1.our - Soil Mechanics II

GRADI VA REVI EW JOURNAL I SSN NO : 0363- 8057
BLACK COTTON SOIL STABILIZATION BY USING BIO-

ENZYME AND MARBLE DUST POWDER FOR PAVEMENT SUB-
GRADE
Aishwarya P Gayakawad1, Rajshekhar Rathod2, Sagar Sonawane3,
1Department of Civil Engineering, MIT SOE, Loni, Pune, 412201, Maharashtra, India.
Aishwarya P Gayakawad(s).
Rajshekhar Rathod
Sagar Sonwane
These authors contributed equally to this work.
ABSTRACT
Black Cotton Soils (BCS), characterized by their susceptibility to vertical ground

movements and their detrimental impact on geotechnical structures and pavements,
present significant challenges. These issues are particularly pronounced in areas with
subpar subgrade soils, rendering conventional pavement construction economically
prohibitive. To meet this pressing need, there is a growing shift towards investigating
non-traditional, sustainable, and cost-effective solutions. Regrettably, there is a scarcity
of research concerning the reaction mechanisms underlying non-traditional soil
stabilization methods. In response, this study explores the potential of Marble Dust (MD)
as a soil stabilizer and Bio Enzyme (BE), an environmentally friendly and non-toxic
liquid enzyme that expedites soil stabilization during construction. The study's primary
objectives encompass the assessment of key geotechnical parameters such as
compaction, Atterberg's limits, and unconfined compressive strength while varying the
proportions of marble dust and bioenzyme. Furthermore, it employs microstructural-
driven analytical techniques to investigate the reaction mechanisms driving this
innovative soil stabilization approach. The findings offer promising prospects for
VOLUME 9 I SSUE 9 2023 PAGE NO: 312

mitigating the expansion of reactive soils and promoting sustainable solid waste
management practices.
Key Words: Subgrade, Black Cotton Soil, Marble Dust, Bio-enzyme, Stabilization.
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL
Black soils, also known as Regur soils, constitute a substantial portion of India's
landscape, encompassing about 20% of the country's total land area. Their distinctive
black color is attributed to the presence of humus, and they exhibit a sticky texture when
wet due to their high clay content. While black soils are deficient in nitrogen, they contain
sufficient phosphorous for plant growth. In hilly regions, particularly in the Deccan
Plateau and the plateaus of Madhya Pradesh, Saurashtra, Malwa, and Maharashtra, these
soils tend to be thin and sandy. These soils are characterized by essential clay minerals
such as montmorillonite and cover an extensive area of approximately 300,000 square
kilometres. However, from an engineering standpoint, black soils possess certain
properties like high compressibility, low bearing capacity, and low shearing strength. For
instance, Maharashtra, a state in India, is renowned for its black cotton soil, which
constitutes over three-fourths of its land area, particularly in semi-dry plateau regions.
However, constructing roads on highly clayey soils like black cotton soil in Maharashtra
can be intricate and is generally discouraged due to potential complications.
In summary, black soils are a significant soil type in India, distinguished by their unique
characteristics and engineering challenges. The current research effort on subgrade
improvement focuses on the study of soil samples collected from Wagholi, Pune,
Maharashtra.
1.2 AN OVERVIEW OF SOIL STABILIZATION
The most successful approach of ground improvement found worldwide is soil

stabilization. In the last forty years, particularly, a variety of soil stabilization techniques
have been rigorously applied in field applications and have undergone thorough testing
by researchers. These include mechanical stabilization, which densifies the soil by
expelling air from the spaces without significantly changing the water content, and
chemical stabilization, which contains chemicals to improve soil characteristics, which
in turn improve ground strength. For soil stabilization, it is essential to comprehend the

properties of the materials that will be combined and the outcomes after mixing. There
is other more variables that affect this method's success in addition to the choice of
materials and doses.
1.3 OBJECTIVES
1. The research aims to evaluate the engineering properties of native soil and blended
soil samples with varying proportions of Marble Dust and bio enzyme, aiming to
determine the optimal blend proportion for desired soil characteristics and stability.
2. The study aims to investigate the engineering properties of blended soil samples using
CBR and UCS methods to identify the most effective blend.
3. It will design and compare flexible pavements using different proportions of the
Blends to assess their suitability for pavement construction.
4. The research will perform a cost analysis based on flexible pavement thickness,
comparing the expenses of traditional methods to the proposed Blends for soil
stabilization.
2 MATERIALS
2.1 BLACK COTTON SOIL
Clayey soil is a specific type of soil composition primarily consisting of silicates of
aluminium, iron, magnesium, and sometimes other metals. When this soil becomes wet,
it exhibits a high degree of stickiness due to the substantial clay content. Its notable
characteristic is its pronounced hardness, making it challenging to break down into
manageable lumps for use in road construction.
The chemical composition of this black cotton soil is given in the following Table 1
Serial
Parameter Unit Observed Value Methods
Number
1 Moisture % 4.67 IS:1514-1959
2 Calcium Oxide Ppm 14.10 IS:6932(Part1)-1973
3 Magnesium Oxide Ppm 17.20 IS:6932(Part1)-1973
4 CaCO3 % 4.00 IS:1514-1959

5 Alumina % 0.30 IS:6932(Part1)-1973
6 Iron % 0.15
7 Volatile Matter at 1500C % 0.40
8 Carbonate % 1.00
9 Acid Insoluble Matter % 0.60 No Specific Standard

values are available
10 pH - 6.90
11 Total Solids % 4.60
12 Calcium Carbonate % 0.08
13 Specific Gravity - 2.00
2.2 MARBLE DUST

The production of waste marble dust has surged in response to the growing demand for
marble products within the construction industry. Approximately 25% of the marble
extracted for block cutting ultimately becomes dust due to the mixing of marble dust and
water during the cutting process. This waste material finds applications in various fields,
including brick production, manufacturing of building materials, ceramics, and
infiltration techniques.
The chemical composition of this marble dust is given in the following Table 2
Serial
Parameter Unit Observed Value
Number
1 Specific gravity (Gs) - 2.64
2 Uniformity coefficient (Cu) - 2.85
3 Coefficient of curvature (Cc) - 1.19
4 Density(g/cm3) - 2.8
5 SiO2 % 71.18
6 Al2O3 % 19.42

7 Fe2O3 % 3.7
8 CaO % 4.45
9 MgO % 1.25
2.3 BIO-ENZYME
The introduction of bio-enzyme, specifically "ECO TERRAIN," derived from natural
and non-toxic liquid enzymes sourced from vegetable extracts, leads to notable
enhancements in the engineering properties of soil. These improvements encompass
higher soil compaction densities and increased stability. ECO TERRAIN, provided by
the organization "Infinita Biotech," achieves this by forming robust covalent connections
that facilitate the bonding of microorganisms within the soil. This innovative soil
stabilization solution offers a non-flammable and non-corrosive approach to fortifying
soil for various applications.
The following combinations of Marble Dust and bio enzyme are used for various Blends:
Notation for
Sr.no Blend Combination
various Blends
1 S1 100% Virgin Black Cotton Soil
5% Marble Dust + 2% Bio enzyme + 93% Black

2 S2
Cotton Soil
10% Marble Dust + 2% Bio enzyme + 88%
3 S3
Black Cotton Soil
15% Marble Dust + 2% Bio enzyme + 83%
4 S4
Black Cotton Soil
3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
In order to evaluate the engineering characteristics of both the untouched (virgin) soil
and the amalgamated soil mixture, a comprehensive series of tests has been carried out.
These tests were performed subsequent to the initial assessment of the soil's fundamental

physical and chemical composition, with the findings of these preliminary tests already
provided.
Laboratory Testing
 Index properties of soil  Engineering Property of Soil
 Grain Size analysis.  Specific Gravity test.
 Consistency Indices.  Free Swell Index.
 Permeability.
 Compaction test.
 Direct Shear test.
 Unconfined compression test.
 California Bearing ratio.
4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

1. Grain Size Analysis
For the Sieve analysis, 14 Soil samples are taken for sieving. Each soil sample is sieved
with standard sieve sizes of, 4.75, 2.36, 1.18, 1, 0.600, 0.300, 0.150, 0.075, PAN,
respectively.
Table 3 Grain Sieve Analysis of Black Cotton Soil

Mechanical Sieve Analysis
Sr.no Samples Gravel Sand Silt and Clay Total
(%) (%) (%)
1 1 32.95 66.85 0.2 100
2 2 31.2 68.6 0.2 100
3 3 17.05 82.7 0.25 100
4 4 12.8 87 0.2 100
5 5 15.5 84.3 0.2 100
6 6 12.75 86.3 0.95 100
7 7 16.95 82.75 0.3 100
8 8 18.75 80.85 0.4 100
9 9 19 80 1 100
10 10 15.5 84 0.5 100
11 11 18 81.5 0.5 100
12 12 17.5 81.7 0.8 100
13 13 10.5 89.3 0.2 100
14 14 33 66.9 0.1 100

Grain Size Analysis

100
90
80
Percentage Passing
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
particle size, mm
Figure 1 Grain sieve analysis graph
The particle size distribution curves of black cotton soil are shown in the above figure
and summarised in Table 3.
2. Atterberg’s Limit - Consistency Indices
The primary emphasis of this study was placed on determining the Consistency Indices,
specifically the Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Shrinkage Limit, for both the Black
Cotton Soil and three distinct Blended samples. The results of these evaluations are
presented comprehensively in Table 4, while Figure 2 provides a graphical representation
of the data collected.
Table 4 Consistency Indices for different Blends of Black Cotton Soil
Blends S1 S2 S3 S4
Liquid
56.07 51.053 61.32 58
Limit
Plastic
39.95 23.623 44.995 44.63
Limit
Shrinkage
38.5 28.2 25.8 22.35
Limit

Constistency indices chart
Liquid Limit Plastic Limit Shrinkage Limit
70
61.32
56.07 58
60
Atterberg's limits
51.053
50 44.995 44.63
39.95 38.5
40
28.2 25.8
30 23.623 22.35
20
10
0
S1 S2 S3 S4
Blends
Figure 2 Consistency Indices Chart of Various Blended Soil Samples
3. Specific Gravity
In our laboratory experiments, we conducted Specific Gravity tests on the Black Cotton
Soil samples, both in their natural state and when blended with Marble Dust and Bio-
enzyme. The average Specific Gravity values for each blend are documented in Table 5,
and for a visual representation of how Specific Gravity changes with varying blend
proportions, please refer to Figure 3. These findings carry significant implications for the
evaluation of soil stability, compaction characteristics, and behaviour, particularly in the
context of pavement design and construction.
Table 5 Specific gravity of Soil Samples
Notation Blended Soil Mixture Specific Gravity
S1 100% BCS 2.2
S2 5% MD + 3% BE + 92% BCS 2.34
S3 10% MD + 6% BE + 84% BCS 2.42
S4 15% MD + 9% BE + 76% BCS 2.45

SPECIFIC GRAVITY
S4 2.45
Soil Samples
S3 2.42
S2 2.34
S1 2.2
2.05 2.1 2.15 2.2 2.25 2.3 2.35 2.4 2.45 2.5
specific gravity
Figure 3 Specific Gravity for Soil sample of different Blends
The Specific Gravity of the Virgin Soil sample (S1) is measured as 2.2, while for the S2
blend, it increases to 2.34. Further, for the S3 and S4 Blends, the Specific Gravity values
are determined as 2.42 and 2.45, respectively.
4. Compaction Test
The compaction test, which seeks to enhance soil density by eliminating voids, was
carried out to ascertain the Optimum Moisture Content (OMC) and Maximum Dry
Density (MDD) for the Blends incorporating Marble Dust and Bio-enzyme. The results
for OMC and MDD for different soil sample Blends are detailed in Table 6. These
findings are further illustrated in Figure 4 for visual clarity. This dataset holds significant
importance in comprehending the compaction characteristics of the soil Blends and aids
in determining the essential moisture content required to attain the highest density during
road construction and pavement design.
Table 6 OMC and MDD for Soil Sample of different Blends
Blends OMC, (%) MDD, (g/cc)
S1 15 1.39
S2 21 1.43
S3 18 1.453
S4 21 1.85

COMPACTION
1.9
1.85
1.8
1.75
1.7
1.65
1.6 S1
MDD
1.55
1.5 S2
1.45 S3
1.4
1.35 S4
1.3
1.25
1.2
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
OMC
Figure 4 Moisture Content and Dry Density for Soil sample of different Blends
It is observed that the optimum moisture content for the soil sample of Blend S1 and
Blend S3 increases by 40% compared to the virgin soil sample (S1), while for the soil
sample of Blend S4, it increases by 20%. In terms of maximum dry density, the soil
samples of Blends S1, S2, and S3 exhibit increases of 2.8%, 4.5%, and 33.09%,
respectively, compared to the virgin soil sample (S1).
5. Free Swell Index Test

The free swell index test is a vital assessment of a soil's propensity to swell upon contact
with water, a crucial factor associated with substructure issues and foundation failures.
The outcomes of this test are presented comprehensively in Table 7, and for a visual
depiction of the data, please refer to Figure 5. These results provide valuable insights into
the free swell index of the soil, indicating the percentage increase in volume upon
exposure to water. By studying the data in Table 7 and referencing the bar graph, one can
discern variations in swelling behaviour among various soil samples, including the
Blends and the natural (virgin) soil.
Table 7 Free Swell Index for Soil Sample of Various Blends
Blended Soil Samples Free Swell Index, (%)
S1 55.49
S2 48.78
S3 29.09

S4 21.61
Free Swell Index

110
100
100
87.91
90
Relative Free Swell Index, %
80
70
60 52.42
50
38.94
40
30
20
10
S1 S2 S3 S4
Blended Soil sample
Figure 5 Free Swell Index for Soil sample of Various Blends
This indicates a decrease in the Free Swell Index by 12.09%, 47.57%, and 61.05%
respectively, when compared to the Free Swell Index of the virgin soil (S1).
6. Permeability Test
The Permeability test is a crucial assessment that determines the rate at which water can
traverse through soils, a property influenced by the arrangement of soil grains and the
presence of pore spaces. This test plays a pivotal role in geotechnical investigations,
providing essential information on how effectively water can permeate the soil layers
within a specified area, which is critical for construction project planning.
The results of the Permeability test are presented in Table 8, and a visual representation
of the data is provided in Figure 6. These findings supply valuable insights into the soil's
permeability characteristics, serving as a guiding factor in the planning and execution of
construction projects.
Table 8 Coefficient of Permeability for different Blends of Soil
Coefficient of Permeability,
Blended Soil sample
cm/s (10-4)
S1 232

S2 156
S3 144
S4 148
Coefficient of Permeability
120
Relative Coefficient of Permeability,
100
100
80 67.24
62.07 63.8
60
cm/s
40
20
0
S1 S2 S3 S4
Blended Soil Samples
Figure 6 Coefficient of Permeability for various Blends of Soil
Specifically, the Relative Coefficient of Permeability for the soil sample of virgin soil
(S1) decreases by 67.24%, 62.07%, and 63.8% for Blends S2, S3, and S4, respectively.
7. Direct Shear Test
The Direct Shear test is a valuable method employed to determine the consolidated
drained shear strength of soils. The results of this test are presented comprehensively in
Table 9 and are visually depicted in Figure 7. An in-depth examination of these findings
allows for the assessment of the shear strength characteristics exhibited by the soil
Blends.
These outcomes hold critical significance in understanding the stability and load-bearing
capacity of the soil in various geotechnical applications. They play a pivotal role in
informing the design and analysis of structures such as foundations and retaining walls,
as well as facilitating assessments of slope stability. Furthermore, they provide valuable
insights into the soil's shear behaviour, which is instrumental in devising appropriate soil
stabilization and reinforcement techniques.

Table 9 Maximum Shear Stress for different Blends
Normal Max Shear Stress, N/cm2

Stress,
N/cm2 S1 S2 S3 S4
5 5.32 6.48 9.21 11.51
10 6.07 10.2 12.36 14.38
15 7.82 11.53 17.44 20.15
25
20.15
Max Shear Stress, N/cm2
20
17.44
14.38
15 S1
12.36
11.51 11.53 S2
10.2
9.21
10 7.82 S3
6.48 6.07 S4
5.32
5
0
5 10 15
Normal Stress, N/cm2
Figure 7 Shear Stress for different Soil samples
Table 10 Cohesion and Angle of Internal Friction for various Blends
Blended Soil Angle of Internal

Cohesion (C), N/cm2
sample Friction (ⱷ)
S1 3.9033 140
S2 4.3533 270
S3 4.7733 400
S4 6.7067 410
The angle of internal friction increased by approximately 1.9 times, 2.8 times, and 2.9
times, respectively, compared to 100% virgin soil (S1). Similarly, the cohesion increased

by 11.52%, 22.28%, and 71.82%, respectively, compared to the virgin soil (S1) for the
various soil samples of Blends S2, S3, and S4.
8. Unconfined Compression Strength
The Unconfined Compression Test is a commonly used method to assess the Unconfined
Compressive Strength of cohesive soil specimens. The results of this test, presented in
Table 11 and graphically illustrated in Figure 8, provide valuable insights into the
strength characteristics of the materials under study. This test is instrumental in
determining the material's ability to withstand compressive forces without undergoing
significant deformation or failure, thus supplying crucial data for engineering and
construction applications.
Table 11 Unconfined compression strength values
UCS Test Value
Blends Strain Strain, %
(KPa)
S1 0.01956 1.9 104
S2 0.03476 3.5 212
S3 0.05862 5.9 360
S4 0.06585 6.6 375
UCS Test Value (kPa)

400
360.58
346.15
350
300
Relative UCS Values, kPa
250
203.85
200
150
100
100
50
0
1.9 3.5 5.9 6.6
Strain Percentage
Figure 8 Unconfined Compression Strengths for various Soil sample

The Relative UCS values for Blends S2, S3, and S4 are 203.85%, 346.15%, and 360.58%,
respectively. In other words, the UCS values increased by approximately 2 times, 3.46
times, and 3.6 times, respectively.
9. California Bearing Ratio Test
The California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test was conducted on soil samples containing
different combinations of Black Cotton Soil, Marble Dust, and Bio-enzyme to evaluate
the strength characteristics of both soaked and unsoaked soil specimens. The resulting
CBR values for each condition are presented in Tables 12 and 13. Additionally, the
Unconfined Compression Test was employed to establish the relationship between
penetration depth and load for the various soil Blends. The CBR values, calculated at
penetrations of 2.5mm and 5mm, are illustrated in Figure 9 for the unsoaked soil samples.
These findings are of paramount importance when assessing the suitability and
performance of the soil Blends in construction applications. They provide valuable
insights into the load-bearing capacity and behavior of these materials under different
moisture conditions, which is crucial information for making informed decisions in
construction and engineering projects.
Table 12 CBR Values for Unsoaked Soil sample Blends
Blends CBR unsoaked, (%)
S1 2.54
S2 5.63
S3 7.69
S4 15.91

CBR Unsoaked Chart

15.91
16
5.26%
14
CBR Unsoaked, %
12
10
7.69 2.02%
8
5.63
6
4 2.54
2
0
S1 S2 S3 S4
Soil Blends
Figure 9 Unsoaked CBR Values for Soil sample of Various Blends
The results indicate a consistent increase in the Unsoaked CBR values for each soil
sample blend. Specifically, compared to the Virgin Soil (S1), the Unsoaked CBR value
increased by approximately 2.21 times for Blend S2, 3 times for Blend S3, and 6.26 times
for Blend S4.
Table 13 CBR Values for Soaked Soil sample Blends
Blends CBR soaked, (%)

S1 1.26
S2 4.32
S3 6.84
S4 13.91
CBR Soaked Chart

16
13.91
14
12 10.03
%
CBR Soaked, %
10
8 6.84
4.42
6 4.32 %
4
2 1.26
0
S1 S2 S3 S4
Soil Blends

Figure 10 Soaked CBR Values for Soil sample of various Blends
Compared to the Black Cotton Soil, the Soaked CBR values increased approximately by
3.43 times for Blend S2, 5.42 times for Blend S3, and 11 times for Blend S4. These
increments indicate a substantial enhancement in the soil's stability and strength. Overall,
these findings demonstrate the positive effects of the various soil sample Blends on soil
stability, particularly under soaked conditions. The increased Soaked CBR values signify
improved strength and densification of the soil, suggesting enhanced suitability for
construction applications.
10. COST ANALYSIS
Cost analysis is concluded for following data
1. Four lane dual carriageway

2. Initial traffic in the year of completion of construction = 1495 CVPD (sum of both
directions)
3. Traffic growth rate = 7 %
4. Design life = 15 years
5. Vehicle damage factor based on axle load survey = 3.9 standard axle per commercial
vehicle
6. Design CBR of sub-grade Soil = 5%
7. Lane Distribution factor = 0.45
In the context of designing flexible pavements, a critical cost analysis has been
conducted to assess the financial implications of different Soaked California Bearing
Ratio (CBR) values—specifically, 5%, 7%, and 15%. The analysis estimates expenses
related to implementing the pavement design under various CBR conditions,
including material costs, construction methods, labor, and equipment expenses.
Table 14 Estimated Cost Comparison of Designed Flexible Pavement

Pavement Estimated Cost,
Sr. No. CBR Value, %
Thickness, mm ₹
1 5 605 3,83,44,180
2 7 590 3,76,67,700
3 12 555 3,15,79,380

5 CONCLUSIONS
1. The results of Grain Size Analysis indicate that the maximum dominancy of Silt and Clay
is around 79.2% and above in most of the 14 samples which clearly indicate that the
given Soil sample is Expansive in nature. Grain Size Analysis indicate that particle size
distribution is more or less same across all the Soil samples.
2. The Atterberg’s limit test results reveals that the Shrinkage Limit of the various Blended
Soil samples decreases by 42% compared to Virgin Soil sample (S1), whereas the Plastic
Limit and Liquid Limit for Soil sample of all three Blends increase by 12% and 3%,
respectively over that for Virgin Soil sample (S1). This is due to the addition of marble
dust to soil which led to decrease in plasticity and water-holding capacity and reduced
shrinkage potential. These enhancements in the soil's characteristics improve its strength
and stability, making it more suitable for various engineering applications.
3. The Specific Gravity of blended Soil sample S2, S3, and S4 increases by 6.4%, 10%, and
11.4% respectively, when compared with Virgin Soil sample (S1). This is due to porosity
of particles decreases and leads to densification.
4. The Compaction test results indicates the Maximum Dry Density for Soil sample of
Blend S4 increased to 1.85 g/cc at Moisture Content 21% from 1.39 g/cc at Moisture
Content 15% for Virgin soil sample (S1). However, the Maximum Dry Density for Soil
sample of Blend S3 is 1.453 g/cc at Moisture Content 18% and that of Blend S2 is 1.43
g/cc at Moisture Content 21%. Thus, S3 blend is denser due to the resistance of the
flocculated structure to the compaction process providing the advantage of improved
CBR value.
5. Free Swell Index values for Soil sample of Blend S2, S3, and S4 are 48.78%, 29.09%,
and 21.61% respectively, when compared to Free Swell Index of 55.49% for Virgin Soil
sample (S1). This is due to the process of flocculation of clay particles, reducing the
attraction of moisture and thereby reducing the swelling activity of the soil.
6. Coefficient of Permeability for blended Soil sample S2, S3, and S4 reduces by 32.7%,
37.9%, and 36.2% respectively, when compared to Coefficient of Permeability of Virgin
Soil sample (S1). This is due to of addition of Marble Dust and Bio-enzyme which
reduces the porosity and it restricts the seepage of water through the soil.

7. It is observed from Direct Shear Strength test that as Marble Dust and Bio-enzyme
content in the Blended Soil sample is increased, three times increase in the Angle of
Internal Friction (ⱷ) and 71.82% increase in Cohesion (C) is observed for Soil sample of
Blend S4 as compared to Virgin Soil sample (S1). This is due to particle interlocking,
providing a binding effect, and promoting improved compaction.
8. Unconfined Compression Strength for blended Soil sample S2, S3, and S4 increases by
2 times, 3.46 times, and 3.6 times, respectively when compared to Unconfined
Compression Strength of Virgin Soil sample (S1). This significant increase in strength
attributed to the chemical reactions that occur between the calcium content in Marble
Dust and Bio-enzyme and the silica and alumina present in the Soil. These reactions lead
to the formation of cementitious compounds.
9. The CBR of Unsoaked Soil sample Blends S2, S3, and S4 increases by 2.2 times, 3 times,
and 6.3 times respectively, when compared to CBR of Unsoaked Virgin Soil sample (S1)
and the CBR of Soaked Soil sample Blends S2, S3, and S4 increases by 3.4 times, 5.4
times, and 11 times when compared to CBR of Soaked Virgin Soil sample (S1). This is
due to formation of physical and chemical bonds between the soil particles and blend of
bio-enzyme and marble dust. This binding effect reduces particle movement and sliding
under loads leading to increased load-bearing capacity.
10. The estimation of pavement thickness was conducted based on the CBR values of the
blended soil samples. Among the samples, Blend S2 with a 5% CBR value had a
pavement thickness of 605mm, Blend S3 with a 7% CBR value had a thickness of
590mm, and Blend S4 with a 15% CBR value had a thickness of 555mm. A comparison
of these samples revealed a reduction in pavement thickness. Specifically, Blend S3
showed a decrease of 15mm, while Blend S4 experienced a significant reduction of
50mm compared to the pavement thickness of Blend S2. These findings emphasize the
potential advantages of using soil blends with higher CBR values, as they result in a
reduced pavement thickness, potentially leading to cost savings in pavement
construction.
11. The cost analysis of the designed flexible pavement clearly indicates that as the CBR
value increases, the cost decreases. A thorough comparison of the cost for different CBR
values reveals significant reductions. Specifically, when comparing the cost of the
designed pavement for a 7% CBR of Blend S3 to the value to that of a 5% CBR value of

Blend S2, a noticeable reduction of 5.4% is observed. Furthermore, the cost of the
designed pavement for a 15% CBR of Blend S4 value shows a substantial reduction of
18.32% when compared to the cost for a 5% CBR value of Blend S2. These findings
underscore the cost-effectiveness of higher CBR values in the design of flexible
pavements.
6 REFERENCES
1. F. Yilmaz and M. Yurdakul, Evaluation of Marble Dust for Soil Stabilization. Journal
of Special issue of the 3rd International Conference on Computational and
Experimental Science and Engineering (ICCESEN 2016), Vol-132, page 710-712
(2017)
2. Altug SAYGILI, Use of Waste Marble Dust for Stabilization of Clayey Soil. Journal of
ISSN 1392–1320 materials science (medžiagotyra), Vol. 21, No. 4. 2015
3. R. Ali, H. Khan, A. A. Shah, Expansive Soil Stabilization Using Marble Dust and
Bagasse Ash. Journal of International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), Volume
3 Issue 6, June 2014
4. J. Pooni, D. Robert, C. Gunasekara, F. Giustozzi, and S. Setunge, Mechanism of
Enzyme Stabilization for Expansive Soils Using Mechanical and Microstructural
Investigation. Journal of American society of civil engineers (ASCE 2021)
5. Rintu Renjith, Sujeeva Setunge, Dilan J. Robert, Chamila Gunasekara, and Brian
O’Donnell, Optimization of Enzyme-Based Soil Stabilization. Journal of American
society of civil engineers (ASCE 2020)
6. Vikash Kumar, Shiwanshu Shekhar, Santosh Kumar, Akash Priyadarshee, and Niraj
Kumar, A Study on Soil Stabilisation using Bio-enzyme. Journal of Journal of Civil
Engineering and Environmental Technology Volume 6, Issue 7; October-December
2019
7. Jacobs W., et. al., Strength of Sediment Mixtures as a Function of Sand Content and
Clay Mineralogy, “In Proceedings in Marine Science”, Vol. 9, pp. 91-107, 2008
8. Negi A. S., et. al., Soil Stabilization using Lime, “International Journal of Innovative
Research in Science, Engineering and Technology”, Vol. 2, pp 448-453, 2013.
9. Dhule S. B., et. al., Improvement of Flexible Pavement with use of Geogrid, “Electronic
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering”, Vol. 16, pp 269-279, 2011.
10. Reddy B. V. & Latha M. S., Retrieving Clay Minerals from Stabilised Soil
Compacts, “Applied Clay Science”, Vol. 101, pp 362-368, 2014.

11. Butt W. A., et al., Soil Sub-Grade Improvement using Human Hair Fiber, “International
Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research”, Vol. 5, Issue 12, pp 977-981, 2014.
12. Marsh A., et. al., Stabilisation of Clay Mixtures and Soils by Alkali
Activation, “Earthen Dwellings and Structures, Springer, Singapore”, pp 15-26, 2019.
13. Matus F., et. al., Soil Carbon Storage and Stabilisation in Andic Soils: A
Review, “Catena”, Vol. 120, pp 102-110, 2014.
14. Ouhadi V. R. & Goodarzi A. R., Assessment of The Stability of a Dispersive Soil
Treated by Alum, “Engineering geology”, Vol. 85, Issue 1-2, pp 91-101, 2006.

1.our - Soil Mechanics II

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1.our - Soil Mechanics II

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1.our - Soil Mechanics II

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GRADI VA REVI EW JOURNAL I SSN NO : 0363- 8057

BLACK COTTON SOIL STABILIZATION BY USING BIO-

Aishwarya P Gayakawad1, Rajshekhar Rathod2, Sagar Sonawane3,

These authors contributed equally to this work.

Black Cotton Soils (BCS), characterized by their susceptibility to vertical ground

VOLUME 9 I SSUE 9 2023 PAGE NO: 312

1.2 AN OVERVIEW OF SOIL STABILIZATION

The most successful approach of ground improvement found worldwide is soil

VOLUME 9 I SSUE 9 2023 PAGE NO: 313

1 Moisture % 4.67 IS:1514-1959

2 Calcium Oxide Ppm 14.10 IS:6932(Part1)-1973

3 Magnesium Oxide Ppm 17.20 IS:6932(Part1)-1973

4 CaCO3 % 4.00 IS:1514-1959

VOLUME 9 I SSUE 9 2023 PAGE NO: 314

5 Alumina % 0.30 IS:6932(Part1)-1973

7 Volatile Matter at 1500C % 0.40

9 Acid Insoluble Matter % 0.60 No Specific Standard

11 Total Solids % 4.60

12 Calcium Carbonate % 0.08

13 Specific Gravity - 2.00

2.2 MARBLE DUST

1 Specific gravity (Gs) - 2.64

2 Uniformity coefficient (Cu) - 2.85

3 Coefficient of curvature (Cc) - 1.19

VOLUME 9 I SSUE 9 2023 PAGE NO: 315

1 S1 100% Virgin Black Cotton Soil

5% Marble Dust + 2% Bio enzyme + 93% Black

VOLUME 9 I SSUE 9 2023 PAGE NO: 316

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Table 3 Grain Sieve Analysis of Black Cotton Soil

VOLUME 9 I SSUE 9 2023 PAGE NO: 317

Grain Size Analysis

Figure 1 Grain sieve analysis graph

2. Atterberg’s Limit - Consistency Indices

VOLUME 9 I SSUE 9 2023 PAGE NO: 318

Constistency indices chart

Liquid Limit Plastic Limit Shrinkage Limit

Figure 2 Consistency Indices Chart of Various Blended Soil Samples

Table 5 Specific gravity of Soil Samples

Notation Blended Soil Mixture Specific Gravity

S1 100% BCS 2.2

S2 5% MD + 3% BE + 92% BCS 2.34

S3 10% MD + 6% BE + 84% BCS 2.42

S4 15% MD + 9% BE + 76% BCS 2.45

VOLUME 9 I SSUE 9 2023 PAGE NO: 319

Figure 3 Specific Gravity for Soil sample of different Blends

Blends OMC, (%) MDD, (g/cc)

VOLUME 9 I SSUE 9 2023 PAGE NO: 320

5. Free Swell Index Test

Blended Soil Samples Free Swell Index, (%)

VOLUME 9 I SSUE 9 2023 PAGE NO: 321

Free Swell Index

Figure 5 Free Swell Index for Soil sample of Various Blends

VOLUME 9 I SSUE 9 2023 PAGE NO: 322

Figure 6 Coefficient of Permeability for various Blends of Soil

7. Direct Shear Test

VOLUME 9 I SSUE 9 2023 PAGE NO: 323

Table 9 Maximum Shear Stress for different Blends

Normal Max Shear Stress, N/cm2