CHAPTER ONE
1) INTRODUCTION
Site feasibility study for geotechnical projects is of far most beneficial before a project can take off.
Site surveys usually take place before the design process begins in order to understand the
characteristics of subsoil upon which the decision on location of the project can be made. The
following geotechnical design criteria must be considered during site selection.
• Design load and function of the structure.
• Type of foundation to be used.
• Bearing capacity of subsoil.
In the past, the third bullet played a major role in decision-making on-site selection. Once the bearing
capacity of the soil was poor, the following were options:
• Change the design to suit site conditions.
• Remove and replace the in-situ soil.
• Abandon the site.
Abandoned sites due to undesirable soil bearing capacities dramatically increased, and the outcome
of this was the scarcity of land and increased demand for natural resources. Affected areas include
those which were susceptible to liquefaction and those covered with soft clay and organic soils. Other
areas were those in a landslide and contaminated land. However, in most geotechnical projects, it is
not possible to obtain a construction site that will meet the design requirements without ground
modification. The current practice is to modify the engineering properties of the native problematic
soils to meet the design specifications. Nowadays, soils such as, soft clays and organic soils can be
improved to the civil engineering requirements. This state of the art review focuses on soil
stabilization method which is one of the several methods of soil improvement.
Soil stabilization aims at improving soil strength and increasing resistance to softening by water
through bonding the soil particles together, water proofing the particles or combination of the two
(Sherwood, 1993). Usually, the technology provides an alternative provision structural solution to a
practical problem. The simplest stabilization processes are compaction and drainage (if water drains
out of wet soil it becomes stronger). The other process is by improving gradation of particle size and
further 1
improvement can be achieved by adding binders to the weak soils (Rogers et al, 1996). Soil
stabilization can be accomplished by several methods. All these methods fall into two
broad categories (FM 5-410) namely;
- mechanical stabilization
Under this category, soil stabilization can be achieved through physical process by altering the
physical nature of native soil particles by either induced vibration or compaction or by incorporating
other physical properties such as barriers and nailing. Mechanical stabilization is not the main
subject of this review and will not be further discussed.
- chemical stabilization
Under this category, soil stabilization depends mainly on chemical reactions between stabilizer
(cementitious material) and soil minerals (pozzolanic materials) to achieve the desired effect. A
chemical stabilization method is the fundamental of this review and, therefore, throughout the rest
of this report, the term soil stabilization will mean chemical stabilization.
Through soil stabilization, unbound materials can be stabilized with cementitious materials (cement,
lime, fly ash, bitumen or combination of these). The stabilized soil materials have a higher strength,
lower permeability and lower compressibility than the native soil (Keller brochure 32-01E). The
method can be achieved in two ways, namely;
(1) in situ stabilization and
(2) ex-situ stabilization.
Note that, stabilization is not necessary a magic wand by which every soil properties can be improved
for better (Ingles and Metcalf, 1972). The decision to technological usage depends on which soil
properties have to be modified. The chief properties of soil which are of interest to engineers are
volume stability, strength, compressibility, permeability and durability (Ingles and Metcalf, 1972;
Sherwood, 1993; EuroSoilStab, 2002). For a successful stabilization, a laboratory tests followed by
field tests may be required in order to determine the engineering and environmental properties.
Laboratory tests although may produce higher strength than corresponding material from the field,
but will help to assess the effectiveness of stabilized materials in the field. Results from the laboratory
tests will enhance the knowledge on the choice of binders and amounts (EuroSoilStab, 2002).
2) BACKGROUND OF STUDY
Civil Engineers are often faced with the problem of constructing facilities on or with
soils, which in many cases do not possess sufficient strength and high bearing
capacity to support the loads imposed upon them, either during the construction or
the service life of the structures. As a result of the poor performance of these soils, it
is important for Engineers to devise various methods and techniques of improving
the properties of the soil to meet the specifications required for the construction of
the facilities. As there are different methods of improving the properties of soil, the
choice of a particular method of improvement depends majorly on the type of soil,
its characteristics and the type and degree of improvement desired. Stabilization of
soil is a very effective method to improve the properties of the soil. Soil stabilization
is the improvement of stability or bearing power of the soil by the use of controlled
compaction, proportioning and/or the addition of suitable admixture or stabilizers.
The objectives of any stabilization technique are to increase the shear strength,
durability, and improve workability of the soil. Stabilization can be used to treat a
wide range of sub-grade materials from expansive clays to granular materials. The
most common improvements achieved through stabilization include better soil
gradation, reduction of plasticity index or swelling potential, and increases in
durability and strength. Soil stabilization can be achieved by controlled compaction
of the soil or the addition of suitable admixtures like cement, lime and waste
materials like fly ash, phosphogypsum etc. However, there has been an increase in
the cost of introducing these additives in recent years which paved way for other
type materials (e.g. coconut shell ash) as additives. These new additives can be used
effectively to meet the challenges of environmental pollution resulting from increase
in Agricultural waste.
3) STATEMENT of THE PROBLEM
Here are some common problems that can be addressed through soil stabilization:
- The soil is too soft or unstable for construction.
- The soil is susceptible to erosion.
- The soil has poor water drainage.
- The soil contains high levels of chemicals or other contaminants.
- The soil does not have the desired pH level for construction.
- The soil has poor bearing capacity.
- The soil has a high shrink-swell potential.
These are just a few examples of common soil stabilization problems, but there can be many
more depending on the specific situation. Do you have a specific problem in mind?
Human
4) AIM of STUDY
The aim of soil stabilization is typically to improve the properties of the soil to make it more suitable
for a particular purpose, such as construction or farming. The specific goals of soil stabilization can
vary depending on the specific situation and the desired outcome. Some common aims of soil
stabilization include:
- To improve the strength and durability of the soil.
- To reduce the risk of soil erosion.
- To improve water drainage and prevent flooding.
- To improve the chemical or biological composition of the soil.
- To reduce the risk of soil contamination.
- To increase the ability of the soil to support vegetation or crops.
These
5) OBJECTIVES of STUDY
The objectives of soil stabilization are often related to the specific aims of the project. For example,
the objective of soil stabilization in a construction project might be to increase the strength of the
soil to support the weight of the structure, to improve its bearing capacity In a soil erosion
prevention project, the objective might be to increase the stability of the soil to reduce erosion. And
in a contaminated soil remediation project, the objective might be to reduce the toxicity of the soil to
make it safer for people and the environment. In general, the objectives of soil stabilization are
focused
6) SCOPE of STUDY
In civil engineering, the scope of study for soil stabilization typically involves determining the specific
characteristics of the soil that need to be improved and developing a plan to achieve the desired
outcome. This may include conducting soil tests to determine the soil type, strength, and other
properties, as well as analyzing the site conditions and the desired use of the soil. The scope of study
may also involve analyzing the cost and feasibility of different soil stabilization methods and
developing a schedule for the project. Additionally, the scope of study may consider the
environmental impacts of the soil stabilization project and any applicable regulations.
7) LIMITATION of STUDY
There are several limitations that civil engineers may encounter when working on soil
stabilization projects. These limitations can include:
- Budget constraints, which can limit the types of soil stabilization methods that can be used.
- Geographical limitations, such as soil type, location, climate, and topography.
- Time constraints, which can limit the amount of time available for soil stabilization.
- Regulatory limitations, such as environmental or zoning regulations that must be followed.
- Material limitations, such as availability and cost of materials used for soil stabilization.
- Labor limitations, such as availability and cost of labor.
- Design limitations
8) JUSTIFICATION of STUDY
the justification for soil stabilization typically focuses on the benefits of improving the
engineering properties of the soil for a specific project. Some common justifications include:
- Improved bearing capacity of the soil, which allows for heavier structures to be built.
- Improved compressive strength of the soil, which allows for deeper foundations to be built.
- Improved shear strength of the soil, which reduces the risk of slope failure.
- Improved permeability of the soil, which allows for better drainage and reduces the risk of flooding.
- Improved durability of the soil, which reduces the need for maintenance or repairs.
CHAPTER TWO
Literature Review:
1) COMPONENTS OF STABILIZATION:
Soil stabilization involves the use of stabilizing agents (binder materials) in weak soils to
improve its geotechnical properties such as compressibility, strength, permeability and durability. The
components of stabilization technology include soils and or soil minerals and stabilizing agent or
binders (cementitious materials).
2) SOILS:
Soft soils, such as silty, clayey peat, or organic soils, often require significant stabilization efforts
to attain favorable engineering characteristics. According to Sherwood (1993) stabilizing fine-grained
granular materials is easier because of their large surface area compared to particle diameter. A clay
soil compared to others has a large surface area due to flat and elongated particle shapes. Silty
materials can be challenging for stabilization due to their sensitivity to slight moisture changes
(Sherwood 1993).
Peat soils and organic soils are rich in water content of up to about 2000%, high porosity and
high organic content. The uniformity of peat soil can vary from muddy to fibrous, and in most cases,
the deposit is shallow, but in worst cases, it can extend to several meters below the surface
(Cortellazzo and Cola, 1999; Åhnberg and Holm, 1999). Organic soils, with their high exchange
capacity, may impede hydration by retaining calcium ions from cement. Stabilizing these soils requires
careful selection of binder and the appropriate quantity to overcome this challenge.
3) STABILIZING AGENTS:
These are hydraulic (primary binders) or non-hydraulic (secondary binders) materials that when in
contact with water or in the presence of pozzolanic minerals reacts with water to form cementitious
composite materials. The commonly used binders are:
. Cement
. Fly Ash
. Lime
. Blast Furnace Slag
3.1). CEMENT:
In civil engineering, cement refers to a powdery substance that, when mixed with water, sand,
and aggregates (such as crushed stone or gravel), forms a durable and solid binding material. Cement
is a fundamental component of concrete, which is one of the most widely used construction
materials in the world.
The primary function of cement in civil engineering is to act as a binding agent that holds
together the various components of concrete, allowing it to harden and develop its structural
strength over time. When water is added to cement, a chemical reaction known as hydration occurs,
resulting in the formation of calcium silicate hydrate and other compounds. These compounds create
a strong, solid matrix that binds the sand and aggregates together, forming a robust and load-bearing
material.
Cement plays a crucial role in various construction applications, including the creation of
buildings, bridges, highways, dams, and many other infrastructure projects. It provides the necessary
strength and durability for these structures to withstand the forces and loads they are subjected to
over their lifetimes (John Christner).
TYPES OF CEMENT:
Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC):
OPC, or Ordinary Portland Cement, is widely utilized in construction with different grades like OPC
33, 43, and 53 denoting diverse compressive strengths. Its versatility makes it suitable for various
applications such as building construction, bridges, pavements, and general concrete work (John
Christner).
Portland Pozzolana Cement (PPC):
PPC, or Portland Pozzolana Cement, is a composite cement mixing OPC with pozzolanic materials
such as fly ash or silica fume. It enhances workability and durability, commonly chosen for projects
requiring resistance to sulfate and chloride attacks (John Christner).
Rapid Hardening Cement:
High Early Strength Cement, or fast-setting cement, achieves rapid strength, typically within days.
Ideal for projects requiring quick setting and early strength, like repairs, precast concrete, and cold-
weather construction (John Christner).
Low Heat Cement:
Low heat cement, unlike Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC), produces less heat during
hydration. This makes it suitable for large concrete structures such as dams and foundations, where
excessive heat could lead to cracking (John Christner).
Sulfate-Resistant Cement:
Specialized sulfate-resistant cement, tailored to withstand sulfate-rich environments, finds
application in projects, especially in coastal regions, where protection against sulfate attack in soils or
water is crucial (John Christner).
White Cement:
White cement is similar to OPC but has a higher purity level and is used in applications where a
white or decorative finish is desired, like in the production of white or colored concrete products and
architectural elements (John Christner).
Fly Ash:
Fly ash is a heterogeneous by-product material produced in the combustion process of coal used in
power stations. It is a fine grey coloured powder having spherical glassy particles that rise with the flue
gases. As fly ash contains pozzolanic materials components which reach with lime to form cementatious
materials. Thus Fly ash is used in concrete, mines, landfills and dams (Fasi Ur Rahman).
Physical Properties of Fly Ash:
Fineness Of Fly Ash:
As per ASTM, the fineness of the fly ash is to be checked in both dry n wet sieving. The fly ash
sample is sieved in 45 micron sieve and the percentage of retained on the 45 micron sieve is
calculated. Further fineness is also measured by LeChatelier method and Blaine SpecificSurface
method (Fasi Ur Rahman).
Specific Gravity of Fly Ash:
The specific gravity of fly ash ranges from a low value of 1.90 for a sub-bituminous ash to a high
value of 2.96 for an iron-rich bituminous ash (Fasi Ur Rahman).
Size and Shape of Fly Ash:
As the flyash is a very fine material, the particle size ranges in between 10 to 100 micron. The
shape of the fly ash is usually spherical glassy shaped (Fasi Ur Rahman).
Colour:
The colour of the fly ash depends upon the chemical and mineral constituents. Lime content in
the fly ash gives tan and light colours where as brownish colour is imparted by the presence of iron
content. A dark grey to black colour is typically attributed to an elevated un-burned content (Fasi Ur
Rahman).
Lime:
Lime provides an economical way of soil stabilization. Lime modification describes an increase in
strength brought by cation exchange capacity rather than cementing effect brought by pozzolanic
reaction (Sherwood, 1993). In soil modification, as clay particles flocculates, transforms natural plate
like clays particles into needle like interlocking metalline structures. Clay soils turn drier and less
susceptible to water content changes (Roger et al, 1993). Lime stabilization may refer to pozzolanic
reaction in which pozzolana materials reacts with lime in presence of water to produce cementitious
compounds (Sherwood, 1993, EuroSoilStab, 2002). The effect can be brought by either quicklime,
CaO or hydrated lime, Ca (OH)2. Slurry lime also can be used in dry soils conditions where water may
be required to achieve effective compaction (Hicks, 2002). Quicklime is the most commonly used
lime; the followings are the advantages of quicklime over hydrated lime (Rogers et al, 1996).
- higher available free lime content per unit mass
- denser than hydrated lime (less storage space is required) and less dust
- generates heat which accelerate strength gain and large reduction in
moisture content according to the reaction equation below
CaO+H2O→Ca(OH)2 +Heat(65kJ/mol).
Quicklime when mixed with wet soils, immediately takes up to 32% of its own weight of water from
the surrounding soil to form hydrated lime; the generated heat accompanied by this reaction will
further cause loss of water due to evaporation which in turn results into increased plastic limit of soil
i.e. drying out and absorption (EuroSoilStab, 2002; Sherwood, 1993).
The addition of 2% lime to soil with 35% moisture content and a plastic limit of 25% alters the plastic
limit to 40%, reducing moisture content to 5% below the new plastic limit. Sherwood's 1993 study
attributes this change to cation exchange, where sodium and hydrogen cations are replaced by calcium
ions, enhancing water affinity. Even in calcium-saturated soils, lime addition increases pH and exchange
capacity. Lime reacts with wet clay minerals, raising pH, promoting solubility of siliceous
and aluminous compounds, leading to the formation of cementitious products. Natural pozzolanas,
rich in silica and alumina, can react effectively with lime.
Lime stabilizations technology is mostly widely used in geotechnical and environmental
applications. Some of applications include encapsulation of contaminants, rendering of backfill (e.g.
wet cohesive soil), highway capping, slope stabilization and foundation improvement such as in use of
lime pile or lime-stabilized soil columns (Ingles and Metcalf, 1972). However, presence of sulphur and
organic materials may inhibit the lime stabilization process. Sulphate (e.g. gypsum) will react with
lime and swell, which may have effect on soil strength.
Blast Furnace Slag:
These are the by-product in pig iron production. The chemical compositions are similar to that of
cement. It is however, not cementitious compound by itself, but it possesses latent hydraulic
properties which upon addition of lime or alkaline material the hydraulic properties can develop
(Sherwood, 1993; Åhnberg et al, 2003). Depending on cooling system, Sherwood (1993) itemized slag
in three forms, namely:
Air-cooled slag:
Hot slag after leaving the blast furnace may be slowly cooled in open air, resulting into
crystallized slag which can be crushed and used as aggregate.
Granulated (merit 5000) or Pelletised slag:
Quenching (i.e. sudden cooling with water or air) of hot slag may result into formation of vitrified
slag. The granulated blast furnace slag or Merit 5000 (commonly known in Sweden) is a result of use
of water during quenching process, while, the use of air in the process of quenching may result into
formation of pelletised slag.
Expanded Slag:
Under certain conditions, steam produced during cooling of hot slag may give rise to expanded
slag.
Stabilization Methods:
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 (Keller Inc.). The 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.
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
SIEVE ANALYSIS (3/08/2023)
SIEVE A B C
2.36 08 4 96
1.06. 19 9.5 86.5
600 45 22.5 64
425 21 10.5 53.5
300 11 5.5 48
212 10 5 43
150 06 3 40
75 04 2 38
DUST 01 0.5 37.5
SIEVE ANALYSIS (3/08/2023)
SIEVE A B C
2.36 0 0 100
1.06. 06 3 97
600 29 14.5 82.5
425 25 12.5 70
300 16 8 62
212 13 6.5 55.5
150 07 3.5 52
75 04 2 50
DUST 01 0.5 49.5
ABOVE { 80 below} indirectly the soil is bad.
Natural moisture content
Ikorodu
SAMPLE 1G 2G
WEIGHT OF SAMPLE + CONTAINER 51 +54 24 + 44
WEIGHT OF THE DRY SAMPLE 45+41 20g + 39g
WEIGHT OF THE CONTAINER 8+20 14g + 20g
MOIST LOST 613 415
MOISTURE CONTENT 16.23 + 22.73 66.67+ 26.32
FIELD DENSITY
SAMPLE A B C D
Weight of wet soil + the 3010 2725 3023 32.03
container
Weight of the cylinder 1551 1458 1553 1458
Weight of the wet sample 144g 1227 1470 1745
Bulk density of the soil = 1.65 = 1.45 = 1.82 = 2.08
Weight of sample + 42 25 53 45
container (wet)
Weight of sample + 40 22 48 46
container (dry)
Weight of container 22 6 26 26
Moisture content 11.11 18.75 22.73 15
Field aggregate 25-22 = 3 *100 = 11.1
22-6. 16
Agege =. 53-48. = 5.*100 =22.7
48-26. 22.
Ikorodu = 49-46 = 3 * 100 = 15
46-26. 20
LAB
Ikorodu 51-45/ 45-8 = 6/37 * 100 = 16.2
Dry density = 13.79
Dry density =7.54
Dry density =7.711
Dry density = 13
ALTERBERA TEST
MOISTURE CONTENT FOR 2% OF LIME AND ASH
AGEGE SAMPLE
SAMPLES A B C D E F
WEIGHT OF WET SAMPLE 73 47 55 46 72 57
WEIGHT OF DRY SAMPLE 66 43 51 42 64 51
WEIGHT OF CONTAINER 22 10 21 23 21 20
MOISTURE CONTENT 16 12.1 13.3 21.1 19 19.4
WEIGHT OF WET SOIL + MOULD 3750 3776 3983 4228 4139 4084
MASS FOR EACH SAMPLE 2197 2223 2430 2675 2586 2531
MOISTURE CONTENT
Sample A .=16
Sample B .=12.1
Sample C .=13.3
Sample D =21.1
Sample E = 19
Sample F =19.4
Bulk density
Sample A .=2.197
Sample B .=2.223
Sample C .=2.430
Sample D .=2.675
Sample E .=2.586
Sample F .=2.531
DRY DENSITY =
Sample A = 13
Sample B = .17
Sample C = .17
Sample D = .12.1
Sample E = .13
Sample F = 12.4
MOISTURE CONTENT FOR 5% OF LIME AND ASH
AGEGE SAMPLE
SAMPLES A B C D E F G
WEIGHT OF WET SAMPLE 62 55 63 68 58 58 68
WEIGHT OF DRY SAMPLE 60 52 57 60 52 50 60
WEIGHT OF CONTAINER 26 22 20 20 20 20 27
MOISTURE CONTENT 5.9 8.1 16.2 20 19 27 24.2
WEIGHT OF WET SOIL + MOULD 3844 3899 4080 4131 4144 4082 3985
MASS FOR EACH SAMPLE 2291 2326 2527 2578 2591 2529 2432
MOISTURE CONTENT
Sample A 5.9.
Sample B 8.1
Sample C 16.2
Sample D 20
Sample E .19
Sample F 27
Sample G. 24.2
Bulk density
Sample A .2.291
Sample B .2.326
Sample C .2.527
Sample D .2.528
Sample E .2.591
Sample F .2.529
Sample G.2.432
DRY DENSITY = Bulk density
Sample A = .33.2
Sample B = 25.6
Sample C = 14.7
Sample D = .12.3
Sample E = .13
Sample F = .9.0
Sample G = 9.7
MOISTURE CONTENT FOR 7% OF LIME AND ASH
AGEGE SAMPLE
SAMPLES A B C D E F G
WEIGHT OF WET SAMPLE 59 46 54 56 54 52 65
WEIGHT OF DRY SAMPLE 53 42 51 50 49 549 60
WEIGHT OF CONTAINER 25 20 21 28 10 21 27
MOISTURE CONTENT 13.3 18.1 10 27.2 12.8 10.7 15.2
WEIGHT OF WET SOIL + MOULD 3739 3809 3866 3950 4141 4097 4037
MASS FOR EACH SAMPLE 2186 2256 2313 2397 2594 2544 2484
MOISTURE CONTENT
Sample A 13.3.
Sample B =18.1
Sample C =10
Sample D =27.2
Sample E .=12.8
Sample F =10.7
Sample G.=15.2
Bulk density
Sample A .=2.186
Sample B .=2.256
Sample C .=2.313
Sample D .=2.397
Sample E .=2.594
Sample F .=2.544
Sample G. =2.484
DRY DENSITY =
Sample A = .15.3
Sample B = 11.8
Sample C = 21.0
Sample D = .8.5
Sample E = .18.8
Sample F = .21.7
Sample G = 15.3
MOISTURE CONTENT FOR 10% OF LIME AND ASH
AGEGE SAMPLE
SAMPLES A B C D E F G
WEIGHT OF WET SAMPLE 57 78 86 93 54 54 82
WEIGHT OF DRY SAMPLE 52 74 80 87 49 50 76
WEIGHT OF CONTAINER 20 27 20 20 20 20 20
MOISTURE CONTENT 13.5 14.8 10 8.9 17.2 13.3 10.7
WEIGHT OF WET SOIL + MOULD 3849 3862 3889 4036 4145 4195 4145
MASS FOR EACH SAMPLE 2296 2309 2236 2483 2592 2642 2592
MOISTURE CONTENT
Sample A 13.5.
Sample B 14.8
Sample C 10
Sample D 8.9
Sample E .17.2
Sample F 13.3
Sample G.10.7
Bulk density
Sample A .=2.296
Sample B .=2.309
Sample C .=2.336
Sample D .=2.483
Sample E .=2.592
Sample F .=2.642
Sample G.=2.592
DRY DENSITY =
Sample A = .15.8
Sample B = 14.6
Sample C = 21.2
Sample D = .25.0
Sample E = .14.2
Sample F = .18.4
Sample G = 22.1
MOISTURE CONTENT FOR 2% OF LIME AND ASH
IKORODU SAMPLE
SAMPLES A B C D E F
WEIGHT OF WET SAMPLE 48 55 62 41 96 78
WEIGHT OF DRY SAMPLE 45 53 59 37 62 70
WEIGHT OF CONTAINER 20 27 27 10 20 26
MOISTURE CONTENT 12 7.7 9.4 14.8 16.7 18.2
WEIGHT OF WET SOIL + MOULD 3880 4016 4178 4187 4135
MASS FOR EACH SAMPLE 2327 2463 2625 2634 2362
MOISTURE CONTENT
Sample A .=12
Sample B =7.7
Sample C =9.4
Sample D =14.8
Sample E .=16.7
Sample F =18.2
Bulk density
Sample A .=2.327
Sample B .=2.463
Sample C .=2.625
Sample D .=2.634
Sample E .=2.582
Sample F .
DRY DENSITY =
Sample A = .17.9
Sample B = 28.3
Sample C = 25.2
Sample D = .16.7
Sample E = .14.5
Sample F = .
MOISTURE CONTENT FOR 5% OF LIME AND ASH
IKORODU SAMPLE
SAMPLES A B C D E F
WEIGHT OF WET SAMPLE 37 37 66 51 56 48
WEIGHT OF DRY SAMPLE 40 43 72 54 60 53
WEIGHT OF CONTAINER 16 12 26 26 22 26
MOISTURE CONTENT 23.8 24 15 12 11.7 22.7
WEIGHT OF WET SOIL + MOULD 3907 3941 4109 4309 4260 4230
MASS FOR EACH SAMPLE 2354 2388 2556 2756 2707 2677
MOISTURE CONTENT
Sample A .=23.8
Sample B =24
Sample C =15
Sample D =12
Sample E .=11.7
Sample F =22.7
Bulk density
Sample A .=2.354
Sample B .=2.388
Sample C .=2.556
Sample D .=2.756
Sample E .=2.707
Sample F .=2.677
DRY DENSITY =
Sample A = .9.5
Sample B = 9.6
Sample C = 15.9
Sample D = .21.2
Sample E = .21.3
Sample F = .11.3
7% OF LIME AND ASH WITH 60% OF WATER
IKORODU WET SAMPLES
st
Weight Of 1 Sample + Mould + Lime And Ash =3829g.
nd
Weight Of 2 Sample + Mould + Lime And Ash =3921g.
rd
Weight Of 3 Sample + Mould + Lime And Ash =3947g.
th
Weight Of 4 Sample + Mould + Lime And Ash =4114g.
th
Weight Of 5 Sample + Mould + Lime And Ash =4200g.
th
Weight Of 6 Sample + Mould + Lime And Ash =4205g.
th
Weight Of 7 Sample + Mould + Lime And Ash =4339g.
th
Weight Of 8 Sample + Mould + Lime And Ash =4275g.
Ikorodu Dry Samples
0% of water = 27g/6g
60% of water = 78/20g
of water = 46/10g
of water = 66/27g
of water = 81/27g
of water = 74/27g
of water = 56/10g
of water = 58/10g
MOISTURE CONTENT FOR 7% OF LIME AND ASH
IKORODU SAMPLE
SAMPLES A B C D E F G H
WEIGHT OF WET SAMPLE 27 78 46 66 81 74 56 58
WEIGHT OF DRY SAMPLE 25 75 41 63 76 69 48 50
WEIGHT OF CONTAINER 10 20 10 27 27 27 12 16
MOISTURE CONTENT 7.4 3.84 10.8 4.5 6.17 675 14.2 13.7
WEIGHT OF WET SOIL + 3829 3921 3947 4114 4200 4205 4339 4275
MOULD
MASS FOR EACH SAMPLE 2276 2368 2394 2561 2647 2652 2786 2722
VOLUME = 0.00785
For sample A = 3829 - 1553 = 2276.
For sample B = 3921 - 1553 = 2368.
For sample C = 3847 - 1553 = 2394.
For sample D = 4114 - 1553 = 2561.
For sample E = 4200 - 1553 = 2647.
For sample F = 4205 - 1553 = 2652.
For sample G = 4339 - 1553 = 2786.
For sample H = 4275 - 1553 = 2722.
DRY DENSITY =
Sample A = .27
Sample B = 49
Sample C = 20.3
Sample D = .47
Sample E = .37
Sample F = .34
Sample G = 18.3
Sample H = 18.5
MOISTURE CONTENT FOR 10% OF LIME AND ASH
IKORODU SAMPLE
SAMPLES A B C D E F G
WEIGHT OF WET SAMPLE 50 57 54 24 57 44 68
WEIGHT OF DRY SAMPLE 46 55 51 20 52 40 65
WEIGHT OF CONTAINER 21 20 21 14 21 10 21
MOISTURE CONTENT 16 5.7 10 66.6 16.1 13.3 6.8
WEIGHT OF WET SOIL + MOULD 5900 3920 3954 4047 4203 4182 4086
MASS FOR EACH SAMPLE 2347 2367 2401 2494 2560 2629 2533
Bulk density =
Sample A .=2.347
Sample B .=2.367
Sample C .=2.401
Sample D .=2.494
Sample E .=2.560
Sample F =2.629
Sample G.=2.533
DRY DENSITY =
Sample A = .14
Sample B = 35.3
Sample C = 22
Sample D = .3.7
Sample E = .15
Sample F = 18.4.
Sample G = 32.5
UNCONFIED COMPRESSION TEST FOR 5% ON IKORODU SAMPLE (5/9/23)
STRAIN DIAL STRESS DIAL STRAIN AREA STRESS OF SHEAR
GUAGE GUAGE SAMPLE STRENGTH
0.2 10|12 0.003 11.374 15.367 7.68
0.4 15|20 0.005 11.396 25.562 12.78
0.6 25|30 0.008 11.431 38.225 19.11
0.8 35|35 0.011 11.489 44.371 22.18
1.2 |38 0.016 11.524 48.028 24.01
1.6 0.021 11.583
2.0 0.026 11.642
Maximum compressive strength = maximum stress dial gauge * proving ring
factor ( 0.15 *97.1 )
= where =
E = change in length
Original length
Shear strength = Compressive strength /2
↓
Bearing capacity
2% IKORODU
STRAIN DIAL STRESS DIAL STRAIN AREA STRESS OF SHEAR
GUAGE GUAGE SAMPLE STRENGTH
0.2 40 0.003 11.374 582.6 291.3
0.4 45 0.005 11.396 655.425 327.7
0.6 50 0.008 11.431 728.25 364.1
0.8 65 0.011 11.489 946.725 473.35
1.2 70 0.016 11.524 1019.55 509.68
1.6 0.021 11.583
2.0 0.026 11.642
UNCONFIED COMPRESSION TEST FOR 2% ON AGEGE SAMPLE
STRAIN DIAL STRESS DIAL STRAIN AREA STRESS OF SHEAR
GUAGE GUAGE SAMPLE STRENGTH
0.2 10 0.003 11.374 145.65 72.8
0.4 20 0.005 11.396 291.3 145.65
0.6 25 0.008 11.431 364.125 182.065
0.8 30 0.011 11.489 436.95 218.475
1.2 40 0.016 11.524 582.6 291.3
1.6 45 0.021 11.583 655.425 327.7
2.0 0.026 11.642
5% AGEGE
STRAIN DIAL STRESS DIAL STRAIN AREA STRESS OF SHEAR
GUAGE GUAGE SAMPLE STRENGTH
0.2 15 0.003 11.374 218.475 109.23
0.4 20 0.005 11.396 291.3 145.65
0.6 22 0.008 11.431 320.43 160.215
0.8 0.011 11.489
1.2 0.016 11.524
1.6 0.021 11.583
2.0 0.026 11.642
