distribution 58
3.10 Characteristic of Cohesive soil 59
3.11 Characteristic of Municipal solid waste 60
3.12 Collection and preparation of MSW ash 60
3.13 Testing on MSW ash 62
3.13.1 Vane shear test 62
3.13.2 Permeability test 63
3.13.3 Proctor compaction test 65
3.14 Summary 67
4 Observation and Conclusions 68-74
4.1 General 68
4.2 Vane shear test 68
4.3 Permeability test 69
4.4 Proctor compaction test 70
4.4.1 Maximum Dry density 70
4.4.2 Optimum Moisture Content 70
4.5 Cost Analysis 71
4.5.1 Cost Analysis of Lime stabilization 71
4.5.2 Cost Analysis of MSWA stabilization 72
4.6 Summary 73
5 Conclusion 75-76
6.1 General 75
6.2 Conclusion 75
6.3 Future scope of work 76

 References 77
 Publications 83

x
 List of Figures

Figure Title Page no.

1.6no.
(b) Deonar Dumping ground 9
1.6 (b) Disposal site location in Mumbai 9
3.2 Guidelines for stabilization of soils & base material for use in pavement 36
3.5 Decision tree for selecting stabilizers for use in subgrade soil 44
3.5.1 Lime stabilization 45
3.5.2 Cement stabilization 46
3.5.3 Flyash stabilization 47
3.5.4.1 Deep mixing 48
3.5.4.4 Mass stabilization 52
3.8.1 Effect of soil stabilization 56
3.9.1 Atterberg limits 57
3.9.2 Particle size distribution curve 59
3.12 (a) Muffle furnace for incineration of MSW 61
3.12 (b) MSW ash 61
3.13.1 Vane shear test apparatus 63
3.13.2 Permeability test apparatus 65
3.13.3 Proctor Compaction test apparatus 67
4.2 Graphical representation of Vane shear test results 69
4.3 Graphical representation of Permeability test results 69
4.4.1 Graphical representation of Proctor compaction test results (a) 70
4.4.2 Graphical representation of Proctor compaction test results (b) 71

xi
 List of Tables

Table no. Title Page no.

1.5 Chemical Composition of MSWA 8
4.1 Vane shear test 69

4.2 Permeability test 69

4.3.1 Proctor compaction test (a) 70

4.3.2 Proctor compaction test (b) 71

5.2 Cost analysis in case of lime stabilization 72

5.3 Cost analysis in case of MSWA stabilization 73

xii
 Abbreviation Notation and Nomenclature
RHA Rice Husk Ash
MSW Municipal Solid Waste
SWM Solid Waste Management
BMC Brihan Mumbai Mahanagar Palika
MoUD Ministry of Urban Development
OMC Optimum Moisture Content
MDD Maximum Dry Density
CBR California Bearing Ratio
SP Standard Proctor
WAS West African Standard
MP Modified Proctor
UCS Unconfined Compressive Strength
MPa Mega Pascal
AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
CKD Cement Kiln Dust
LKD Lime Kiln Dust
LOI Loss On Ignition
PI Plasticity Index
wP Plastic Limit
wL Liquid Limit
wS Shrinkage Limit

xiii
 Chapter 1

Introduction

1.1 General

The foundation of a building or road is an essential part for effective transmission of

load to the subsoil present beneath it. The quality of soil has large impact on type of structure
and its design. The expansive soils are examples of weak soils, which encountered in
foundation engineering for bridges, highways, buildings, embankments etc. Expansive soil
undergoes volume changes when they come in contact with water. They show alternate
swelling and shrinkage properties. It expands during rainy season and shrinks during summer
season. Solid waste term includes all those solid and semi-solid materials that are discarded
by the community. Improper management of solid wastes causes adverse effects on the
ecology which may lead to cause possible outbreak of diseases and epidemics. Solid wastes
are broadly classified in to three group’s namely Industrial waste, Agricultural waste, and
Municipal waste apart from other categories of wastes. Soil stabilization is a procedure in
which existing properties of soil are improved by means of addition of cementing materials or

1
chemicals. One of the more common methods of stabilization includes the mixing of natural
coarse grained soil and fine grained soil to obtain a mixture that develops adequate internal
friction and cohesion and thereby provides a material that is workable during placement.
Stabilization of soil can be carried out by using mechanical stabilization, cementing
stabilization and chemical stabilization. Rearrangement of soil particles by some of
mechanical compaction is referred as “Mechanical Stabilization”, use of cementing material
such as cement, lime, bitumen/asphalt etc. is added to soil is „Cementing Stabilization‟ and
use of chemicals in soil such as calcium chloride; sodium chloride etc. is “Chemical
Stabilization”. Today, world faces a serious problem in disposing the large quantity of
Municipal waste. (Kharade, 2014)
The disposal of Municipal waste without proper attention creates impact on
environmental health. It disturbs ecosystem, causes air pollution, water pollution etc. The
engineers have to take challenge for safe disposal of municipal waste. This research
undertakes use of Municipal waste in stabilizing soil, various attempts have been made to
improve the strength of soil using different chemical additives in combination with lime and
cement, but research work has to focus more on use of cheaper and locally available material.
(Kharade, 2014)
Solid waste term includes all those solid and semi-solid materials that are discarded by
the community. Improper management of solid wastes causes adverse effects on the ecology
which may lead to cause possible outbreak of diseases and epidemics. Solid wastes are
broadly classified in to three group’s namely Industrial waste, Agricultural waste, and
Municipal waste apart from other categories of wastes. In this paper previous researches are
discussed on rice husk ash waste from paddy grain and waste tyre use in geotechnical works.
Rice is the primary source of food for billion peoples across the world. In 2013 around 107
million tons of paddy produced in India. India is second largest producer of rice next to china.
One ton of rice paddy produces 220 kg rice husk. Rice husk is the shell produced during de-
husking of paddy. Rice husk being agricultural waste dumped near the mills or burnt in open
fields. Numerous problems arises from rice husk disposal such as, methane generation due to
fermentation of rice husk ash (RHA) with microorganisms, being light and fine particles
causing breathing problems, bad effect on the health are reported such as acute and chronic
effect affecting eyes, skin and upper respiratory tract and allegoric response such as nasal
catarrh, asthma and limitation of RHA because of low nutritious value, long periods required

2
for decompose are not appropriate for composting of manure. Thus, proper and safe disposal
of rice husk is again a big problem. Different ways are available in for enhancing the
engineering performances of soils are soil stabilization, soil reinforcement etc. Admixtures
like lime, cement were used traditionally for stabilization purposes. Recent studies show RHA
alone or in combination with lime or cement can be used for effective stabilization of weak
soils to a great extent. Disposal of recycling tyre poses a major problem worldwide. A lot of
research work is going on worldwide to cope up with this problem. Waste tyres have
characteristics that make them not easy to dispose, and potentially combustible. Huge
stockpiles and uncontrolled dumping of tyres, throughout the countries, is a threat to public
health and environment. One of the alternative ways of disposing of waste tyre is to use them
for geotechnical applications, due to following advantages:
(1) It will help in not only saving huge spaces occupied by waste tyre and tubes, but the
environmental health hazards will also be reduced.
(2) The consumption of natural soil will be reduced, there by rendering cost saving benefits.
(3) The various soil properties such as bearing capacity, shear strength, drainage etc. can be
improved by reinforcing it with waste tyre rubber.
(4) With the introduction of waste tyre rubber in soil its capacity to absorb and dissipate
energy will be enhanced drastically.
(5) Non-biodegradable and thus more durable.
(6) Inexpensive compared to other lightweight reinforcing materials for granular soils.
Reinforced earth technique has been gaining popularity in the field of geotechnical
engineering due to its highly versatile and flexible nature. The application of waste tyres in
various forms has been recently developed in reinforcing soil for a variety of geotechnical
applications ranging from retaining structures and earth embankments, asphalt pavement and
paving system, foundation beds and other applications. Therefore, using recycled materials,
particularly wastes tyres when mixed/combined with soil is becoming more popular due to the
shortage of natural mineral resources and increasing waste disposal costs. However, with
increasing the use of waste tyres in geotechnical applications, a need for further understanding
of the behaviour of rubber–soil mixture/combination is required. Many researchers have
investigated the use of recycled tyre products for soil stabilization, bearing capacity
improvement and for reduction of settlement. This may found to be economical treatment
methods for soils and solution will definitely found beneficial for the developing countries

3
like India where economy is the prime concern for adopting any new method or technique.
The foundation of a building or road is an essential part for effective transmission of load to
the subsoil present beneath it. The quality of soil has large impact on type of structure and its
design. The expansive soils are examples of weak soils, which encountered in foundation
engineering for bridges, highways, buildings, embankments etc. Expansive soil undergoes
volume changes when they come in contact with water. They show alternate swelling and
shrinkage properties. It expands during rainy season and shrinks during summer season.
Expansive soil covers nearly 20% of the land mass in Indian. In Maharashtra region the
expansive soils are identified by name „Black Cotton‟ soil. These soils possess weak
properties due to presence of clay minerals known as “Montmorillonite”. Typical behaviour
of soil results into failure of structure in form of settlements cracks etc. Therefore, it is
important to remove the existing weal soil and replaced it with a non-expansive soil or
improves the properties of weak soil by stabilization. (Singh and Mittal, 2014)
Soil stabilization is a procedure in which existing properties of soil are improved by
means of addition of cementing materials or chemicals. One of the more common methods of
stabilization includes the mixing of natural coarse grained soil and fine grained soil to obtain a
mixture that develops adequate internal friction and cohesion and thereby provides a material
that is workable during placement. Stabilization of soil can be carried out by using mechanical
stabilization, cementing stabilization and chemical stabilization. Rearrangement of soil
particles by some of mechanical compaction is referred as “Mechanical Stabilization”, use of
cementing material such as cement, lime, bitumen/asphalt etc. is added to soil is “Cementing
Stabilization” and use of chemicals in soil such as calcium chloride; sodium chloride etc. is
“Chemical Stabilization”. Today, world faces a serious problem in disposing the large
quantity of agricultural waste. The disposal of agricultural waste without proper attention
creates impact on environmental health. It disturbs ecosystem, causes air pollution, water
pollution etc. The engineers have to take challenge for safe disposal of agricultural waste.
This research undertakes use of agricultural waste in stabilizing black cotton soil, various
attempts have been made to improve the strength of soil using different chemical additives in
combination with lime and cement, but research work has to focus more on use of cheaper
and locally available material. Bagasse ash is a fibrous material obtained from sugar cane
plant after the extraction of sugar cane juice. Sugar factory waste bagasse is used as bio fuel
and in manufacturing of paper. Sugar industry produces 30% bagasse for each lot of crushed

4
sugar cane, when this bagasse is burnt the resultant ash is known as „Bagasse Ash‟. Bagasse
shows the presence of amorphous silica, which is an indication of pozzolanic properties,
responsible in holding the soil grains together for better shear strength. The use of bagasse ash
as stabilizing material for black cotton soil can be checked under various tests such as
standard proctor test, unconfined compression test, California bearing ratio, aterbergs limit
etc. (Kharade, 2014)
Solid waste management is one of the major environmental concerns worldwide. In
India, the scrap tyres are being generated and accumulated in large volumes causing an
increasing threat to the environment. In order to eliminate the negative effect of these
depositions and in terms of sustainable development, there is great interest in the recycling of
these non-hazardous solid wastes. The potential of using rubber from worn tyres in many civil
engineering works has been studied for more than 30 years. Applications where tyres can be
used proven to be effective in protecting the environment and conserving natural resources. In
recent times with the increase in the demand for infrastructure and feasible foundation design
in not applicable due to poor bearing capacity of ground soil stabilization has started to take a
new shape. Stabilization is process of fundamentally changing the chemical properties of soft
soils by adding binders or stabilizers, either in wet or dry conditions to increase the strength
and stiffness of the originally weak soils. With the availability of better research, materials
and equipment soil stabilization is emerging as a popular and cost-effective method for soil
improvement. With the availability of better research, materials and equipment soil
stabilization is emerging as a popular and cost-effective method for soil improvement.
In the present investigation attempt is made to stabilize black cotton soil and shedi soil. Black
cotton is collected from Vidyagiri area of Bagalkot city and shedi soil is collected from
Haliyal road of Dharwad city area with randomly distributed shredded rubber tyre chips with
5%, 10%, 15% and cement with 2% and 4% percentage. The unconfined and CBR tests were
carried out in the laboratory for different mix proportions of rubber with black cotton soil and
shedi soil. Considerable improvement is found in strength of black cotton and shedi soil for
the 5% percent mix of rubber. (Ghatge and Rakaraddi, 2014)
During the last few decades, rapid growth of population, industrialization and
urbanization have resulted in increase in environmental pollution in the form of wastes.
Wastes are re unwanted residual materials, which cannot be discharged directly or before
suitable treatment, to the atmosphere or to any receiving site. The solids, semi-solid and some

5
liquid wastes are matter of great concern and have to be utilized suitably in different
construction applications. Research is being carried out to utilized different solid wastes like
fly ash from thermal power stations, steel slags from steel industries, hospital wastes, red mud
from aluminium industries, quarry wastes etc. Research is also therefore required to be carried
out regarding utility of municipal solid wastes, which are available in huge quantities. Quite a
large amount of solid rubbish is contributed by households in the form of domestic wastes.
Some of the constituents of these wastes are groceries food scraps, vegetable remains, packing
materials, paper, remains of used coal, ash, wood, metals, plastics, ceramics, glass etc. If these
wastes are not properly disposed off, this can prove perilous and environmental hazard, such
places often become a home for rats, flies, bacteria, mosquitoes all having the potential of
causing many human diseases. The damage to the environment by the uncontrolled disposal
of solid wastes can be clearly visualized. (Ghatge and Rakaraddi, 2014)
The generation of huge quantities of MSW poses serious disposal and environmental
problems. Thus, it is imperative for a large-scale utilization of MSW and is bulk utilized in
the construction of roads. Extensive research work has also been done in India as well as
abroad and the studies have shown that MSW has a great potential for its use in road works.
However, it is not utilized properly on our roads mainly due to lack of information of the
subject. As a result, millions of tons of MSW are getting accumulated and causing serious
environmental problems. At the present time, most operating facilities in the U.S. recover the
ferrous metal fraction present in municipal waste combustor ash, which can comprise
approximately 10 to 20 percent of the total ash fraction. Only a very small fraction (less than
10 percent) of the non-ferrous fraction of the ash generated in the U.S. is recovered and
utilized. Most of this fraction is used in landfill cover applications. A small unknown fraction
is used as an aggregate substitute in road base applications. MSWA has been used as a
granular base in road construction, as a fill material, and as an embankment material in
Europe for almost two decades. Municipal waste combustor ash has also been tested for use
as an aggregate substitute in asphalt paving mixes, where it has performed in a satisfactory
manner, particularly in base or binder course applications. In this application, the ash is used
to replace the sand-size or fine aggregate portion of the mix. There are presently no known
commercial uses of municipal waste combustor ash in this application. (Ghatge and
Rakaraddi, 2014)

6
1.2 Soil Stabilization
The main requirement of soil stabilization is adequate strength and it depends on
character of soil. In case of cohesion less soils the strength could be improved by providing
confinement or by adding cohesion with a cementing or binding agent. In case of cohesive
soil, the strength could be increased by drying, making soil moisture resistant, altering the
clay electrolyte concentration, increasing cohesion with a cementing agent and adding
frictional properties.

1.3 Needs & Advantages

Soil properties vary a great deal and construction of structures depends a lot on the
bearing capacity of the soil, hence, we need to stabilize the soil which makes it easier to
predict the load bearing capacity of the soil and even improve the load bearing capacity. The
gradation of the soil is also a very important property to keep in mind while working with
soils. The soils may be well-graded which is desirable as it has less number of voids or
uniformly graded which though sounds stable but has more voids. Thus, it is better to mix
different types of soils together to improve the soil strength properties. It is very expensive to
replace the inferior soil entirely soil and hence, soil stabilization is the thing to look for in
these cases.
 It improves the strength of the soil, thus, increasing the soil bearing capacity.
 It is more economical both in terms of cost and energy to increase the bearing capacity
of the soil rather than going for deep foundation or raft foundation.
 It is also used to provide more stability to the soil in slopes or other such places.
 It helps in reducing the soil volume change due to change in temperature or moisture
content.

 Stabilization improves the workability and the durability of the soil.

1.4 Municipal solid waste (MSW)

Trash or garbage or rubbish is waste type consisting of everyday items that are
discarded by the public. "Garbage" can also refer specifically to food waste, as in a
garbage disposal; the two are sometimes collected separately consists of everyday items we

7
use and then throw away, such as product packaging, grass clippings, furniture, clothing,
bottles, food scraps, newspapers, appliances, paint, and batteries.

1.5 Constituents of Municipal Solid Waste

Municipal solid waste generally consists food waste (stale, pulp, skins of vegetables
and fruits), plastic and rubbers, metal (recyclable), paper and utensils which are reusable. The
chemical oxide composition of MSWA indicated that the total amounts of SiO2, Al2O3, and
Fe2O3 was less than 70% (minimum requirement for Class N pozzolana, classifying the ash
as class F pozzolana. MSWA contains high amounts of carbonates (calcite – 57.6%) and
quartz (14.1%) however it does not have sulphates as compared to cement. The lack of
sulphates in MSWA makes it not to pose any threat of sulphate attack when used as a
pozzolana stabilizing agent as suggested by (14). The low calcium oxide content (3.9%) of
MSWA makes it not to be self-cementing as compared to that of cement (65.41%).
Conversely the high CaCO3 content increases the bonding effect of MSWA. In addition, the
physical effect (filler effect) due to the packing characteristics of MSWA (since it is clay) will
contribute to the compressive strength if used as a stabilizing agent.

Table 1.5 shows chemical composition of Municipal solid waste, as municipal solid
content many compounds which will affect soil chemically. So for carrying out soil
stabilization different chemical composition should be known.
Table 1.5: Chemical composition of MSWA

Minerals Cement MSWA

SiO2 20.9 % 14.1%
Al2O3 4.76% 2.0%
Fe2O3 3.41% 1.6%
CaO 65.41% 3.9%
MgO 1.25% 4.4%
CaCO3 - 57.6%
SO3 2.71% -
SiO2 + Al2O3 + Fe2O3 - 17.7%

Cement and Municipal solid waste ash contains same minerals but in different
percentage. Cement contains silica in high percentage whereas municipal solid waste ash

8
contains calcium carbonate as major element. Present of these minerals in municipal solid
waste ash make it as good binder as cement which is necessary for soil stabilization.

1.6 Present scenario of MSW in Mumbai

In 2011-12, Mumbai alone accounted for 6.11% of the total waste generated daily in
India. As its waste piles, up, the land-starved city is staring at the big question.
Environmentalists believe the BMC’s current policies are in violation of MSW Rules,
2000, as the corporation allows compactor trucks to collect mixed waste and fails to penalise
buildings that do not segregate waste. In February last year, a circular issued by deputy
municipal commissioner (SWM) Prakash Patil stated that by July 2013, the corporation would
stop accepting mixed waste and issue legal notices to housing societies that fail to segregate
waste at the source. (Indian Express, 6 Feb 2014)
Fig 1.6 (a) shows scattered and mismanaged solid waste at Deonar dumping ground.
Due to improper arrangements, it’s becoming waste hump at site and creating nuisance in
surrounding.

Fig 1.6 (a): Deonar dumping ground

(Source: httpwww.mid-day.comarticlesmumbai-has-no-space-to-dump-its-garbage15898155)
Deonar dumping ground facing excess waste dumping against its capacity, which is
resulting in scattering of solid waste at dumping ground and nearby areas.
The plan has yet to be finalised. “Segregation was widely successful between 1997
and 2004, where the civic body roped to encourage composting in an effort to decentralise
waste management. But the current policy, of awarding centralised contracts to private
9
companies running compactor trucks and paying a tipping fee to private contractor (the case
in Kanjurmarg) for every tonne of waste accepted at the dump yard, reverses the previous
successful policies,” Rishi Aggarwal, a research fellow with Observer Research Foundation,
says adding that the civic body has failed to make residents a partner in solid waste
management, but has put its faith in private parties to manage waste. Questions have been
repeatedly raised over the quality of service provided by the contractors in collection and
transportation of waste. Critics say while the BMC has an elaborate system in place for
collection and transportation of waste, there are no real-time checks in place to see if the
appointed contractors are following specifications. In a major health hazard, conservancy
workers involved in collection, transportation and disposal continue to work without wearing
the prescribed rubber gloves, face masks, reflector jackets and safety shoes. (Indian Express, 6
Feb 2014)
Instead of assigning officers to inspect the work, it will be monitored from the offices
through live feeds,” says Patil. The initiative is part of the civic body’s attempt to comply
with standards set by the Ministry of Urban Development’s (MoUD) for urban local bodies to
enhance the quality of civic amenities. Apart from effective garbage collection, the civic body
will also have to ensure 80 per cent recovery of collected waste through recycling, 100 per
cent scientific disposal of municipal solid waste, 100 per cent cost recovery in SWM services
and 90 per cent efficiency in collection of SWM charges. Starting with collection, Dr Sahu
says, BMC should first provide the necessary infrastructure to encourage segregation. “If
BMC wants to increase segregation of waste, it will first have to invest in more dust bins for
Mumbai. Different dust bins for different types of waste should be provided so that residents
are publicly educated to segregate wet waste from paper, plastic, glass and metal. (Indian
Express, 6 Feb 2014)

Fig 1.6 (b) represents Solid waste disposal sites and transfer station with its location,
sources from where refuse collected. It shows inefficiency of no. of dumping ground with
respect to waste generation.

10
 Fig.1.6 (b): Disposal Site Location in Mumbai

(Source: www.mcgm.gov.in)

Mumbai’s solid waste is dumped at three dumping ground located at Deonar, Mulund
and Gorai. For dumping of refuse at these sites MCGM established two transfer station at
Mahalakshmi and Kurla for easy and feasible dumping.

1.7 Objectives of the Work

The dissertation study aims to achieve the following objectives:
1) To use municipal waste ash as a stabilizing material and to solve the problem of waste
disposal.
2) To evaluate the different characteristics of soil for different proportions of ash in
replacement of 5%, 10%, 15% and 20%
11
3) To analysis of cost of lime and MSWA stabilization.

4) To study the results of replacement and concentration on future use.

1.8 Scope of Work

This study will contribute in improvement of soil properties by using waste ash. As
soil and waste is variable material in characteristics from place to place, this experimental
research work will be applicable for particular region soil with particular type of Municipal
solid waste. For different area’s soil and different waste, we can have different Optimum
percentage of waste ash which will enhance soil properties. Use of solid waste ash as
stabilizing material, is cheap as well as eco-friendly method of soil stabilization, which will
solve the waste disposal problems as well as enhances soil properties.

1.9 Organization of Dissertation

This dissertation report comprises of following chapters. The brief contents have been
discussed as below:

 Chapter One contains the background to the study, objective of the work, scope of
the work & organization of the dissertation.
 Chapter Two contains overall review of literature on management of solid waste and
soil stabilization.
 Chapter Three comprises of research methodology & steps to achieve the Objective.
 Chapter Four includes results and cost analysis of work.
 Chapter Five deals with the conclusions, future scope and summary.

12
 Chapter 2

Review of Literature

2.1 General
Many researchers attempt to stabilize the different type of soil with use of cementious
materials or waste or as a combination; here we discuss some of works based on use of waste
Ash which used in combination with cementious material or used separately. For soil
stabilization, various materials are being used like rubber tyre, bagasse ash, industrial waste
etc.

2.2 overview of Literature

Sivapullaiah et al. (1996) presented the effect of fly ash and lime, on the index
properties of expansive soils such as liquid limits, plastic limits and free swell. The studied
soil was black cotton soil. The results showed that the index properties of this soil were
13
significantly varied by addition fly ash. It is observed that the domain of alteration depends on
the particle size distribution, free lime content and pozzolanic reactivity of the fly ash. The
effect of the coarseness of fly ash particles is to decrease the activity. Thus, fly ash can
decrease the plasticity index of the soil. The effect of the addition of fly ash is to significantly
improve the physical properties and workability of the black cotton soil.

Mirsa (1998) examined clay stabilization with Class C fly ash. Physical and chemical
properties of fly ash and compaction and strength behaviour of soils stabilized with Class C
fly ash were discussed. Examples were prepared by blending a small proportion of bentonite
with kaolinite. Furthermore, fly ash had a rapid hydration characteristic. So, higher densities
and strengths were achieved when the compaction is performed with little or no delay.
However, delayed compaction produces low densities and strength. It was observed that the
stabilization characteristics are related to the soil mineral type and plasticity. The laboratory
studies indicated that use of Class C fly ash in soil stabilization was dependent on the ash
contents, water content, compaction delay, strength development with time and curing
methodology and the type of clay mineral. Thus, these Class C fly ashes are particularly
suited for use as soil improvement agents.

Temimi et al. (1998) studied the addition of fly ash in the clay soils. Different clay-fly
ash samples were tested in order to find the effect of fly ash on the mechanical properties of
clay materials. It indicated that the inclusion of fly ash in the clay material improved the
mechanical properties of the clay, like the compressibility and the consolidation. So,
compressibility and the settlement, decreased and the consolidation of clay increased.

Puppala et al. (2001) used from fly ash and fiber reinforcement methods, to treat and
increase the strength of two expansive soils. In this regard, Physical tests such as Atterberg
limits, standard Proctor compaction and other tests like unconfined compressive strength,
shrinkage, and free swell were conducted on both raw and treated clay samples. Both methods
showed an increase in unconfined compression strength of the soils. Improvement with fly
ash decreased free swell, plasticity and linear shrinkage strains of raw soils. Fiber
reinforcement decreased the vertical shrinkage strains. Whereas, it increased the free swell
values. In general, the fly ash treatment method can be used to stabilize expansive soils, and
fibers can be used to increase the strength and decrease the shrinkage potentials of expansive
soils. In addition, the important point is that fibers alone will not provide comprehensive

14
stabilization. Another advantage of the two methods was that both stabilizers were recycled
waste products and therefore their use in soil stabilization will reduce landfilling costs.

Cokca (2001) used from high-calcium and low-calcium class C fly ashes for
stabilization of an expansive soil and evaluation of the expansive soil-lime, expansive soil-
cement, and expansive soil-fly ash systems. Lime, cement and fly ash were added to the
expansive soil at different percentages. The specimens were subjected to chemical
composition, grain size distribution, consistency limits, and free swell tests. Also, the
Specimens with fly ash were cured and after that they were subjected to free swell tests. It can
be concluded that the expansive soil can be successfully stabilized by fly ashes. Furthermore,
plasticity index, activity, and swelling potential of the samples decreased with increasing
percentage of stabilizer and curing time.

Bresson and Koch (2001) studied that Loess-derived soils of the northern Paris basin
are prone to surface structure degradation leading to erosion, flooding, and pollution.
Concomitantly, recycling of municipal solid waste (MSW) has been recognized as an
important environmental issue. The aim of this study was to test the impact of compost
application on soil surface structure degradation and on the resulting runoff and erosion
processes. Aggregates (0–30 mm) from a silty loam were mixed with MSW compost at a rate
of 15 gm/kg (dry matter). Repacked seedbeds were exposed to a 19 mm/hr simulated rainfall
for 60 min.
Morphological evolution of the soil surface was monitored using sequential
photographs. Crust and seedbed microstructures were studied after 4, 15, and 60 min of
rainfall, using thin sections from resin-impregnated replicates. Runoff was measured every
five minutes, and aliquots were sampled for sediment concentration. In control seedbeds,
surface crusts quickly developed and the whole seedbed slumped because of aggregate
coalescence through deformation in a viscous state. Compost application delayed crust
formation and prevented seedbed slumping. This, in turn, delayed runoff from 2.5 to 9.2 mm
of cumulative rainfall. Sediment concentration in the incipient runoff was decreased from
36.4 to 11 gm/l. This could be ascribed to the stabilization of the aggregate framework, which
allowed the particles detached from the top of surface aggregates to illuviate a few
millimetres deeper. In a highly unstable soil, MSW compost application was efficient in
combating soil surface structure degradation and its consequences on runoff and erosion.

15
 Nalbantoglu (2004) used Cation Exchange Capacity values to indicate the changes in
the mineralogy of the fly ash-soils mixtures and explain the reduction in the plasticity and
water absorption potential. Cation Exchange Capacity values were used to explain the effect
of the pozzolanic reaction on the particle size and the swell potential of the treated soils. The
results indicated that fly ash is effective in improving the structure and plasticity of the fly
ash-soil mixture by reducing the content of clay size particles, plasticity index and the swell
potential. However, the reduced Cation Exchange Capacity values indicated that fly ash
improvement changes in the mineralogy of the improved soils and produced the new
minerals. These pozzolanic reaction is caused the soils to become more granular and less
water absorption potential.

Kumar and Sharma (2004) presented a study of the efficacy of fly ash in improving
the engineering characteristics of expansive soils. An experimental program evaluated the
effect of the fly ash on the free swell index, swell potential, swelling pressure, plasticity,
compaction, strength, and hydraulic conductivity characteristics of expansive soil. The results
showed that the plasticity, hydraulic conductivity and swelling properties of the blends
decreased and the dry unit weight and strength increased with an increase in fly ash content.
The resistance to penetration of the mixtures increased significantly with an increase in fly
ash content for a certain water content. Excellent correlation was obtained between the
measured and predicted undrained shear strengths and the undrained cohesion of the
expansive soil blended with fly ash increased with the fly ash content.

Amu et al. (2005) studied the stabilizing of an expansive clay soil with the
combination of cement and fly ash. The samples were classified to three groups; cement
optimal mix, cement plus fly ash optimal mix and unstabilized sample. The three different
classes of sample were subjected to Maximum Dry Densities, Optimum Moisture content,
California Bearing Ratio (CBR), Unconfined Compression and Undrained Triaxial test. The
results showed that the soil sample stabilized with a mixture of cement and fly ash had better
performance with attention to maximum dry densities, optimum moisture content, bearing
capacity and shearing resistance tests. Furthermore, the addition of certain percentage of fly
ash improved the stabilizing potential of cement on an expansive clay soil.

Parsons and Kneebone (2005) quantified the level of improvement provided by Class
C fly ash and determined of the mixture deterioration with fly ash during the time. A series of

16
dynamic cone penetrometer values were obtained for treated or untreated subgrades with fly
ash. Pavements ranged in age from zero to nine years. Laboratory tests also showed that fly
ash contributed to soil strength and stiffness while plasticity and swell potential were reduced.
Use of fly ash alone for stabilization may not be sufficient to improve soil properties to
desired levels. In addition, an improved subgrade assisted to the strength of the pavement, and
may provide reductions in costs and the thickness of the asphalt section.

Misra et al. (2005) studied the laboratory evaluation of the stabilization characteristics
of clay soils blended with self-cementing class C fly ash and residual self-cementation of
ponded class C fly ash. The stabilization characteristics were evaluated with reaching to the
uniaxial compressive strength stiffness, and swelling potential. So, twelve set of mixtures of
clay soils with the percentages of kaolinite and montmorillonite, self-cementing fly ash and
appropriate amount of water were compacted and cured. Furthermore, unconfined
compression and CBR tests were used. The results showed that the optimum moisture content
changes due to the addition of fly ash. The samples rapidly gained compressive strength and
stiffness within seven days curing period, and the greatest increase occurred in one day due to
the rapid hydration reaction of fly ash. With increasing in montmorillonite content, strength of
the samples increased significantly. By increasing in fly ash content, swelling potential of
stabilized clay may be reduced. CBR values showed that the ponded class C fly ash can be a
good substitute as a base course material.

Sezer et al. (2006) presented an investigation into the stabilization of a soft clay
subgrade with a very high lime fly ash. The objective of this paper was to use very high lime
fly ash in soil stabilization without using any other activator and to investigate some strength
characteristics of fly-ash–clay mixtures. Different percentages of the soil were replaced with
fly ash. In addition, for different stabilized soil samples with fly ash at optimum water
contents, standard proctor test was conducted. The tests lasted for 3 months and the
unconfined compressive strength and shear strength parameters, cohesion and internal friction
angle, were determined. It was found that, inclusion of fly ash improved the properties of the
soil. The maximum dry density decreased and optimum moisture content increased with
increasing fly-ash content. In addition, the fly ash increased the unconfined compressive
strength and cohesion of the soil.

17
 Senol et al. (2006) presented using of self-cementing fly ashes without any other
activators for the stabilization of four different types of soft subgrades. The samples were
prepared by mixing fly ash at different contents at changeable water contents. The laboratory
tests such as index properties, compaction, unconfined compressive strength and CBR tests
were used. To developing water content–strength relationship, samples were subjected to
unconfined compression strength and California bearing ratio tests after seven days curing
time. To evaluating the impact of compaction delay, the samples were compacted two hours
later after mixing with water. The results showed that the fly ash increased both the
unconfined compressive strength, and the CBR values and can replace with soft subgrade of
highways. So, stabilizing the soft subgrade at specified water contents and minimizing
compaction delay could maximize the strength of mixtures.

Prabhakar et al. (2006) investigated the behaviour of soils mixed with fly ash to
improve the load bearing capacity of the soil. Three different types of soil and different
percentage of fly ash were used. The objectives of this investigation were reached to the
usefulness of fly ash-soil mixtures, and focused to improve the engineering properties of soil
with better load bearing capacity. This study also mentioned the cost effective of fly ash for
soil improvement and covered the compaction behaviour, settlement, California bearing ratio,
shear strength parameters and swelling characteristics. The results showed that addition of fly
ash reduced the dry density of the soil and unit weight of soil. The void ratios and porosity
changed with increasing content of fly ash in soils. The shear strength of the mixture was
improved due to the addition of fly ash and increasing of it was nonlinearly. The value of
cohesion increased by the addition of fly ash and this alteration was linear. CBR value of soil
improved by the addition of fly ash. The results indicated that the shear strength and the angle
of internal friction of soil admixed with fly ash caused a better strength. Using fly ash in soil
also reduced swelling in the soil. Even, the fly ash improved the shear strength, cohesion and
bearing capacity. So, this mixture can be used as the base materials for the roads, back filling
and etc.

Edil et al. (2006) evaluated the effectiveness of self-cementing fly ashes for
stabilization of soft fine-grained soils. California bearing ratio (CBR) and resilient modulus
tests were conducted on mixtures. Different soft fine grained soils such as inorganic soils and
organic soil and different fly ashes were used. Two of the fly ashes are high quality Class C

18
ashes and the other ashes are off-specification ashes. Tests were conducted on soils and soil–
fly ash mixtures prepared at optimum water content and different wet of optimum water
content. The results showed that addition of fly ash significantly, increased the CBR of the
inorganic soils. On the other hand, CBR of soil–fly ash mixtures generally increased with fly
ash content and decreased with increasing compaction water content. Furthermore, fly ash
should be stiffened over time to increase the resistance of the pavement. Organic soil typically
had much lower CBR from inorganic soils. However, for wetter or more plastic fine grained
soils the resilient modulus had further increase.
Bund Buhler and Cerato (2007) used lime and Class C fly ash to reduce the plasticity
of highly expansive clays. Soil samples with similar classification were used to show
shrinkage variability with the addition of lime and Class C fly ash. The plasticity reduction
was determined with linear shrinkage test. The results showed that both lime and fly ash
reduced the linear shrinkage but the addition of lime caused further decrease in linear
shrinkage. The high unit weight of fly ash relative to lime has made its lag in shrinkage
reduction. So, we needed less lime than fly ash to reduce the plasticity of a highly expansive
soil whereas fly ash is a waste product of power plant and it is more cost effective than lime.

Kumar et al. (2007) studied the effects of polyester fiber inclusions and lime
stabilization on the geotechnical characteristics of fly ash-soil mixtures. The geotechnical
characteristics of fly ash soil specimens, lime-soil specimens and lime-fly ash-soil specimens
mixed with different proportions of randomly oriented fibers were investigated. Test
specimens were subjected to compaction tests, unconfined compression tests and split tensile
strength tests. Specimens were cured after which they were tested for unconfined compression
tests and split tensile tests. The results showed that with the increase in lime content, the
maximum dry density of soil-lime mixes decreases and optimum moisture content increases
but fly ash decreases further maximum dry density and optimum moisture content increases.
However polyester fibers had no significant effect on maximum dry density and optimum
moisture content. With the increase in the percentage of fly ash while the lime is constant,
strength tends to increase and reaches a certain maximum value and after that it starts
decreasing. The ratio of split tensile strength and unconfined compressive strength increases
with increase in fiber content. So, polyester fibers are more efficient when soil was subjected
to tension rather than to compression. Furthermore, a good stabilization can be formed on
expansive soils by the combination of fibers, lime, and fly ash.
19
 Kumar and Sharma (2007) studied the effect of fly ash on the volume change of a
highly plastic expansive clay and a non-expansive clay with low plasticity. The effect of fly
ash on free swell index, swell potential, and swelling pressure of expansive clays were
evaluated. Moreover, Compression index and secondary consolidation characteristics of both
clays were also determined. The results showed that Swell potential and swelling pressure,
when determined at constant dry unit weight of the mixture, decreased and when determined
at constant weight of clay, increased. Compression index and coefficient of secondary
consolidation of both the clays decreased by addition fly ash. So, the settlement of structures
built on this stabilized clays decreased and consolidation happened in shorter time.
Furthermore, maximum dry unit weight increased and optimum moisture content decreased
with increasing fly ash content.

Zha et al. (2008) presented laboratory tests to evaluate the effect of adding fly ash and
fly ash lime on the geotechnical behaviour of the expansive soil in terms of grain size
distribution, Atterberg limits, specific gravity, compaction characteristics, free swell, swell
potential, swelling pressure, axial shrinkage percent, and unconfined compressive strength. In
this regard, the influence of curing time on the swell potential, swelling pressure, and
unconfined compressive strength was investigated. The relationship between the plasticity
index and swell-shrinkage properties for soils was discussed. The results showed that the
plasticity index, activity, free swell, swell potential, swelling pressure, and axial shrinkage
percent decreased with an increase in fly ash or fly ash-lime content. With the increase of the
curing time for the treated soil, the swell potential and swelling pressure decreased. There was
not significant change in the unconfined compressive strength. However, after curing of the
samples, the unconfined compressive strength increased significantly. Furthermore, with an
increase in fly ash and lime fly ash content, the optimum water content and the maximum dry
unit weight decreased.

Shafique et al. (2010) conducted an experimental study to investigate the long-term

performance of fly ash to improve two fine-grained soil subbases and focused on the effect of
weathering action, such as wet–dry cycles and freeze–thaw cycles on the performance of this
mixture. Specimens were from low plasticity clay and high plasticity expansive soil that
improved with a Class C fly ash. The samples were subjected to twelve cycles of wet–dry and
freeze–thaw, in a controlled laboratory condition with change in geotechnical properties of the

20
weathered blends to understand the long-term performance. Wet–dry cycles conducted with
tap water and saline water. Furthermore, plasticity index tests, unconfined compression tests,
and vertical swell tests were used. The fly ash increased the unconfined compressive strength
of fine-grained soil significantly and decreased the plasticity and swell potential. Freeze–thaw
cycles reduced stabilized samples strength but after this reduction, the strength was still
higher than the strength of unstabilized samples. Wet–dry cycles with saline water reduced
the plasticity but did not have any effect on strength. A slight decrease of the vertical swelling
was also observed after wet–dry cycles using saline water. The freeze–thaw cycles did not
change the plasticity of the stabilized soils but decreased the unconfined compressive strength
of stabilized expansive soils. Also, vertical swelling increased rapidly and then increased very
slowly.

Gabriela (2010) studied that Soils in urban areas often present characteristics that
might submit these environments to erosion processes. Applying municipal solid wastes
(MSW) composts to soils have been suggested as a means to improve physical and chemical
properties. A field experiment with a completely randomized design was conducted in a
typical Argiudoll from a degraded area in Buenos Aires City. The objective was to evaluate
the effect of MSW compost application on soil properties, residue decomposition and
reestablishment.
At the beginning of the trial, compost was prepared and applied in a bare soil on 0.25
m2 square plots afterwards litterbags were incorporated and poa was sown. Compost amounts
were: 0 (control); 2 (low); 4 (medium) and 7 kg/m2 (high) on fresh matter basis. During the
trial residue decomposition and aerial dry matter were evaluated, at the end soil physical and
chemical parameters were measured. Medium and high compost rates increased organic C,
total N and extractable P. Addition of 2 kg/m2 affected soil organic C as well, but in a minor
fee. Soil physical properties were improved after MSW compost addition. In medium and
high doses, augmentations in organic matter reduced bulk densities and enhanced water
infiltration. Aerial dry matter (DM) was significantly affected by treatments (p < 0.05).
Medium dose improved soil properties and plant DM in the same amount as the highest rate.
MSW compost application in urban soils is a viable alternative, since allows the full
restoration of an area with serious environmental problems.
Safiuddin and Salam (2010) studied the potential use of various solid wastes for
producing construction materials. The study is based on the comprehensive review of
21
available literature on the construction materials including different kinds of solid wastes. The
traditional methods for producing construction materials are using the valuable natural
resources. Besides, the industrial and urban management systems are generating solid wastes,
and most often dumping them in open fields. These activities pose serious detrimental effects
on the environment. To safeguard the environment, many efforts are being made for the
recycling of different types of solid wastes with a view to utilizing them in the production of
various construction materials. This study discusses the environmental implications caused by
the generation of various solid wastes, and highlights their recycling potentials and possible
use for producing construction materials. In addition, study shows the applications of solid
waste based construction materials in real construction, and identifies the research needs.
Brooks et al. (2011) studied an experimental program to evaluate the potential of
limestone dust and coal fly ash to stabilize some problem soils. The tests such as Atterberg
limits, compaction, California bearing ratio (CBR), swell, and unconfined compressive
strength were used. A one-way analysis of variance test performed on the generated data.
Results showed that the plasticity and swell of the soils were reduced. A significant increase
was observed in strength of the soils for CBR and UCS when stabilized with the additives.
Maximum dry density of the soil-additive mixture decreased and optimum moisture content
of the mixture increased with increase in additive content.

Division (2011) studied the effect of geo-textile as a reinforcement in the subgrade by

conducting cyclic plate load tests. The soil was mixed with optimum of fly ash and optimum
for the construction with or without reinforcement. Compaction properties and CBR values
were determined for the soil and it categorized as high plasticity clay. The results showed that
the utilization of fly ash and fly ash as an admixture significantly increases the load carrying
capacity of the sub grade soil and also a significant increase in load carrying capacity of the
stabilized soil was happened by providing composite geo-textile as reinforcement at Optimum
moisture content condition.

Chittaranjan et.al (2011) studied the ‘Agricultural wastes as soil stabilizers’. In this
study, Agricultural wastes such as sugar cane bagasse ash, rice husk ash and groundnut shell
ash are used to stabilize the weak sub grade soil. The weak sub grade soil is treated with the
above three wastes separately at 0%, 3%, 6%, 9%,12%and 15% and CBR test is carried out

22
for each percent. The results of these tests showed improvement in CBR value with the
increase in percentage of waste.
Senol (2012) performed an experimental study to investigate the effects of fiber on the
compaction and strength behaviour of high plasticity clay with fly ash in different
proportions. The soil samples were prepared with different percentages of fiber content and
fly ash. Different tests such as optimum moisture content, unconfined compression strength,
compaction and Atterberg limits test were conducted. The results showed that fibers acted like
a reinforcement in the soil and prevented the formation of cracks whereas fly ash bound the
soil particles together that is caused to an increase in CBR values of the stabilized soil. The
inclusion of fiber caused an increase in the CBR, increase the strength of the fly ash
specimens and changed their brittle behaviour into ductile behaviour. Further increase was
observed in strength when both fiber and fly ash were used. So, the combination of fiber and
fly ash is an efficient method to ground improvement.

Lopes et al. (2012) examined the applicability of fly and bottom ash on the layers of
pavements by mixing these ashes with a non-lateritic sandy-silty soil, with and without lime
addiction. This study, presented the results of physical and chemistry characterization, and
compression, resilient modulus and permanent deformation, after environmental testing
solubilization and leaching. The results showed that the soil is dependent on confining
pressure and the inclusion of fly ash and the mixture cure and these parameters increase the
value of resilient modulus. On the other hand, the addiction of bottom ashes increased
immediately the resilient modulus of the mixtures. The mixtures with or without the addition
of lime, with the presence of bottom and fly ash, had mechanical behaviour compatible with
the requirements of pavement with low traffic volume.

Onyelowe (2012) studied soil stabilization by using 4% and 6% cement with

variations of bagasse ash ranging from 0%(control), 2%, 4%, 6%, 8%, and 10% by weight of
the dry soil. The OMC, MDD, and CBR tests were carried out on the mixture of soil with
cement and with bagasse ash as admixture. The results of the optimum moisture content,
maximum dry density and California bearing ratio for the 4% and 6% cement content for the
varying percentages of bagasse ash are as at 4% cement content, with bagasse ash as
admixture, there is a general reduction in the maximum dry density while there is an increase
in the maximum dry density with increase in bagasse ash content at 6% cement content. The

23
optimum moisture content generally increased with increase in the bagasse ash content. There
was also a tremendous improvement in the CBR with Bagasse Ash compared to the natural
soil.
Sen and Kashyap (2012) studied that Based on direct shear test on soil sample- 1, with
fiber reinforcement of 0.05%, 0.15% and 0.25%, the increase in cohesion was found to be
10%, 4.8% and 3.73% respectively. The increase in the internal angle of friction (φ) was
found to be 0.8%, 0.31% and 0.47% respectively. Since the net increase in the values of c and
φ were observed to be 19.6%, from 0.325 kg/cm2 to 0.3887 kg/cm2 and 1.59%, from 47.72 to
48.483 degrees respectively, for such a soil, randomly distributed polypropylene fiber
reinforcement is not recommended. The results from the UCS test for soil sample- 1 are also
similar, for reinforcements of 0.05%, 0.15% and 0.25%, the increase in unconfined
compressive strength from the initial value are 11.68%, 1.26% and 0.62% respectively. This
increment is not substantial and applying it for soils similar to soil sample- 1 is not effective.
The shear strength parameters of soil sample- 2 were determined by direct shear test. It
shows that the increase in the value of cohesion for fiber reinforcement of 0.05%, 0.15% and
0.25% are 34.7%, 6.09% and 7.07% respectively. The increase in the internal angle of friction
(φ) was found to be 0.8%, 0.31% and 0.47% respectively. Thus, a net increase in the values of
c and φ were observed to be 53%, from 0.3513 kg/cm2 to 0.5375 kg/cm2 and 15.02%, from
27.82 to 32 degrees. Therefore, the use of polypropylene fiber as reinforcement for soils like
soil sample- 2 is recommended. On comparing the results from UCS test of soil sample- 2, it
is found that the values of unconfined compressive strength show a net increment of 49.8%
from 0.0692 MPa to 0.1037 MPa. This also supports the previous conclusion that use of
polypropylene fibers for reinforcing soils like soil sample- 2 is recommended. Overall it can
be concluded that fiber reinforced soil can be considered to be good ground improvement
technique specially in engineering projects on weak soils where it can act as a substitute to
deep/raft foundations, reducing the cost as well as energy.

Bose (2012) used fly ash to stabilize a highly plastic clay. The geo-engineering
properties such as, Atterberg limits, grain size distribution, linear shrinkage, free swell index,
welling pressure, compaction characteristics, unconfined compressive strength and CBR value
of virgin clay and stabilize with fly ash were evaluated. Expansive soil was stabilized with
various proportion of fly ash. The results showed that plasticity index of clay-fly ash mixes
24
decreased with increase in fly ash content. Thus, addition of fly ash increases its workability
by colloidal reaction and changing its grain size. The free swell index value and swelling
pressure of expansive clay mixed with fly ash decreased with increase in fly ash content.
Furthermore, addition of fly ash reduced the optimum moisture content but the dry density
increased and unconfined compressive strength of clay-fly ash mixes is found to be
maximum. So, it is concluded that the fly ash has a good potential for improving the
engineering properties of expansive soil.

Sharma et al. (2012) reported the improvement in the strength of a cohesive soil by
addition of both fly ash and lime. In this regard, X-ray diffraction, scanning electron
microscopy, coupled with energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS), thermal gravimetric
analysis, zeta potential and pH value test was carried out in order to explain the stabilization
mechanism. On the other hands, an experimental program was conducted to evaluate the
effect of the fly ash content on the free swell index, plasticity, compaction characteristics,
unconfined compressive strength, California bearing ratio and Atterberg limits of a cohesive
soil. In addition, dosages of fly ash and lime were determined to yield optimum strength of
soil. The XRD, SEM, EDS, and zeta potential confirmed the breaking of montmorillonite
structure in the untreated clay after stabilization. It was also confirmed that the pozzolanic
reaction dominated over the cation exchange capacity. The results showed that the strength
increases of soil happened with addition both of fly ash and lime. In addition to, from PH
value test a minimum lime content was recommended for stabilizing the soil. The unconfined
compressive strength and CBR value increased by addition of fly ash and lime. The addition
of fly ash also improved the geotechnical properties of the soil.

Dahale et.al (2012) studied soil stabilization means alteration of the soils properties to
meet the specified engineering requirements. Methods for the stabilization are compaction
and use of admixtures. Lime or Cement was commonly used as stabilizer for altering the
properties of soils. From the recent studies, it is observed that, solid waste materials such as
fly ash, rice husk ash are used for this intended purpose with or without lime or cement.
Disposal of these waste materials is essential as these are causing hazardous effects on the
environment.

Lin et al. (2013) studied two expansive soils from a microscopic point to better
understand the cation exchange capacity, mineralogical, and microstructural changes that

25
occur during Class C Fly Ash stabilization. X-ray diffraction (XRD) was used to monitor the
mineralogical changes and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was adopted to observe the
microstructural alterations. Energy Dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy (EDXS) was used to
evaluate the distribution of the stabilization agent inside the specimen. It was found that the
CFA stabilization process reduced the plasticity index (PI), clay size fraction, percent of
swell, swell pressure, and volumetric water contents of the soil water characteristic curves,
and increased the unconfined compressive strength. The reaction between soil and fly ash
caused the iron-oxide coating that verified by both XRD and energy-dispersive X-ray
spectroscopy analysis. The combined effects of flocculation and coating reduced the water-
retention property of the stabilized soils, decreased their swell potential, and increased the soil
strength.

Mir and Sridharan (2013) studied adding, high calcium and low calcium fly ashes in
different proportions to a highly expansive black cotton soil. The objective of the study was to
study the effect of fly ashes on the physical, compaction, and swelling potential of black
cotton soils that were reached from laboratory tests and utilization of waste material without
disruptive effect on the environment. The results showed that the liquid limits, compaction
characteristics and swelling potential of expansive soil–fly ash mixtures are significantly
modified and improved. With the addition of fly ash to black cotton soil the maximum dry
unit weight of the mixtures decreases with increase in optimum moisture content and it can be
attributed to the improvement in gradation of the fly ash. Furthermore, compressibility
characteristics of the expansive soil are improved with the addition of fly ash.
Kiran and Kiran (2013) studied the black cotton soil which is taken from Harihara,
Davanagere district, Karnataka. Under this study laboratory experiments are carried out for
different percentages (4%, 8% and 12%) of bagasse ash and additive mix proportions. The
strength parameters like CBR, UCS are determined. It is observed that, the blend results of
bagasse ash with different percentage of cement for black cotton soil gave change in density,
CBR and UCS values. The density values got increased from 15.16 KN/m3 to 16.5 KN/m3 for
addition of 8% bagasse ash with 8% cement, Then CBR values got increased from 2.12 to
5.43 for addition of 4% bagasse ash with 8% cement and UCS values got increased to 174.91
KN/m2 from 84.92 KN/m2 for addition of 8% bagasse ash with 8% cement.
Abdulfatah et al (2013) studied the compaction characteristics of Lateritic Soil-
Stabilized Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Bottom Sediment. In particular, work has been
26
directed towards determining to what extent the results of the British Standard Compaction
Test for Lateritic Soils are affected by MSW Bottom Sediments. The bottom sediments of
MSW from some selected dumping sites in Kano metropolis Nigeria were mixed with lateritic
soils in different proportions and a compaction test was conducted on the mixtures. Maximum
dry densities (MDD) of the mixtures were found to range between 1.600 and 1.700 Mg.m-3
and optimum moisture contents (OMC) were between 12% and 17%. The results are similar
to those of Silty Clay Soils of MDD between 1.600 and 1.845 Mg.m-3 and OMC between
15% and 25%. It is recommended that the bottom sediments be used as landfill or road
construction materials after sorting out the re-cycled materials.
Timothy et al (2013) studied the geotechnical properties of lateritic soil-stabilized
municipal solid waste (MSW) bottom sediment from active dumping sites in Kano metropolis
in Nigeria. The study focuses on evaluating the MSW bottom sediment for possible reuse.
The bottom sediment of MSW has indicated several characteristics such as light specific
gravity and it is a well-graded sandy material (A-3 Grade) that can be compacted to a
maximum dry density (MDD) similar to that of natural soil. Moreover, the sediment is fairly
stable and durable at mix proportions of 0% to 40% lateritic soil. The frictional angle ϕ ranges
from 33o to 38o. The CBR value is up to 12, meeting the Nigerian standard specifications for
roads and bridges. These sediments can be used as a landfill material and also as a substitute
aggregate in paving application for low cost roads.

Kerni and Jan (2013) studied the process of changing soil engineering properties to
improve the bearing capacity and durability property of weak soil. The aim of the study was
to review on stabilization of clayey soil using demolished waste material. Various methods
are available for stabilizing clayey soil. These methods include stabilization with chemical
additives, soil replacement, compaction control, moisture control and thermal methods. All
these methods may have the disadvantages of being ineffective and expensive. Based on
literature fines obtained from demolished waste is a low cost and effective soil stabilization
method. It can be concluded that there is a need to utilize the waste material obtained from the
construction and demolition of buildings in the soil stabilization. Using C&D waste in soil
stabilization helps to reduce the hazardous environmental impacts of the waste and improves
the engineering properties of soil which ultimately reduces the cost of construction and
increases the life of the structure built on stabilized soil.

27
 Moses and Osinubi (2013) studied the influence of compactive efforts on Cement-
Bagasse ash treatment on expansive black cotton soil. The dark grey soil used in study was
obtained along Gombe-Biu road in Yamatu Deba Local Government Area of Gombe State
using the method of disturbed sampling. The index properties were determined on the natural
and treated soils with Stepped percentages of cement (i.e., 0, 2, 4, 6 and 8%) were admixed
with 0, 2, 4, 6 and 8% of bagasse ash by dry weight of soil. All the compactions involving
moisture-density relationships, CBR and UCS tests were carried out by using energies derived
from the standard Proctor (SP) and modified Proctor (MP) energies. Finally, an optimal blend
of is 8% OPC/4% BA is recommended for treatment of expansive black cotton soil for use as
a sub-base material. In research mechanism author used Bagasse ash alone to stabilize the
soil. The attempt gives an idea weather use of any cementing material in addition to bagasse
Ash is essential or not.
Vizcarra et al. (2014) presented the characteristics of municipal solid waste (MSW)
incineration ash and evaluates this ash in road pavement layers through the mixture of ash
with a clay soil. Chemical, physical, and mechanical tests and the mechanistic-empirical
design for a pavement structure were carried out on the pure soil and also in the soil mixture
with the addition of different ash content. The results showed that fly ash reduced the
expansion of the material, showing an increase in the California bearing ratio (CBR) and
resilient modulus value. Furthermore, content and type of ash was important in final results
and it showed the efficacy of MSW fly ash for its use in base road pavement layers.

Athanasopoulou (2014) evaluated the improvement in engineering properties of clayey

subgrade that was stabilized with lime or fly ash. In this regard, California bearing ratio
(CBR) tests were used to evaluate the bearing strength of stabilized soils. The results showed
that admixture of lime or fly ash caused an increase in the plasticity limit, while the liquid
limit and the plasticity index of the soils have been reduced. However, further increases in the
California bearing ratio value obtained when the soil samples were mixed with lime. Also, the
swelling reduced with the addition of both additive materials. The increase in optimum
moisture content increased CBR value, particularly at high lime or fly ash percentages.
Furthermore, the maximum dry density reduced with addition of lime and fly ash.

Prasad and Sharma (2014) evaluated the effectiveness of clayey soil blended with sand
and fly ash for soil stabilization by studying the subgrade characteristics. The purpose of this

28
work is to find a solution for proper disposal of fly ash and also provides good subgrade
material for pavement construction. The results showed that substantial improvement in
compaction and California bearing ratio of composite containing clay, sand and fly ash. The
swelling of the clay also reduced after stabilization. The maximum dry density of clay-sand-
fly ash mix decreased with the addition of fly ash and optimum moisture content increased.
Thus, the stabilized soil can be used for construction of flexible pavements in low traffic
areas.

Kate (2014) explored the possibility of utilizing the fly ash with or without lime for
stabilizing the expansive soils to improve strength and volume change behavior. The free
swell index, swell, swelling pressure and unconfined compressive strength tests have been
conducted on expansive soils with mixing clay in different proportions. The results showed
that the swelling characteristics such as free swell index, maximum swell and swelling
pressure decreased with increase in percentage of fly ash. These values are decreased
considerably by addition of small percentage of lime to fly ash. Negligible changes in
Unconfined Compressive Strength values have been observed with increase in percentage of
fly ash. Whereas, the addition of lime increases these values significantly. These soils that
stabilized with fly ash alone did not show marked change in immediate strength. However,
curing caused a remarkable increase in their strengths. As a final result, the soils with low
expansively can be stabilized with appropriate percentage of fly ash alone. However, for
medium to high expansively should be used from small percentage of lime and fly ash.

Kumar and Ghosh (2014) presented the consolidation and swelling characteristics of
fly ash and montmorillonite clay blends. Different types of fly ash with different percentage
of montmorillonite clay were added to each sample. Specimens were compacted at the
optimum moisture content and the maximum dry density. In this regard, the standard Proctor
compaction tests were used. Furthermore, the effect of permeability, free swell index and
plasticity of fly ash– montmorillonite clay mixtures were evaluated. The results showed that
immediate settlement of fly ash takes place in a short period of time during consolidation, and
secondary settlement is negligible. There was not any significant change in vertical
compression of fly ash samples. The compression index of the fly ashes and montmorillonite
clay respectively, showed fast consolidation and endurance large deformation of mixtures. So,
in soft soils, fly ash can be used to reduce embankment settlement.

29
 Singh and Mittal (2014) studied the alteration of the soils properties to meet the
specified engineering requirements. Methods for the stabilization are compaction and use of
admixtures. Lime and Cement was commonly used as stabilizer for altering the properties of
soils. Earth reinforcement techniques with commonly used with mild steel rods, geo
synthetics etc. From the recent studies, it is observed that, solid waste materials such as rice
husk ash and waste tyres are used for this intended purpose with or without lime or cement.
Disposal of these waste materials is essential as these are causing hazardous effects on the
environment.

Kumar and Patil (2014) studied Expansive soil is a problematic soil for civil engineers
because of its low strength and cyclic swell shrink behaviour. Stabilization using solid wastes
is one of the different methods of treatment, to improve the engineering properties and make
it suitable for construction. The beneficial effects of some prominent solid wastes as obtained
in laboratory studies, in stabilization of expansive soil discussed paper.

Kharade et.al (2014) studied Soil is a base of structure, which actually supports the
structure from beneath and distributes the load effectively. If the stability of the soil is not
adequate then failure of structure occurs in form of settlement, cracks etc. Expansive soil also
known as black cotton soil is more responsible for such situations and this is due to presence
of montmorillonite mineral in it, which has ability to undergo large swelling and shrinkage.
To overcome this, properties of soil must be improved by artificial means known as ‘Soil
Stabilization’. It is a technique which improvises one or more soil properties by mechanical,
cementing and chemical use. Many research has been conducted for stabilization of soil by
using cementing, chemical materials e.g. fly ash, cement, Calcium chloride, Sodium chloride
etc. Toady world is facing serious problem of disposal of agricultural waste. Western
Maharashtra is popular for production of sugarcane in large quantity. Sugar factories produces
waste after extraction of sugar cane in machines that waste when burnt, the result ash is
known as ‘Bagasse Ash’. It is a fibrous material with presence of silica (SiO2) and can be
used to improve the existing properties of black cotton soil. In study laboratory experiments
were conducted on black cotton soil with partial replacement by Bagasse Ash (3%, 6%, 9%
and 12%). Paper highlights significant increase in properties of black cotton soil obtained at
6% replacement of Bagasse Ash without any chemical or cementing material.

30
 Ghatge and Rakaraddi (2014) studied Construction of engineering structures on weak
or soft soil is considered as unsafe. Improvement of load bearing capacity of the soil may be
undertaken by a variety of ground improvement techniques. In the investigation, shredded
rubber from waste has been chosen as the reinforcement material and cement as binding agent
which was randomly included into the soil at three different percentages of fibre content i.e.
5%, 10% and 15% by weight of soil. The investigation has been focused on the strength
behaviour of soil reinforced with randomly included shredded rubber fibre. The samples were
subjected to California bearing ratio and unconfined compression tests. The tests have clearly
shown a significant improvement in the shear strength and bearing capacity parameters of the
studied soil. The results obtained are compared with unreinforced sample sand inferences are
drawn towards the usability and effectiveness of fibre reinforcement as a replacement for deep
or raft foundation and on pavement sub grade soil as a cost-effective approach. The low
strength and high compressible soft clay soils were found to improve by addition of shredded
rubber and cement. It can be concluded that shredded rubber fibre can be considered as a good
earth reinforcement material.

Borthakur and Singh (2014) studied Peat soil has geotechnical properties such as high
water content, high organic matter content, low shear strength, low bearing capacity and high
compressibility which makes it as a difficult soil for construction of structures in its natural
state. In Manipur, India around 4,24,000 hectares of land area is covered by peat soil, so,
improvement mechanism is needed for construction of structures upon it. Industries are very
less in Manipur, so commonly used stabilising industry by products like fly ash, lime etc. are
not economically available. Therefore, locally available admixtures such as stone dust (SD)
and kiln dust (KD) have been selected for stabilization of peat soil. Admixtures are mixed
with peat soil in different seven percentages: 0%, 2%, 5%, 8%, 10%, 12%, and 15%,
respectively. Again, the peat soil is also mixed with both stone dust (SD) and kiln dust (KD)
in the ratio of (soil: stone dust: kiln dust); 94:3:3, 92:4:4, 90:5:5, 88:6:6and 86:7:7. Proctor
compaction test, unconfined compressive strength test, triaxial shear strength test and
California bearing ratio tests are conducted on stabilised soil to determine admixture impact
on peat soil properties. Laboratory test results shows that Maximum dry density (MDD) and
unconfined compressive strength of stabilised soil are maximum at 10% of admixtures.
Maximum value of shear strength is observed at 8%, for soils with KD and SD+KD, & at 5%
for soils with SD.CBR values increases in all cases & bearing capacity is maximum at 8%.
31
Results of this study show that, if properly optimized, the use of these locally available
admixtures may be available alternative for the stabilization of peat soil.

Kumar and Munilakshmi (2015) studied that clayey soils usually have the potential to
demonstrate undesirable engineering behaviour, such as low bearing capacity, high shrinkage
and swell characteristics and high moisture susceptibility. Stabilization of these soils is a
usual practice for improving the strength. Study reports the improvement in the strength of a
locally available cohesive soil by addition of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) incinerator ash
as a soil stabilizing agent and to evaluate its influence on soil properties and shear strength of
the soil when used in different proportions.

2.3 Summary
Research on soil stabilization by using any waste material separately or in
combination shows that soil properties can be enhanced but till certain limit, above that limit
these materials doesn’t affect soil properties. Different soil and different waste material has
different physical and chemical properties, so while selecting any waste material for
stabilization we should consider chemical and physical properties of soil as well as waste
material. It will result in effective and cheap stabilization method.

32
 Chapter 3

Methods and Methodology

3.1 General
Long term performance of pavement structures often depends on the stability of the
underlying soils. Engineering design of these constructed facilities relies on the assumption
that each layer in the pavement has the minimum specified structural quality to support and
distribute the super imposed loads. These layers must resist excessive permanent deformation,
resist shear and avoid excessive deflection that may result in fatigue cracking in overlying
layers. Available earth materials do not always meet these requirements and may require
improvements to their engineering properties in order to transform these inexpensive earth
materials into effective construction materials. This is often accomplished by physical or
chemical stabilization or modification of these problematic soils. Although the solution
appears simple and straight forward, engineering properties of individual soils may vary

33
widely due to heterogeneity in soil composition, difference in micro and macro structure
among soils, variability and heterogeneity of geologic deposits and due to differences in
physical and chemical interactions of air/water with soil particles. These differences
necessitate the use of site-specific treatment options for stabilization. (Little and Nair, 2009)
Over the years, engineers have tried different methods to stabilize soils that are subject
to fluctuations in strength and stiffness properties as a function of fluctuation in moisture
content.
Stabilization can be derived from thermal, electrical, mechanical or chemical means.
The first two options are rarely used. Mechanical stabilization, or compaction, is the
densification of soil by application of mechanical energy. Densification occurs as air is
expelled from soil voids without much change in water content. This method is particularly
effective for cohesion less soils where compaction energy can cause particle rearrangement
and particle interlocking. But, the technique may not be effective if these soils are subjected to
significant moisture fluctuations. The efficacy of compaction may also diminish with an
increase of the fine content, fraction smaller than about 75 μm, of the soil. This is because
cohesion and inter particle bonding interferes with particle rearrangement during compaction.
Altering the physio-chemical properties of fine-grained soils by means of chemical
stabilizers/modifiers is a more effective form of durable stabilization than densification in
these fine-grained soils. Chemical stabilization of non-cohesive, coarse grained soils, soils
with greater than 50 percent by weight coarser than 75 μm is also beneficial if a substantial
stabilization reaction can be achieved in these soils. In this case the strength improvement can
be much higher, greater than tenfold, when compared to the strength of the untreated material.
(Little and Nair, 2009)
The soil must first be classified as either a sub grade category or base category
material. In order to be classified as a base material the following criteria must be met: (a) a
maximum of 25 percent of the soil mass passes the No. 200 sieve (0.074 mm or 0.003 in.), (b)
not more than 40 percent of the soil mass passes the No. 40 sieve (0.42 mm or 0.0165 in.), (c)
a maximum plasticity index of 12 percent, and (d) a maximum liquid limit of 40 percent.
Otherwise, it is classified as a sub grade material for stabilization purposes. The definition of
modification and stabilization can be ambiguous. This modification reduces the plasticity of
the soil (improves the consistency) to the desired level and improves short-term strength to
the desired level (short-term is defined as strength derived immediately within about 7-days of

34
after compaction). Even if no significant pozzolanic or cementitious reaction occurs, the
textural changes that accompany consistency improvements normally result in measurable
strength improvement. Stabilization occurs when a significant, longer-term reaction takes
place. This longer-term reaction can be due to hydration of calcium-silicates and/or calcium
aluminates in Portland cement or class C fly ash or due to pozzolanic reactivity between free
lime and soil pozzolana or added pozzolana. A strength increase of 50 psi (350 kPa) or greater
(of the stabilized soil strength compared to the untreated soil strength under the same
conditions of compaction and cure) is a reasonable criterion for stabilization. (Little and Nair,
2009)

3.2 Mechanisms of stabilization

The stabilization mechanism may vary widely from the formation of new compounds
binding the finer soil particles to coating particle surfaces by the additive to limit the moisture
sensitivity. Therefore, a basic understanding of the stabilization mechanisms involved with
each additive is required before selecting an effective stabilizer suited for a specific
application.
Chemical stabilization involves mixing or injecting the soil with chemically active
compounds such as Portland cement, lime, fly ash, calcium or sodium chloride or with
viscoelastic materials such as bitumen. Chemical stabilizers can be broadly divided in to three
groups: Traditional stabilizers such as hydrated lime, Portland cement and Fly ash; Non-
traditional stabilizers comprised of sulfonated oils, ammonium chloride, enzymes, polymers,
and potassium compounds; and By-product stabilizers which include cement kiln dust, lime
kiln dust etc. Among these, the most widely used chemical additives are lime, Portland
cement and fly ash. Although stabilization with fly ash may be more economical when
compared to the other two, the composition of fly ash can be highly variable. The mechanisms
of stabilization of the traditional stabilizers are detailed below. (Little and Nair, 2009)
Fig 3.2 shows typical steps in soil stabilization. For any soil stabilization, there is
certain procedure which ensures steps involve in stabilization, stabilizer selection, quantity of
additive needed etc.

35
 Fig 3.2: Guideline for stabilization of soils & base materials for use in pavements
(Source: www.geotechnicalinvestigation.com)
Stabilization of soil starts with soil exploration and classification of soil. Depend upon
soil type selection of additive for stabilization is done. For homogenous and desirable mix,
mix design is carried out and different properties are being evaluated. If desirable properties
are not achieved, then again change mix design and repeat properties tests.

3.2.1 Traditional Stabilizers

Traditional stabilizers generally rely on pozzolanic reactions and cation exchange to
modify and/or stabilize. Among all traditional stabilizers, lime probably is the most routinely
used. Lime is prepared by decomposing limestone at elevated temperatures. Lime-soil
reactions are complex and primarily involve a two-step process. The primary reaction
involves cation exchange and flocculation/agglomeration that bring about rapid textural and

36
plasticity changes. The altered clay structure, as a result of flocculation of clay particles due to
cation exchange and short-term pozzolanic reactions, results in larger particle agglomerates
and more friable and workable soils. (Little and Nair, 2009)
Although pozzolanic reaction processes are slow, some amount of pozzolanic strength
gain may occur during the primary reactions, cation exchange and flocculation/agglomeration.
Extent of this strength gain may vary with soils depending on differences in their
mineralogical composition. Therefore, mellowing periods, normally about one-day in length
but ranging up to about 4-days, can be prescribed to maximize the effect of short term
reactions in reducing plasticity, increasing workability, and providing some initial strength
improvement prior to compaction. The second step, a longer-term pozzolanic based
cementing process among flocculates and agglomerates of particles, results in strength
increase which can be considerable depending on the amount of pozzolanic product that
develops, and this, in turn depends on the reactivity of the soil minerals with the lime or other
additives used in stabilization.
The pozzolanic reaction process, which can either be modest or quite substantial
depending on the mineralogy of the soil, is a long-term process. This is because the process
can continue as long as a sufficiently high pH is maintained to solubilize silicates and
aluminates from the clay matrix, and in some cases from the fine silt soil. These solubilized
silicates and aluminates then react with calcium from the free lime and water to form calcium-
silicate-hydrates and calcium aluminates hydrates, which are the same type of compounds that
produce strength development in the hydration of Portland cement. However, the pozzolanic
reaction process is not limited to long term effects. The pozzolanic reaction progresses
relatively quickly in some soils depending on the rate of dissolution from the soil matrix. In
fact, physio-chemical changes at the surface of soil particles due to pozzolanic reactions result
in changes in plasticity, which are reflected in textural changes that may be observed
relatively rapidly just as cation exchange reactions are.
Portland cement is comprised of calcium-silicates and calcium-aluminates that hydrate
to form cementitious products. Cement hydration is relatively fast and causes immediate
strength gain in stabilized layers. Therefore, a mellowing period is not typically allowed
between mixing of the components (soil, cement, and water) and compaction. In fact it is
general practice to compact soil cement before or shortly after initial set, usually within about
2 hours. Unless compaction is achieved within this period traditional compaction energy may

37
not be capable of developing target density. However, Portland cement has been successfully
used in certain situations with extended mellowing periods, well beyond 2 to 4 hours.
Generally, the soil is remixed after the mellowing periods to achieve a homogeneous mixture
before compaction. (Little and Nair, 2009)
Although the ultimate strength of a soil cement product with an extended mellowing
period may be lower than one in which compaction is achieved before initial set, the strength
achieved overtime in the soil with the extended mellowing period may be acceptable and the
extended mellowing may enhance the ultimate product by producing improved uniformity.
Nevertheless, the conventional practice is to compact soil cement within 2 hours of initial
mixing. During the hydration process, free lime, Ca (OH) 2 is produced. In fact, up to about 25
percent of the cement paste (cement and water mix) on a weight basis is lime. This free lime
in the high pH environment has the ability to react pozzolanically with soil, just as lime does
and this reaction continues as long as the pH is high enough, generally above about 10.5. Fly
ash is also generally considered as a traditional stabilizer. While lime and Portland cement are
manufactured materials, fly ash is a by-product from burning coal during power generation.
As with other by-products, the properties of fly ash can vary significantly depending
on the source of the coal and the steps followed in the coal burning process. These by-
products can broadly be classified into class C (self-cementing) and class F (non-self-
cementing) fly ash based on AASHTO M 295 (ASTM C 618). Class C fly ash contains a
substantial amount of lime, CaO, but almost all of it is combined with glassy silicates and
aluminates. Therefore, upon mixing with water, a hydration reaction similar to that which
occurs in the hydration of Portland cement occurs. As with Portland cement, this hydration
reaction produces free lime. This free lime can react with other unreacted pozzolana, silicates
and aluminates, available within the fly ash to produce a pozzolanic reaction, or the free lime
may react pozzolanically with soil silica and/or alumina. Class F ash, on the other hand,
contains very little lime and the glassy silica and/or alumina exists almost exclusively as
pozzolana. Therefore, activation of this pozzolana requires additives such as Portland cement
or lime, which provide a ready source of free lime. The hydration or “cementitious” reactions
and the pozzolanic reactions that occur when fly ash is blended with water from the products
that bond soil grains or agglomerates together to develop strength within the soil matrix. As
discussed previously, maintenance of a high system pH is required for long term strength gain
in fly ash-soil mixtures. (Little and Nair, 2009)

38
 The kinetics of the cementitious reactions and pozzolanic reactions that occur in fly
ash stabilized soils vary widely depending on the type of ash and its composition. Normally,
class C ashes react rapidly upon hydration. However, class F ashes activated with lime or
even Portland cement produce substantially slower reactions than Portland cement – soil
blends. Generally, compaction practice of fly ash - soil blends varies depending on the type of
ash used or whether or not an activator is used, but the standard practice is to compact within
6 hours of initial mixing.

3.2.2 By-product Stabilizers

Like traditional stabilizers, pozzolanic reactions and cation exchange are the primary
stabilization mechanisms for many of the by-product stabilizers. Lime kiln dust (LKD) and
cement kiln dust (CKD) are by-products of the production of lime and Portland cement,
respectively. Lime kiln dust (LKD) normally contains between about 30 to 40 percent lime.
The lime may be free lime or combined with pozzolana in the kiln. The source of these
pozzolana is most likely the fuel used to provide the energy source. LKDs may be somewhat
pozzolanically reactive because of the presence of pozzolana or they may be altogether non-
reactive due to the absence of pozzolana or the low quality of the pozzolana contained in the
LKD. Cement kiln dust (CKD) is the by-product of the production of Portland cement. The
fines captured in the exhaust gases of the production of Portland cement are more likely (than
LKD) to contain reactive pozzolana and therefore, to support some level of pozzolanic
reactivity. CKD generally contains between about 30 and 40 percent CaO and about 20 to 25
percent pozzolanic material. (Little and Nair, 2009)
Specific procedure of composition of by-product LKD or by-product CKD as the
oxide composition of each can vary widely depending on the composition of the feed stock,
the nature of the fuel, the burning efficiency, and the mechanism and efficiency of flue dust
capture. For example, if coal is used, then ash produced as a by-product of burning coal could
be captured in the bag house or other mechanism used to capture exhaust fines with the by-
product lime. If the source of the LKD is from the production of dolomite lime, then
magnesium oxide may form a significant part of the LKD. Magnesium oxide, MgO, takes
longer and is more difficult to fully hydrate than CaO, and upon hydration it expands. If the
LKD contains more than about 5 percent MgO then care should be taken to insure full
hydration of the MgO if this LKD is used for modification or stabilization. Again, it is

39
incumbent upon the agency involved to determine acceptable levels of oxides and trace
elements that comprise the by-product. As a general guide on the level of risk associated with
the presence of oxides and trace elements in these by product stabilizers, the development of
expansive mineral products may become intolerable when the SO3 content exceeds about 3
percent or when the MgO content exceeds about 3 to 5 percent. The impact of organics can
also be a problem as their presence can interfere with the availability of calcium to the soil or
aggregate being treated. Several tests can be used to screen for the presence of organics. One
quick test if loss on ignition (LOI). Although it does not identify the type of organic, which is
definitely important, an LOI of greater than about 8 to 10 percent flags a potentially
problematic quantity of organics.

3.2.3 Non-Traditional Stabilizers

This standard practice is limited to traditional, chemical stabilizers like: Portland
cement, lime and fly ash. However, it is important when considering treatment with these
traditional products to broach the subject of non-traditional or alternative stabilizers.
The mechanism of stabilization for non-traditional stabilizers varies greatly among the
stabilizers. Asphalt may or may not be grouped as a traditional stabilizer depending on
perspective. Asphalt is not a “chemical” stabilizer in the sense that it does not react
chemically with the soil to produce a product that alters surface chemistry of the soil particles
or that binds particles together. Instead asphalt waterproofs aggregate and soil particles by
coating them and developing an adhesive bond among the particles and the asphalt binder (6).
The process is dependent on the surface energies of the aggregate or soil and the asphalt
binder. Consequently, since this mechanism is more physical than chemical, soils with very
high surface areas are not amenable to asphalt stabilization and such stabilization is normally
limited to granular materials such as gravels or sands, and perhaps some silty sands. As a
visco-elastic, visco-plastic material, temperature and/or dilution methods are required to make
asphalt stabilization effective in soils.
Either lower viscosity liquid asphalts (normally developed by mixing bitumen with
diluents) or emulsified asphalts are used in soil stabilization. Because the nature of asphalt
stabilization is so mechanistically different from chemical stabilization, asphalt stabilization is
not considered as a candidate in this standard practice. (Little and Nair, 2009)

40
3.3 Soil classification
Soil is a broad term used in engineering applications which includes all deposits of
loose material on the earth’s crust that are created by weathering and erosion of underlying
rocks.
Although weathering occurs on a geologic scale, the process is continuous and keeps
the soil in constant transition. The physical, chemical, and biological processes that form soils
vary widely with time, location and environmental conditions and result in a wide range of
soil properties. Physical weathering occurs due to temperature changes, erosion, alternate
freezing and thawing and due to plant and animal activities causing disintegration of
underlying rock strata whereas chemical weathering decomposes rock minerals by oxidation,
reduction, hydrolysis, chelation, and carbonation. These weathering processes, individually or
in combination, can create residual in-place soils or facilitate the transport of soil fractions
away from the parent rocks by geologic agents like wind, water, ice or gravity. These
transport processes often result in mixing of soil minerals or introducing salts or organic
material of a variety of species and concentrations. Soil impacted by the presence of organics
and salts, such as sulphates, can exist as remote outcrops or over large areas and often do not
have clearly defined boundaries. The soil pedological profile also varies considerably with
location and even within a specific soil series or association. The complexity of soils requires
a disciplined yet efficient method to identify and classify them for their use as a construction
material.
Soil texture is defined, at least initially, by its appearance and is dependent on the size,
shape and distribution of particles in the soil matrix. Soil particle sizes may vary from
boulders or cobbles, roughly a meter in diameter, to very fine clay particles, roughly a few
microns in diameter. Engineering properties of coarse fractions are dependent on physical
interlocking of grains and vary with the size and shape of individual particles. Finer fractions
in soil have a significantly higher specific surface area and their behaviour is influenced more
by electro-chemical and physio-chemical aspects than particle interaction. Among finer
particles, clays exhibit varying levels of consistency and engineering behaviour and
demonstrate various levels of plasticity and cohesiveness in the presence of water. Silt
fractions are also classified as fine-grained soils because more than 50 percent of the soil mass
is smaller than 75 μm, which fits in the designation of fine-grained material according to the
Unified Classification System (AASHTO M 145). However, the specific surface area of silt

41
fines is several orders of magnitude larger than that of clay soil particles. This difference is
part of the reason that clay particles are more reactive than silt particles. In addition, clay
minerals have a unique sheet particle structure and a crystalline layer structure that is
amenable to significant isomorphous substitution. As a result of the isomorphous substitution
of lower valence cations for higher valence cations within the layer structure, clay mineral
surfaces carry a significant negative surface charge that can attract positively charged ions and
dipolar water molecules. The cumulative effect of high surface area and surface charge makes
clay particles particularly reactive, especially with water, and is the root cause of the
propensity of clay particles to shrink and swell depending on the availability of water.
The AASHTO (M 145) soil classification system differentiates soils, first based on
particle size and secondly based on Atterberg limits. If 35 percent or more of the mass of the
soil is smaller than 75 μm in diameter, then the soil is considered either a silt or clay and if
less than 35 percent of particles are smaller than 75-micron sieve, then the soil is considered
to be coarse-grained, either a sand or gravel. For stabilization purposes, soils can be classified
into sub grade and base materials based on fractions passing No. 200 sieve. If 25 percent or
more passes through the no. 200 sieve the soil can be considered as a sub grade, and if not,
they may be classified as a base material. However, more than simple gradation impacts the
definition of a sub grade or base. In order to be termed a base material, the material in
question must also be targeted for use as a base layer from a structural perspective. On the
other hand, an in situ coarse-grained soil with less than 25 percent fines, may be, by definition
a native sub grade even though it may achieve the required classification of a base. For
stabilization purposes, the soils may be differentiated into sub grade (soil) stabilization and
base stabilization (coarse-grained) on the basis on the fine content index.

3.4 Guidelines for soil stabilization

Stabilization projects are site specific and require integration of standard test methods,
analysis procedures and design steps to develop acceptable solutions. Many variables should
be considered in soil treatment, especially if the treatment is performed with the intent of
providing a long-term effect on soil properties. Soil-stabilizer interactions vary with soil type
and so does the extent of improvement in soil properties. Hence developing a common
procedure applicable for all types of stabilizers is not practical.

42
 Soil exploration and sampling should be performed as described in the preceding
sections. The soil can be classified as either a sub grade category or base category material on
the basis of AASHTO M145. A key decision factor in selecting the appropriate sub grade
additive is the concentration of water soluble sulphates in the soil. Sulphate testing should be
done in accordance with the modified version of AASHTO T 290 or equivalent. Soils with
sulphate levels above 3,000 ppm may be considered problematic and should be addressed
separately from the standpoint of additive selection all the way through mix design and
construction. Sampling, testing, stabilizer selection, and mix design for these soils should
follow the draft recommended practice for stabilizing sulphate-bearing soils. A second key
factor to be considered when deciding on the type of stabilizer to be used is the concentration
of organic matter in the soil.
Organic contents can interfere with strength gain mechanisms and should be
determined prior to proceeding with mix design with any calcium-based stabilizer AASHTO
M 147 also provides guidance in distinguishing among classes of base materials. (Little and
Nair, 2009)

3.5 Guidelines for Stabilizer Selection

Soil characteristics including mineralogy, gradation and physio-chemical properties of
fine-grained soils influence the soil-additive interaction. Hence stabilizer selection should be
based on the effectiveness of a given stabilizer to improve the physio-chemical properties of
the selected soil. The preliminary selection of the appropriate additive(s) for soil stabilization
should consider:
• Soil consistency and gradation
• Soil mineralogy and composition
• Desired engineering properties
• Purpose of treatment
• Mechanisms of stabilization
• Environmental conditions and engineering economics
Soil index properties (i.e., sieve analysis, Atterberg limit testing, and moisture density
testing) should be determined based on laboratory testing of field samples. Soil samples
should be prepared following AASHTO T 87. The initial processing of most soils involves
thorough air drying or assisted drying at a temperature not to exceed 60oC. Aggregations of

43
soil particles should be broken down into individual grains to the extent possible. A
representative soil fraction should be selected for testing following AASTHO T 248. The
required quantity of soil smaller than 0.425 mm (No. 40 sieve) should be used to determine
the soil index properties. Liquid limit testing should be performed following AASHTO T 89
and plastic limit and plasticity index testing should be measured following AASHTO T 90.
(Little and Nair, 2009)
Fig 3.5 shows Atterberg limits contribution in deciding type of stabilizers. For
selection of any stabilizer viz. cement, lime or fly ash, plasticity index is major criteria.
Atterberg limits helps in selection of proper additive.

Fig 3.5: Decision tree for selecting stabilizers for use in subgrade soils
(Source: www.geotechnicalinvestigation.com)
Soil is passed through sieve no 200 and by Atterberg limits, plasticity index is
calculated. If plasticity index (PI) is less than 15 then soil can be stabilized by cement, asphalt
or flyash (Class C). If plasticity index (PI) is 15 to35 then soil can be stabilized by Lime,
lime+cement, lime+ flyash (Class F). If plasticity index (PI) is more than 35 then soil can be
stabilized by Lime, lime+flyash (Class F) or lime+flyash (Class C).

3.5.1 Lime Stabilization

Lime has been found to react successfully with medium, moderately fine and fine
grained soils causing a decrease in plasticity and swell potential of expansive soils, and an
increase in their workability and strength properties. Research has proven that lime may be an

44
effective stabilizer in soils with clay content as low as 7 percent and in soils with plasticity
indices below 10.Fig 3.5.1 shows lime stabilization at site.

Fig 3.5.1: Lime stabilization

(Source: www.heavyequipmentforums.com)
The National Lime Association recommends a plasticity index of 10 or greater in
order for lime to be considered as a potential stabilizer whereas the U.S Army Corps of
Engineers recommends a plasticity Index of 12 or greater for successful lime stabilization (6,
16). Based on AASHTO classification, soil types A-4, A-5, A-6, A-7 and some of A-2-6 and
A-2-7 are suitable for stabilization with lime. (Little and Nair, 2009)

3.5.2 Cement Stabilization

Cement stabilization is ideally suited for well graded aggregates with a sufficient
number of fines to effectively fill the available voids space and float the coarse aggregate
particles. General guidelines for stabilization are that the plasticity index should be less than
30 for sandy materials. For fine-grained soils, soils with more than 50 percent by weight
passing 75μm sieve, the general consistency guidelines are that the plasticity index should be
less than 20 and the liquid limit (LL) should be less than 40 in order to ensure proper mixing.
A more specific general guideline based on the fines content is given in the equation below
which defines the upper limit of P.I. for selecting soil for cement stabilization. Fig 3.5.2
shows cement stabilization at site.

45
 Fig 3.5.2: Cement stabilization
(Source: www.tfsoils.com)
Cement is appropriate to stabilize gravel soils with not more than 45 percent retained
on the no. 4 sieve. The Federal Highway Administration recommends the use of cement in
materials with less than 35 percent passing no. 200 sieve and a plasticity index (PI) less than
20 (18). Based on this system, soils with AASHTO classifications A-2 and A-3 are ideal for
stabilization with cement, but certainly cement can be successfully used to stabilize A-4
through A-7 soils as well. The Portland cement Association (PCA) established guidelines to
for stabilizing a wide range of soils from gravels to clays. (Little and Nair, 2009)

3.5.3 Fly Ash Stabilization

Fly ash can be used effectively to stabilize coarse grained particles with little or no
fines. In coarser aggregates, fly ash generally acts as a pozzolana and/or filler to reduce the
void spaces among larger size aggregate particles to float the coarse aggregate particles. After
the appropriate amount of fly ash is added to coarse grained soils to fill the voids, optimize
density, an activator is often used to maximize the pozzolanic reaction in the mixture. The
activator content is generally in the range of 20 to 30 percent of the fly ash used to fill the
voids. The activator is normally either lime or Portland cement, but lime kiln dust or cement
kiln dust can also be used. Similarly, consider a clay soil that is stabilized with lime but the
clay is not pozzolanically reactive. The addition of fly ash and lime can substantially increase
strength in the blend due to the reactive pozzolana provided by the ash. In these fine-grained
soils, fly ash is typically used in conjunction with lime or cement to enhance the reactivity of
the fine-grained soil with lime or cement. Class C fly ash has been used alone to stabilize
moderately plastic soils. The basis for stabilization is free lime that becomes available upon
46
hydration of the ash. The large majority of this lime is combined with the silica and alumina,
but upon hydration, just as in the hydration of Portland cement, cementitious products are
formed which stabilize the soil. However, during this hydration process, just as in the
hydration of cement, free lime is released, which can react pozzolanically with the clay. This
reaction reduces clay particle plasticity and improves strength. Fig 3.5.3 shows fly ash
stabilization at site.

Fig 3.5.3: Fly ash stabilization

(Source: www.fhwa.dot.gov)
Successful application is often achieved with fine grained, plastic soils, by first
applying lime or cement to reduce plasticity and improve workability of the soil and then
adding the fly ash to boost strength of the soil, lime blend. Again, the impact of a given class
F (with activator) or a given class C fly ash without activator may be very different depending
on the pozzolana content of each ash, the degree of self-cementing property of the class C ash,
etc. Hence, the superior filler cannot be determined beforehand and without evaluation. (Little
and Nair, 2009)

3.5.4 In–Situ Stabilization

The method involves on site soil improvement by applying stabilizing agent without
removing the bulk soil. This technology offer benefit of improving soils for deep foundations,
shallow foundations and contaminated sites. Planning of the design mix involves the selection
and assessment of engineering properties of stabilized soil and improved ground. The purpose
is to determine the dimensions of improved ground on the basis of appropriate stability and
settlement analyses to satisfy the functional requirements of the supported structure. The

47
technology can be accomplished by injection into soils a cementitious material such cement
and lime in dry or wet forms. The choice to either use dry or wet deep mixing methods
depend among other things; the in-situ soil conditions, in situ moisture contents, effectiveness
of binders to be used, and the nature of construction to be founded. Depending on the depth of
treatment, the in-situ stabilization may be regarded as either deep mixing method or mass
stabilization.

3.5.4.1 Deep Mixing Method

The deep mixing method involves the stabilization of soils at large depth. It is an in-
situ ground modification technology in which a wet or dry binder is injected into the ground
and blended with in situ soft soils (clay, peat or organic soils) by mechanical or rotary mixing
tool. Depending on applications, the following patterns may be produced; single patterns,
block patterns, panel pattern or stabilized grid pattern. Note that, the aim is to produce the
stabilized soil mass which may interact with natural soil and not, to produce too stiffly
stabilized soil mass like a rigid pile which may independently carry out the design load. The
increased strength and stiffness of stabilized soil should not, therefore, prevent an effective
interaction and load distribution between the stabilized soil and natural soil. Thus, the design
load should be distributed and carried out partly by natural soil and partly by stabilized soil
mass. Fig 3.5.4.1 shows stages of Deep mixing at site.

Fig 3.5.4.1: Deep mixing

(Source: wpvcemweb02.itap.purdue.edu)

48
 In deep mixing, pile excavates dig of desirable diameter and of suitable depth.
Stabilizer is injected into dug hole. This deep mixing ensures deep penetration of stabilizer
hence assures effectiveness in stabilization.
(a) Wet Mixing
Applications of wet deep mixing involve binder turned into slurry form, which is then
injected into the soil through the nozzles located at the end of the soil auger. The mixing tool
comprise of drilling rod, transverse beams and a drill end with head. There are some
modifications to suit the need and applications. For instance, the Trench cutting
(a) Dry Mixing
Dry mixing (DM) method is clean, quiet with very low vibration and produces no spoil for
disposal. It has for many years extensively used in Northern Europe and Japan. The method
involves the use of dry binders injected into the soil and thoroughly mixed with moist soil.
The soil is premixed using specialized tool during downward penetration, until it reaches the
desired depth. During withdrawal of the mixing tool, dry binder is then injected and mixed
with premixed soil leaving behind a moist soil mix column. In Scandinavians countries and
Sweden in particular, this method is referred to as Lime Cement Column (LCC), whereas, in
Italy, the method is termed as Trevimix and in Japan, the same technology is called dry jet
mixing.
A typical deep mixing (DM) machine consists of track mounted installation rig and a
drill motor. Binder is fed into compressed air through the hose into mixing shaft to the outlet
of mixing shaft into the ground. Powdery binders under compressed air are injected into soft
ground without processing into slurry form. Blade rotates creating a cavity in the soil in which
air and binders fill in during withdrawal. During construction, the most efficient sequence is
to work the stabilizing machine within its operational radius as much as possible. The native
soil is thoroughly mixed with this compressed binder resulting into hardened column within
the ground; the column size up to 1.5-meter diameter may be achieved with a maximum depth
up to 40 m. In sensitive soils, penetration induced vibration may cause loss of soil strength;
therefore, it may be required to inject some of the binder into the ground during penetration.
A wide range of strength can be obtained from low strength to high strength through
regulation of amount of binder. High improved ratio can be achieved by overlapping mixing
or interlocking the column. This method has wide application from embankment stabilization,
slope protection to foundation improvement and liquefaction mitigation. It should be noted

49
that, the effectiveness of the method depends on percentage moisture of the soil. Thus, the
method is not effective in sandy layer with low water content of less than 30%. (Little and
Nair, 2009)

3.5.4.2 Quality Control and Quality Assurance

In deep mixing methods, automatic quality control and quality assurance (QC and
QA) has to be implemented. A variety of installed monitoring instruments in the mixing
machine and binder feeder may help to control column positions, mixing proportional, binder
quantity, penetration and retrieval speed.

3.5.4.3 Applications
For geotechnical and environmentally purposes, the typical application of deep mixing
methods can be grouped into two main categories:
Non-structural purposes o Ground cut off wall
 Dewatering wall
 Containment of contaminants
 Secondary containment

Structural purposes of Deep and shallow foundation

 Tunnel and Retaining wall (stabilization of cuts and open excavation)
Category of mixing application into six main applications, namely:
a. Retaining wall systems
b. Excavation support systems
c. Liquefaction/Seismic mitigation systems
d. Hydraulic barrier systems
e. Foundation support systems
f. Environmental remediation systems

a. Retaining wall systems

A free-standing wall can be constructed using DM which may be used to retain soil
behind it. These retaining walls (Gravity or reinforced wall systems) are most useful for

50
 river front, sea wall for Ports and Harbour, secant walls, water bulkhead and open
excavations.
b. Excavation support systems
Under this category, the applications include the construction of support to open
excavations and underground constructions such as braced excavations, building
excavation, cut and cover tunnel, trenches for railway tracks. All of these may use deep
mixing to construct retaining wall for maintaining the open excavations.
c. Seismic and Liquefaction mitigation systems
Application of deep mixing may include seismic retrofit of dam foundation,
alleviation of lateral spreading, liquefaction mitigation of culvert foundation and river
banks, strengthening around an excavation and levee, stabilization of dune deposits. The
main objective of stabilization in such application is to reduce pore water pressures, to
increase the shear strength of the soils that could liquefy and or to minimize the
propagation of waves in the super-and substructure of the infrastructure systems.

3.5.4.4 Mass Stabilization

Mass stabilization is a shallow to deep stabilization method in which the entire volume
of soft soil can be stabilized to a prescribed depth. The technique is relatively new and is
highly suited for the stabilization of high moisture content such as clay, silty, organic soils
and contaminated sediments. Mass stabilization offers a cost-effective solution to ground
improvement in site remediation especially with a huge number of contaminants and high
water content. Remediation of most deposits of contaminated dredged sediments, organic
soils and waste sludge usually make use mass stabilization method. The method provides an
alternative to traditional method of soil improvement such as removal and replaces
techniques. Fig 3.5.4.4. shows field implementation of Mass stabilization at site.

51
 Fig 3.5.4.4: Mass stabilization
(Source: projektit.ramboll.fi)
The blending of the soil mass may be achieved by either use of excavator mounted
mixing tool with unique shuttles pneumatically delivering the binder to the head of the mixing
tool and into the mix zone or by self-injection of binder into a rotating auger or mixing head
and the soil. The mixer rotates and simultaneously moves vertically and horizontally while
mixing the soil block. The diameter of mixing tool normally lies between 600 mm to 800 mm,
with rotation speed between 80 and 100 rpm. Usually, the soil is stabilized in a sequence of a
block which is defined as the operating range of the machine. The typical range correspond to
8 to 10 m2 in plan and 1.5 to 3 m in depth (i.e. 2 m wide x 5 m long x 3 m deep) with
production rate between 200 and 300 m3 of stabilized soft soil per shift. The amount of binder
is typically in the range of 200 to 400 kg/m3.
In Nordic countries, the amount of binder is in a typical range of 150 and 250 kg/m3,
and the targeted shear strength is 50 kPa. The method has advanced to include use of rapid
cement as a binder in stabilization of contaminated dredged material at Port Hamina and
shoreline of Helsinki, Finland, where stabilized contaminated dredged materials deposited
between embankments created new areas. Prior to initial set of the stabilized mass, a geo-
membrane separator has to be placed on top of stabilized soil on which a selected granular
base course material lies. These fill materials compress the freshly stabilized mass forcing out
all air pocket that may have formed during mixing. According to Euro Soil Stab, deep
stabilization method compared to other methods of stabilization has the following main
advantages:
- Economic and flexible

- saving of materials and energy

- Rapidity in improved engineering properties of the soil

52
- can be flexible linked with other structures and with the surroundings (no harmful settlement
differences)

3.5.5 Ex-Situ Stabilization

The technology involves dislodging of the soils and or sediments from the original
position and moves to other place for the purpose of amendment. These can be encountered in
dredging of river channel and Ports. The main objectives of dredging can be either for
amending the contaminated sediments to reduce toxicity and mobility or to maintain or
deepen navigation channels for the safe passage of ships and boats. Offsite treatment of the
sediment can be done in confined disposal facilities (CDF) and then be used or disposed at
designated site. Method of removal, means of transportation, availability of treatment
location, disposal site or demand for reuse is key factors to consider when planning for ex-situ
stabilization. Treatment of sediments in CDF falls under ex-situ mass stabilization method,
which can be accomplished in several ways depending on natural of sediments and water
contents.

3.6 Additional Tests Involved in Stabilizer Selection

Once an additive has been selected based on the index properties of plasticity index
and percent of the soil mass smaller than 75μm, the possible impact of deleterious
components of the soil must be considered. Organic contents in excess of one percent on a
mass basis have been proven to be potentially deleterious. However, some soils with organic
contents well over one percent have been successfully treated and stabilized with lime and
Portland cement. The second deleterious component is high salt content. A high potassium or
sodium content may negatively impact stabilization by competing with calcium cations.
However, this can normally be overcome simply by adding the additional calcium-based
stabilizer. However, salts containing sulphates have the potential to react with calcium and
aluminium released from soil in the high pH environment formed during stabilization to form
expansive minerals that can disrupt the stabilized layer. The mechanisms of these mineral
formations and the associated volume changes in pavement layers are detailed elsewhere. Soil
organic content should be measured following ASTM D 2974. Soils with an organic content
of 1-2 percent as determined by ASTM D 2974 may be difficult to stabilize or may require

53
uneconomical quantities of additives in order to stabilize. Stabilized soils, in some cases, may
also not be able to meet the recommended strength criteria when excess amounts of organic
matter are present. This is because the presence of organic materials in soils inhibits the
normal hydration process and reduces the strength gain in stabilized soils. Sulphate contents
in soil should be determined following Modified AASHTO test method T 290 or equivalent.
Generally, water soluble sulphate levels greater than 0.3 percent (3,000 ppm) suggest the
potential for expansive reactions to occur that may result in disruptive volume change in the
stabilized layer. Recommendations outlined in Guidelines for Stabilizing Sulphate- Bearing
Soils should be followed in stabilizing these soils with lime. (Little and Nair, 2009)

3.7 validation of stabilizer selection

The procedure outlined below provides a guideline for mixture design for lime,
Portland cement and fly ash.

3.7.1 Lime Stabilization

Lime is an appropriate stabilizer for most cohesive soils but the level of reactivity
depends on the type and amount of clay minerals in the soil. The steps described in the
following paragraphs ensure that the appropriate amount of lime is used to meet design
expectations. If design expectations cannot be met with lime, that will become clear by
following this protocol described in this section.

3.7.2 Cement Stabilization

The American Concrete Institute (ACI) defines soil cement as a mixture of soil and a
measured amount of cement and water mixed to a high density (25). Soil cement has been
classically defined as a stabilized soil in which the coarse aggregate, sand size and larger
(coarser than 75 μm) is surrounded and bonded by a matrix of cement paste and fine soil
particles. The goal of mix design for this type of soil is to float the coarse aggregate in the
matrix. The durability of this matrix is determined by durability tests such as AASHTO T 135
and T 136 (or by their ASTM equivalents D 559 and D 560) or by compressive strength
testing. However, Portland cement has also been successfully used to stabilize fine grained silt
and clay soils. In fact, cement stabilization of silty soils provides perhaps the most dramatic
improvement of any soil type (when the properties of the cement treated silty soil are
54
compared to the properties of untreated soil). However, the amount of cement required to
stabilize fine grained soils can be substantially more than that required to stabilize coarse
grained soils because of the higher surface area of fine grained soils. The transition from silt
to clay means that the particle surface area increases by orders of magnitude. However, in
actuality cement does not need to coat all particles for successful stabilization and substantial
improvement of moderately plastic clay soils, plasticity indices of below 30, has been
achieved with about the same amount of Portland cement as would be required of hydrated
lime. This is primarily because the cement forms a stabilized matrix around agglomerates of
clay particles. Obviously if the integrity of cement matrix surrounding the agglomerates is
compromised, then the durability of the matrix will begin to degrade. The ability to stabilize
soils with plasticity indices above about 20 with cement is based on the ability to intimately
mix cement with the soil to a degree that will produce a reasonably homogeneous and
continuous, stabilized matrix of the agglomerates. This requires a certain efficacy of mixing,
which is in turn associated with the energy imparted to the soil by the mixing equipment and
by the time span over which mixing occurs. The limitation associated with mixing Portland
cement with plastic clay soils is the short time of initial set of the cement, usually not more
than 2 hours is provided for mixing before compaction. However, this mixing time has been
extended under certain circumstances. During the extended mellowing period, the release of
free lime during cement hydration alters plasticity and textural properties of the clay soil,
which can improve workability. However, mixing following this extended mellowing must be
performed with equipment that has the ability to impart sufficient energy to mix the soil and
cement after the cement has reached a final set, which normally occurs within 8 hours. It must
be understood, when extended mellowing is adopted, that all the strength lost during remixing
may not be recovered with additional curing. Hardened soil cement mixtures must withstand
adverse environmental conditions. Other stabilization objectives include reducing plasticity
index, increasing shrinkage limit, meeting strength thresholds, and improving resilient
modulus. Soil cement can provide a strong and uniform support for pavement layers and
provide a firm and stable working platform for construction. (Little and Nair, 2009)

55
3.8 Methods
3.8.1 Mechanical method of Stabilization
In this procedure, soils of different gradations are mixed together to obtain the desired
property in the soil. This may be done at the site or at some other place from where it can be
transported easily. The final mixture is then compacted by the usual methods to get the
required density. Fig 3.8.1 shows load carrying capacity of stabilizes and un stabilized soil
diagrammatically.

Fig 3.8.1: Effect of soil stabilization

(Source: http://stasigeneralcontracting.com/stabilization)
Denser soil after stabilization makes load distribution effective and improves soil
bearing capacity. It enables load to be effective within soil mass which enhances load carrying
capacity of soil.

3.8.2Additive method of stabilization

It refers to the addition of manufactured products into the soil, which in proper
quantities enhances the quality of the soil. Materials such as cement, lime, bitumen, fly ash
etc. are used as chemical additives. Sometimes different fibers are also used as reinforcements
in the soil. The addition of these fibers takes place by two methods;
a) Oriented fiber reinforcement-

56
The fibers are arranged in some order and all the fibers are placed in the same orientation. The
fibers are laid layer by layer in this type of orientation. Continuous fibers in the form of
sheets, strips or bars etc. are used systematically in this type of arrangement.
b) Random fiber reinforcement-
This arrangement has discrete fibers distributed randomly in the soil mass. The mixing is
done until the soil and the reinforcement form a more or less homogeneous mixture. Materials
used in this type of reinforcements are generally derived from paper, nylon, metals or other
materials having varied physical properties.

3.9 Soil properties

3.9.1 Atterberg Limits

The Atterberg limits are a basic measure of the critical water contents of a fine-grained
soil: its shrinkage limit, plastic limit, and liquid limit. As a dry, clayey soil takes on increasing
amounts of water, it undergoes distinct changes in behaviour and consistency. Fig 3.9.1 shows
state of soil at different limits graphically.

Fig 3.9.1: Atterberg limits

(Source: ecoursesonline.iasri.res.in)
Soil is in form of solids until shrinkage limit approaches. Soil is in semi solid form
from shrinkage to plastic limit. Soil is in plastic form from plastic to liquid limit. Soil is in
liquid form after liquid limit.
57
3.9.1.1 Shrinkage Limit:
This limit is achieved when further loss of water from the soil does not reduce the
volume of the soil. It can be more accurately defined as the lowest water content at which the
soil can still be completely saturated. It is denoted by wS.
3.9.1.2 Plastic Limit:
This limit lies between the plastic and semi-solid state of the soil. It is determined by
rolling out a thread of the soil on a flat surface which is non-porous. It is the minimum water
content at which the soil just begins to crumble while rolling into a thread of approximately
3mm diameter. Plastic limit is denoted by wP.

3.9.1.3 Liquid Limit:

It is the water content of the soil between the liquid state and plastic state of the soil. It
can be defined as the minimum water content at which the soil, though in liquid state, shows
small shearing strength against flowing. It is measured by the Casagrande’s apparatus and is
denoted by wL.

3.9.2 Particle Size Distribution

Soil at any place is composed of particles of a variety of sizes and shapes, sizes
ranging from a few microns to a few centimetres are present sometimes in the same soil
sample. The distribution of particles of different sizes determines many physical properties of
the soil such as its strength, permeability, density etc.
Particle size distribution is found out by two methods, first is sieve analysis which is
done for coarse grained soils only and the other method is sedimentation analysis used for
fine grained soil sample. Both are followed by plotting the results on a semi-log graph. The
percentage finer N as the ordinate and the particle diameter i.e. sieve size as the abscissa on a
logarithmic scale. The curve generated from the result gives us an idea of the type and
gradation of the soil. If the curve is higher up or is more towards the left, it means that the soil
has more representation from the finer particles; if it is towards the right, we can deduce that
the soil has more of the coarse-grained particles. Fig 3.9.2 shows

58
 Fig 3.9.2: Particle size distribution curve
(Source: www.geotechengineering.com)
The soil may be of two types- well graded or poorly graded (uniformly graded). Well
graded soils have particles from all the size ranges in a good amount. On the other hand, it is
said to be poorly or uniformly graded if it has particles of some sizes in excess and deficiency
of particles of other sizes. Sometimes the curve has a flat portion also which means there is an
absence of particles of intermediate size, these soils are also known as gap graded or skip
graded.
For analysis of the particle distribution, we sometimes use D10, D30, and D60 etc.
terms which represents a size in mm such that 10%, 30% and 60% of particles respectively
are finer than that size. The size of D10 also called the effective size or diameter is a very
useful data. There is a term called uniformity coefficient Cu which comes from the ratio of
D60 and D10, it gives a measure of the range of the particle size of the soil sample.

3.10 Characteristics of Cohesive Soil:

Definition: Cohesive soil is hard to break up when dry, and exhibits significant
cohesion when submerged. Cohesive soils include clayey silt, sandy clay, silty clay, clay and
organic clay. "Dry soil" means soil that does not exhibit visible signs of moisture content.

 Cohesive soils have shear strength. It is possible to make a vertical cut in silts and
clays and it remain standing, unsupported, for some time. This cannot be done in dry
59
 sand. In clay and silts, therefore, some other factor must contribute to shear strength.
This factor is called cohesion. It results from the mutual attraction, which exist
between fine particles and tends to hold them together in a solid mass without the
application of external forces.
 Clay consists of very fine microscopic particles which hold water to increase their
volume, and release moisture to decrease their volume.
 Special precaution needs to be taken in the design of footings to resist or avoid the
forces caused by shrinking and swelling.

3.11 Characteristics of Municipal Solid Waste:

The concentration of mercury was 23.76 mg/kg, slightly exceeding the maximum
allowable environment amount of 23mg/kg as prescribed by the environment policy. This
high mercury concentration could have been introduced by burning of industrial products in
the MSW. The ash had high concentration of calcium (220240 mg/kg), with its trace elements
like copper (89.12 mg/kg), zinc (325.36 mg/kg), and lead (352.62 mg/kg) all being within
range of environment maximum allowable concentrations in soil.

The loss on ignition of MSWA was 83.49%, which was obtained on burning 6
kilograms of municipal solid waste. This value is more than 12% as the maximum
requirement for pozzolana as set in. It means that MSWA contains un-burnt carbon and this
can reduce the pozzolanic activity of the ash. However, suggested that the un-burnt carbon in
pozzolanic materials can serve as filler in the material being stabilized.

3.12 Collection and Preparation of Municipal Solid Waste Ash:

Municipal solid waste will be collected from our houses. The municipal solid waste
will be incinerated in a muffle furnace that allowed controlled incineration of MSW. MSW
experienced loss on ignition of about 80%. Remaining ashes will be collected at the bottom of
the muffle furnace. The ash was then screened through a 0.3 mm sieve to remove unburnt
MSW.

60
 Fig.3.12 (a): Muffle Furnace for incineration of MSW
(Source: PHE lab, ARKP.)
Fig 3.12 (a) shows Muffle furnace, which is enclosed small lab incinerator used for
small burning or heating purpose. Solid waste collected from dumping ground is burnt in this
furnace for preparation of ash which is used in soil stabilization.

Fig.3.12 (b): MSW Ash

(Source: Geotech lab ARKP.)
Fig 3.12 (b) shows prepared ash of Municipal solid waste in Muffle furnace. After
burning of Municipal solid waste, ash is passed from 0.3 mm sieve so it can be easily used in
soil stabilization and coarser particles can be avoided.

61
3.13 Testing on MSW Ash
3.13.1. Vane Shear Test:

A direct shear test is a laboratory or field test used by geotechnical engineers to measure
the shear strength properties of soil or rock material, or of discontinuities in soil or rock
masses. For shear Unconfined Compression strength test will be conduct.

Procedure:

1. Take fine cohesive soil in a tray and add water to have required moisture contain. Mix them
uniformly.

2. Compact the wet soil in the specimen container to required density. Level it flushing with
the top of container.

3. Mount the specimen container with soil on the base of vane shear apparatus and fix it
securely to the base.

4. Attached required calibrated torque spring to connect torque applicator with vanes.

5. Lower the shear vanes in to the specimen to their full length gradually with minimum
disturbance of the soil specimen so that the top of vanes is at least 10 mm below the top of
soil specimen. Note down spring constant.

7. Rotate the vane at the uniform rate approximately 0.1ͦ /sec. by suitably operating the torque
applicator handle till the specimen fails.

8. Note the final reading of the torque applicator (Ø2).

9. Lift the vane up, remove the soil sample and clean the container.

10. Repeat the above steps for two more samples from same soil.

11. Report average shear strength.

62
 Fig.3.13.1: Vane Shear Test Apparatus

(Source: Geo tech lab, ARKP.)

Above Fig 3.13.1 shows vane shear test apparatus, which is used for finding shear
strength of soil by applying torque to soil by rotating vanes deep inside in soil sample. In this
apparatus, we get Torque produced on soil planes and by torque produced shear strength of
soil is calculated

3.13.2. Permeability test

It can be defined as the ability of a porous mass to allow passage of water through the
medium. For finding permeability Constant head and differential head test will be conduct.

Procedure:

1. Take 2.5kg of air dried soil (sand size) sample passing through 4.75mm sieve and retain
2mm sieve. Add and mix water to bring the moisture contain to desired level. Leave the soil
air–tight container for same time.

2. Saturate porous plate and boiling water.

63
3. Apply grease to inside surface of the mould, base plate and collar.

4. Clamp the mould to the compaction base plate, place to the top of the mould.

5. Prepare soil specimen filling it in 3 layers, each layer should give 25 blows by standard
rammer.

6. Remove the collar and trim off excess soil

7. Cover the soil specimen at both end with filter paper and saturated porous stones. Place the
mould assembly in drainage base fix the top cap on to it using rubber sealing gasket.

8. Open air vent on top of permeameter mould. Immerse the mould with soil specimen in a
water tank (to be used as bottom water tank during test) for saturation for 24 hours.

9. Connect the inlet nozzle of permeameter to the stand pipe filled with water. Close air valve
of permeameter.

10. Open outlet of permeameter and allow water to flow out. Wait for some time to establish
steady flow.

11. Measure head h1 and note time t 1.

12. Let the water level in stand pipe to fall to a lower head. Note h2 and corresponding time t 2.

13. Repeat step 11 and 12 twice to take additional reading h1, h2, t1 & t2.

14. Tabulate observation and calculate average value of coefficient of permeability.

64
 Fig.3.13.2: Permeability Test Apparatus

(Source: Geotech lab, ARKP)

Fig 3.13.2 shows permeameter, which is used to find permeability. In general, we have
two methods to find permeability by this apparatus viz. constant head and falling (varying)
head method.

3.13.3. Proctor Compaction Test:

The Proctor compaction test is a laboratory method of experimentally determining the

optimal moisture content at which a given soil type will become most dense and achieve its
maximum dry density.

65
Procedure:
1. Take 16 kg of air-dried soil sample passing through 20 mm IS sieve.
2. Add water to soil as per the table given in 7.0. Mix soil and water thoroughly.
3. Allow soil to mature for 20hours. For this keep moist soil in water tight container.
4. Take out soil sample in tray. Spread it uniformly using spoon/spatula. Divide it in equal 6
parts.
5. Clean empty compaction mould with base plate, dry and weigh to a nearest gm.
6. Apply grease to inside surface of mould, top of base, internal surface of collar and bottom
surface of rammer.
7. Fix collar to top of the mould. Place mould on floor.
8. Divide soil (1st part) ion three equal sub parts. Put 1 sub part of the soil specimen to the
mould using spoon. Spread it uniformly in mould. Apply 25 blows distributed uniformly over
entire soil surface by rammer. Insure that drop of rammer is full example 310mm.
9. Using spatula make scratches of compacted layer. Add 2 subpart of soil. And apply 25
blows using rammer as stated in step 8.
10. Repeat step9 for 3 sub parts so that Mould is fully filled in 3comapcted layers of soil.
Compacted soil should not protrude/project in collar more than 6mm.
11. Remove collar and using straight edge trim top of compacted layer to level flush with ring
of mould.
12. Weigh mould filled with compacted soil.
13. Extrude soil from mould. Take representative soil sample from middle layer from water
contain determination by oven drying method.
14. Now take 2 part of moist soil sample in a separate tray. Add water to it to increase its
water content as desired. Repeat step 8 to 13.
15. Conduct test repeatedly for remaining 4parts of moist soil by increasing its water contain
more than previous specimen.
16. Tabulate observation. Calculate bulk density, actual water contain and dry density of each
part of moist soil specimen.
17. Plot a smooth curve between water contains % as abscissa and dry density as ordinate on
natural scale.
18. Read water contain % corresponding to max. Dry density and report it as optimum
moisture content.

66
 Fig. 3.13.3: Proctor Compaction Apparatus
(Source: Geo tech lab, ARKP)
Fig 3.13.3 shows Proctor compactor test apparatus, which consists of mould with base
plate and collar, rammer with height projector. Depend upon weight of rammer, height of
compaction and blows given test is called simple or modified proctor test.

3.14 Summary

There are different methods of stabilization which helps in enhancing soil properties.
As solid waste ash is used in this method to stabilize soil and tested for shear, permeability
and compaction. Use of solid waste ash improved soil properties at greater extent and can be
used at larger scale to avoid soil incapability and dumping properties.

67
 Chapter 4

Results and discussion

4.1 General

Soil with different amount percentage of Municipal solid waste ash is used for soil
stabilization. Here we are discussing test results of shear test, permeability and compaction
test on soil with 0%, 5%, 10%, 15% and 20% municipal solid waste ash. As Municipal solid
waste is varying in percentage, properties of soil are also varying. Here we are discussing
results of shear strength, permeability and compaction of soil with different percentage of
Municipal solid waste ash through test reading and graphs plotted for comparison of results.

4.2 Vane Shear Test:

Shear test is carried out on soil with varying percentage of soil check shear effect of
different amount of MSWA. Table 4.2 shows percentage of ash used and shear strength
achieved to corresponding percentage.

68
 Table 4.2: Vane Shear Test

Fig 4.2: Graph of Vane shear test results

At 0% of ash addition i.e. soil without ash gives shear strength as 0.011 N/mm2. As
ash content increases in soil, shear strength of soil also increases as 0.0145 N/mm2 but upto
10% only. After 10% addition of ash doesn’t improve shear strength of soil. Due to
continuous addition of dry MSWA, internal friction of soil particles starts losing and shear
strength of soil decreases.

4.3 Permeability Test:

Permeability test is carried out on soil with varying percentage of soil to check
permeability effect of soil with different amount of MSWA. Table 4.3 shows percentage of
ash used and Permeability achieved to corresponding percentage.

Table 4.3: Permeability Test

Fig 4.3: Graph of permeability test results

69
 At 0% of ash addition i.e. soil without ash gives Permeability as 0.00801 cm/sec. As
ash content increases in soil, permeability of soil decreases as 0.00734 cm/sec at 10%. After
10% addition of ash, permeability of soil continues to decrease. Accumulation of fine ash
particles in soil voids results in blockage of pore path hence permeability of soil decreases.

4.4 Proctor Compaction Test:

4.4.1 MDD (Maximum Dry Density)
MDD is carried out on soil with varying percentage of soil to check density effect of
soil with different amount of MSWA. Table 4.4.1 shows percentage of ash used and dry
density achieved to corresponding percentage.

Table 4.4.1: Proctor Compaction Test (a)

Fig 4.4.1: Graph of Proctor Compaction Test (a)

At 0% of ash addition i.e. soil without ash gives maximum dry density as 1.30 kg/cm3.
As ash content increases in soil, permeability of soil also increases as 1.38 kg/cm3 but upto
5% only. After 5%, addition of ash doesn’t increase dry density of soil.

4.4.2 OMC (Optimum Moisture Content):

OMC is carried out on soil with varying percentage of soil to check density effect of
soil with different amount of MSWA. Table 4.4.2 shows percentage of ash used and Optimum
moisture content achieved to corresponding percentage.

70
 Table 4.4.2: Proctor Compaction Test (b)

Fig 4.4.2: Graph of Proctor Compaction Test (b)

At 0% of ash addition i.e. soil without ash gives optimum moisture content as 35.71%.
As ash content increases in soil, optimum moisture content of soil also increases as 40% but
upto 10% only. After 10%, addition of ash doesn’t improve permeability of soil. MSWA
particles absorbs moisture from soil which results in less moisture content at higher
percentage of Ash content.

4.5 Cost Analysis

The cost estimating tool is intended to be used to develop a preliminary project

scoping cost estimate. This preliminary estimate can be based on the typical cost of item
involved in stabilization process. In this work, Cost involved in soil stabilization with lime is
compared with MSWA soil stabilization

4.5.1 Cost analysis of lime stabilization

Cost analysis of soil stabilization by using Lime as stabilizer involves cost of stabilizer
(Lime), soil-stabilizer binding cost etc. Following table shows different cost accounts in lime
stabilization with respect to its quantity.

71
 Table 4.5.1 Cost analysis in case of lime stabilization

Optimum quantity of lime = 10%

Cost of lime stabilization (Lime density= 1201 kg/m3)

Quantity of soil to be
10 m3
stabilized
10x1201x10/100=1201.00 kg =
Quantity
1.201 tonnes
Cost of lime per tonne (in
5100/-
Rs.)
Cost of lime stabilization per
1.201x5100= 6125.10~6130/-
10 m3 (in Rs.)
Approximate Cost of lime-
200/m3
soil blending (in Rs.)
Cost of lime soil blending of
2000
10 m3 (in Rs.)
Total cost of lime
6130+2000=8130/-
stabilization (in Rs.)

Table 4.5.1 shows optimum quantity of lime as 10% for comparison purpose, cost of
lime and soil-lime binding. Total cost of lime stabilization (Lime=10%) for 10m3 soil is
estimated at 8130/-.

4.5.2 Cost analysis of MSWA stabilization

Cost analysis of soil stabilization by MSWA involves cost of stabilizer (incineration

cost of MSW), soil-stabilizer binding cost etc. Following table shows different cost accounts
in MSWA stabilization with respect to its quantity.

72
 Table 4.5.2 Cost analysis in case of MSWA stabilization

Optimum quantity of MSWA = 10%

Cost of MSWA stabilization (MSWA density= 1260 kg/m3)
Quantity of soil to be
10 m3
stabilized
10x1260x10/100=1260.00 kg
Quantity
= 1.260 tonnes
Cost of MSWA per tonne
(cost of incineration) (in 1000/-
Rs.)
Cost of MSWA
stabilization per 10 m3 (in 1.260x1000= 1260/-
Rs.)
Approximate Cost of
MSWA-soil blending (in 200/m3
Rs.)
Cost of lime soil blending
2000
of 10 m3 (in Rs.)
Total cost of lime
1260+2000=3260/-
stabilization (in Rs.)
Total saving (in Rs.) per 10
8130-3260= 4870/-
m3
Total saving (in Rs.) per m3 487/-

Table 4.5.2 shows optimum quantity of lime as 10% for comparison purpose, cost of
lime and soil-lime binding. Total cost of lime stabilization (Lime=10%) for 10m3 soil is
estimated at 8130/-. Saving in cost is 487/- per m3 as MSW is waste material.

4.6 Summary

Experimental Result on soil with different percentage of Municipal solid waste ash
shows soil can be stabilized with Municipal solid waste ash. This method of stabilization can
73
be implemented on large scale so that it will give us cheap and eco-friendly soil stabilization
technique. Results of experimental research shows following:
1. Shear strength test result shows, shear strength of soil with 10% MSWA is higher than
others, but increase in ash content beyond 10% decreases the shear strength of soil.
2. Permeability test result shows after adding ash in soil, permeability decreases as ash
fines accumulates in soil voids.
3. Proctor compaction test result shows optimum moisture content is also achieved at
10% ash content, but corresponding dry density is less at 10% MSWA content.

74
 Chapter 5

Conclusion
5.1 General
Study of soil stabilization by using municipal solid waste ash gives us wider use of
Solid waste in soil stabilization which definitely reduces the environmental pollution level as
well as enhances the soil properties.

5.2 Conclusion

1. Experimental study of soil stabilization with Municipal Solid waste ash shows use of
Municipal solid waste in 10% with soil enhances soil properties viz. Shear strength,
permeability and compaction.
2. This study shows instead of having simply disposal of Municipal Solid Waste, which
is also not possible due to lack of land availability, we can improve soil properties by
using waste ash.

75
 3. As soil and waste is variable material in characteristics from place to place, this
experimental work is only applicable to our Panvel region soil with particular type of
Municipal solid waste. For different area’s soil and different waste, we can have
different Optimum percentage of waste ash which will enhance soil properties.
4. Using waste ash as stabilising material is cheap as well as eco-friendly method of soil
stabilization, which solves the waste disposal problems as well as enhances soil
properties.

5.3 Future scope of work

1. We can analyse this technique for larger extent. In this study only shear strength,
permeability and compaction is assessed where in future we can go for soil bearing
capacity, consolidation etc.
2. Due to incineration of Municipal solid waste for this technique, air pollution may
credit in atmosphere, for that purpose air assessment is a major scope of work.
3. Municipal solid waste contains some organic fraction also which may responsible for
leachate formation in soil, if this leachate infiltrate through soil and joins ground water
it will contaminate ground water. For analysing this problem we can concentrate on
leachate formation and remedial measures in future.

76
 References

1. Amo, O.O., Fajobi, A.B., & Afekhuai, S.O. (2005), “Stabilizing potential of cement
and fly ash mixture on expansive clay soil”, Journal of Applied Sciences, 5(9), 1669-
1673.
2. Athanasopoulou, A. (2014), “Addition of lime and fly ash to improve highway
subgrade soils”, Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 26(4), 773-775.
3. Abdulfatah Y., Kiru S. G. and Adedokun T. A. (2013), “Compaction Characteristics
of Lateritic Soil- Stabilized Municipal Solid Waste Bottom Sediment” International
Journal of Environmental Science and Development, Vol. 4, No. 3, June 2013.
4. Agbede I. O. and Joel M. (2011) “Effect of carbide Waste on the properties of
Makurdi shale and burnt Bricks made from the admixtures” Americal Journal of
Science and Industrial Research, 2(4), pp – 670-673.
5. Brooks, R., Udoeyo, F.F., & Takkalapelli, K.V. (2011), “Geotechnical properties of
problem soils stabilized with fly ash and limestone dust in Philadelphia”, Journal of
Materials in Civil Engineering, 23(5), 711-716.
6. Borthakur N. and Singh M. S. (2014) “Stabilization of Peat soil using locally
available admixture”, studied Peat soil has geotechnical properties such as high water
Conf. on Advances in Civil and Structural Engineering - CSE 2014.
7. Bose B. (2012), “Geo engineering properties of expansive soil stabilized with fly ash”,
Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 17, Bund. J, 2012, pp. 1339-
1353.
8. Buhler, R.L., & Cerato, A.B. (2007), “Stabilization of Oklahoma Expansive Soils
Using Lime and Class C fly ash”, GSP 162 Problematic Soils and Rocks and In Situ
Characterization.
9. Bresson L. M., Koch C. and Bissonnais Y. Le (2001), “Soil Surface Structure
Stabilization by Municipal Waste Compost Application” Soil sci. Soc. Am. J., vol. 65,
november–december 2001.
10. Cokca, E. (2001) “Use of Class C fly ashes for the stabilization of an expansive soil” ,
Journal of Geotechnical and Geo environmental Engineering, 127(7), 568-573.
11. Chittaranjan M., Vijay M. and Keerthi D. (2011) “Agricultural wastes as soil

77
 stabilizers” International Journal of Earth Sciences and Engineering, , Vol-04, Issue
No 06 SPL, pp. 50-51.
12. Division, G. (2011), “The efficacy of reinforcement technique on the fly ash stabilized
expansive soil as a subgrade embankment for highways”, International Journal of
Engineering Science and Technology, 3(2). ISSN: 0975-5462.
13. Dahale P. P., Nagarnaik P.B. and Gajbhiye A.R. (2012) “Utilization of Solid Waste
for Soil Stabilization”, International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology,
Issue 7.
14. Douglas O. and Osula A. (1989) “Evaluation of Admixture Stabilization for Problem
Laterite”, American Society for Civil Engineering, Vol. 115, No. 6.
15. Edil T.B., Acosta H.A. & Benson C.H. (2006), “ Stabilizing Soft Fine-Grained Soils
with Fly Ash” Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 18(2), 283-294.
16. Gabriela C. (2010), “Influence of Municipal Solid Waste Compost On Soil Properties
And Plant Reestablishment In Peri-Urban Environments” Chil. J. Agr. Res. - Vol. 70 -
Nº 3 – 2010.
17. Gandhi K. S. (2012) “Expansive soil stabilization using Bagasse Ash” International
Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT), Vol. 1 Issue 5.
18. Ghatge S. and Rakaraddi P.G. (2014) “Soil Stabilization Using Waste Shredded
Rubber Tyre Chips”, IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering (IOSR-
JMCE) e-ISSN: 2278-1684,p-ISSN: 2320-334X, Volume 11, Issue 1 Ver. V (Feb.
2014), PP 20-27.
19. Hakari U. D. and Puranik S.C. (2012) “Stabilization of Black Cotton Soils Using Fly
Ash, Hubballi-Dharwad Municipal Corporation Area, Karnataka, India” , Vol. 12
Issue 2.
20. Ijimdiya T.S., Ashimiyu A.L. and Abubakar D.K. (2012) “Stabilization of Black
Cotton Soil Using Groundnut Shell Ash” EJGE, pp 3645 -3652.
21. Indian standards 2720-15(1965): Methods of Test for soils.
22. Kerni V., Kumar V. and Jan U. (2013), “Review on Stabilization of Clayey Soil Using
Fines Obtained from Demolished Concrete Structures 2013.
23. Kharade A. S., Suryavanshi V. V. and Deshmukh R. R. (2014) “Waste Product
‘Bagasse Ash’ From Sugar Industry Can Be Used As Stabilizing Material For

78
 Expansive Soils” IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and
Technology Volume: 03 Issue: 03.
24. Kiran R. G. and Kiran L. (2013) “Analysis of Strength Characteristics of Black Cotton
Soil Using Bagasse Ash and Additives as Stabilizer” International Journal of
Engineering Research & Technology, Issue 7.
25. Kumar, A., Walia, B.S., & Bajaj, A. (2007), “Influence of fly ash, lime, and polyester
fibers on compaction and strength properties of expansive Soil”, Journal of Materials
in Civil Engineering, 19(3), 242-248.
26. Kumar A. and Patil S. S. (2014), “A Review of Literature on Stabilization of
Expansive Soil Using Solid Wastes” International Journal of Engineering Research &
Technology, Issue 14.
27. Kate J M (2005), “Strength and volume change behavior of expansive soils treated
with fly ash”, Geo Frontiers 2005, ASCE, Geotechnical Special Publication.
28. Kumar Pal, S., & Ghosh, A. (2014), “Volume Change Behavior of Fly Ash–
Montmorillonite Clay Mixtures” , Journal of Geomechanics, 14(1), 59-68.
29. Kumar Phani, B. R., & Sharma, R. S. (2007), “Volume change behavior of fly ash-
stabilized”, Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 19(1), 67–74.
30. Kumar A., Singh W. B. and Bajaj A. (2007) “Influence of Fly Ash, Lime, and
Polyester Fibers on Compaction and Strength Properties of Expansive Soil” American
Society for Civil Engineering, Vol. 19, pp 242–248.
31. Lopes, L. S. E., Szeliga, L., Casagrande, M.D.T., & Motta, L.M.G. (2012),
“Appicability of Coal Ashes to be used for Stabilized Pavements Base”, Geo
Congress 55 (21), 2562-7759.
32. Lin, B., Cerato, A.B., Madden, A.S., & Elwood Madden, M.E. (2013), “Effect of Fly
Ash on the Behavior of Expansive Soils: Microscopic Analysis”, Environmental &
Engineering Geoscience, 19(1), 85–94.
33. Little D.N. and Nair S. (2009), “Recommended practice for stabilization of subgrade
soil and base material” Texas A & M university 2009
34. Manasseh J. and Agbede I. O. (2011), “Mechanical-Cement Stabilization of Laterite
for Use as Flexible Pavement Material”, Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering,
Vol. 23, No. 2, pp 146 - 152.

79
35. Moses G. and Osinubi K. J. (2013) “Influence of Compactive Efforts on Cement-
Bagasse Ash Treatment of Expansive Black Cotton Soil” World Academy of Science,
Engineering and Technology, pp 1559 – 1566.
36. Misra, A., Biswas, D., & Upadhyaya, S. (2005), “Physico-mechanical behavior of
self-cementing class C fly ash–clay mixtures”, Fuel, 84, 1410–1422.
37. Mir, B.A., & Sridharan, A. (2013), “Physical and Compaction Behavior of Clay Soil–
Fly Ash Mixtures”, Geotech Geol Eng, 31, 1059–1072.
38. Mirsa, A. (1998), “Stabilization Characteristics of Clays Using Class C Fly Ash”,
Transportation Research Record 1611. 98-1025.
39. Murty V. R. and Praveen G. V. (2008) “Use of Chemically Stabilized Soil as Cushion
Material Below Light Weight Structures Founded on Expansive Soils” American
Society for Civil Engineering, Vol. 20, No. 5, pp 392 – 400.
40. Nalbantoglu, Z. (2004), “Effectiveness of Class C fly ash as an expansive soil
stabilizer. Construction and Building Materials”, 18, 377–381.
41. Onyelowe K. C. (2012) “Cement Stabilized Lateritic Soil and the Use of Bagasse Ash
as Admixture” International Journal of Science and Engineering Investigations, vol. 1,
issue 2.
42. Orts W. J. (2007), “Use of Synthetic Polymers and Biopolymers for Soil Stabilization
in Agricultural, Construction, and Military Applications”, American Society for Civil
Engineering, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp 58–66.
43. Osinubi K.S. (2006), “Influence of Compactive Efforts on Lime-Slag Treated Tropical
Black Clay” Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp- 175–181.
44. Puppala, A., Hoyos, L., Viyanant, C., & Musenda, C. (2001), “Fiber and fly ash
stabilization methods to treat soft expansive soils”, Soft Ground Technology.
45. Phani Kumar, B. R., & Sharma, R. S. (2004), “Effect of Fly Ash on Engineering
Properties of Expansive Soils”, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering, 130(7), 764- 767.
46. Punmia B.C. (2005), “soil mechanics and foundation engineering” 16 th edition Laxmi
publication India 2005.
47. Prabakara, J., Dendorkarb, N., & Morchhalec R.K. (2004), “Influence of fly ash on
strength behavior of typical soils”, Construction and Building Materials, 18, 263–267.

80
48. Parsons, R.L., & Kneebone, E. (2005), “Field performance of fly ash stabilized
subgrades”, Ground Improvement, 9(1), 33–38. Vol. 19, Bund. Z6 17572
49. Purushothamaraj.P.(1999), “Ground Improvement Techniques” 2nd edition, University
Science Press Publication, Imprint of Laxmi Publication Pvt. Ltd, Delhi.
50. Ranjan G. and Rao. A. S. R. (2000), “Basic and Applied Soil mechanics” 2nd edition,
New Age International (P) Ltd Publisher, Delhi.
51. Safiuddin, Mohammed Z.J. and Salam M. A. (2010), “Utilization of solid wastes in
construction materials” International Journal of the Physical Sciences Vol. 5(13), pp.
1952-1963, 18 October, 2010.
52. Shafiquea, S.B., Rahmanb, K., Yaykirana, M., & Azfara, I. (2010), “The long-term
performance of two fly ash stabilized fine-grained soil subbases”, Resources,
Conservation and Recycling, 54, 666–672.
53. Senol, A., Edil, T.B., Shafique, Md.S.B., Acosta, H.A., & Benson, C.H. (2006), “Soft
subgrades stabilization by using various fly ashes”, Resources Conservation and
Recycling, 46, 365–376.
54. Sen A. and Kashyap R. (2012), “Soil stabilization using waste Fiber materials”
National Institute of Technology Rourkela, July 2012.
55. Sezer, A., Inan, G., Yılmaz, H.R., & Ramyar, K. (2006), “Utilization of a very high
lime fly ash for improvement of Izmir clay”, Building and Environment, 41, 150–155.
56. Senol, A. (2012), “Effect of fly ash and polypropylene fibers content on the soft soils”,
Bull Engg. Geol Environ,71, 379–387.e
57. Singh M. and Mittal A. (2014), “A Review on the Soil Stabilization with Waste
Materials” International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA)
ISSN: 2248-9622 National Conference on Advances in Engineering and Technology
(AET- 29th March 2014).
58. Sharma, N.K., Swain, S.K., Sahoo, U.C. (2012), “Stabilization of a Clayey Soil with
Fly Ash and Lime: A Micro Level Investigation”, Geotech Geol Eng, 30, 1197–1205.
59. Sivapullaiah P.V. (2013), “Use of solid waste to enhance properties of problematic
soil of Karnataka” Indian institute of science Bangalore India 2014.
60. Sivapullaiah, P.V., Prashanth, J.P., Sridharan, A. (1996), “Effect of fly ash on the
index properties of black cotton soil”, Soils and Foundations, 36(1), 97-103.

81
61. Temimi, M., Rahal, M., Yahiaoui, M., & Jauberthie, R. (1998), “Recycling of fly ash
in the consolidation of clay soils”, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 24, 1–6.
62. Timothy A. A, Ado Y. A., and Kiru S.G. (2013), “Geotechnical Evaluation of
Municipal Solid Waste as an Alternative Material for Land Filling” International
Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering Website:
www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 3,
Special Issue 4, October.
63. Vara Prasad C.R., & Sharma, R. K. (2014). IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil
Engineering, PP 36-40
64. Vizcarra1, G.O.C., Casagrande, M.D.T., & da Motta, L.M.G. (2014), “Applicability of
municipal solid waste incineration ash on base layers of pavements”, Journal of
Materials in Civil Engineering.
65. Zha, F., Yanjun, S.L., Cui, D.K. (2008), “Behaviour of expansive soils stabilized with
fly ash”, Nat Hazards, 47, 509–523.

82
 Publications
1. “Management of municipal solid waste ash in soil stabilization”, International Conference
on Construction Management and Research, NICMAR, Pune. October 21st -22nd, 2016.
(Communicated)

2. “Management of municipal solid waste ash in soil stabilization”, International Geotechnical

Engineering conference on Sustainability in Geotechnical Engineering Practices and related
Urban Issues, Indian Geotechnical society, Mumbai chapter, September 23rd -24th, 2016.

3.“Soil stabilization by using municipal solid waste ash”, National Conference on Civil
engineering issues and its future (CYNOSURE-2016), Priyadarshini college of Engineering,
Nagpur, 21st – 22nd March 2016.

83