International Journal of Scientific & Technical Development - Volumes & Issues - Volume 8: Dec 2022, Issue 2

Review on Effect of Replacement Lime and Sodium Silicate on The Stabilization of Soil

Authors

Saddam Hussain, Shivani Thakur

DOI Number

Keywords

Soil-lime Stabilization, Soil Sodium Silicate Stabilization, compressive strength, C.B.R. (unsoaked and soaked condition).

Abstract

Soil is the basic foundation for any civil engineering structures. It is required to bear the loads without failure. In some places, soil may be weak which cannot resist the oncoming loads. In such case, soil stabilization is needed. Soil stabilization can be explained as the alteration of the soil Properties by chemical or physical means in order to enhance the engineering quality of the soi. This paper deals with the complete analysis of the improvement of soil properties and its stabilization using lime and sodium silicate. The soil is treated with lime and sodium silicate with different percentages. For this, the percentage of lime was varied as 2.5%, 4.5% and 6.5% (by weight) and sodium silicate percentage was as 1.5%, 2.5%, and 3.5% (by weight). The maximum dry density decreased from 1.70 gm/cc to 1.63 gm/cc. 1.57 gm/cc and 3.5% (by weight). The maximum dry density decreased from 1.70gm/cc to 1.55gm/cc, 1.48gm/cc and 1.50gm/cc with addition of 1.5%, 2.5% and 3.5% sodium silicate to virgin soil. The OMC of soil increased from 16.50% to 18.88%,20.40% and 22.44% with addition of 2.5%, 4.5% and 6.5% lime (by weight). The OMC of soil and sodium silicate from 16.50% to 17.10%, 17.70% and 17.90% with addition 1.5%, 2.5% and 3.5%Sodium silicate (by weight). The unconfined compressive strength increases from 4.10 kg/cm2 to 5.20 kg/cm2 at 1.5% sodium silicate, the unconfined compressive strength increases from 4.10 kg/cm2 to 5.20kg/cm2 at 1.5% sodium silicate (by weight) and to 7.50kg/cm2 at 2.5% sodium silicate (by weight) addition. The value tends to all at 3.5% sodium silicate addition. For optimum mix i.e., soil + 2.5% sodium silicate, the unconfined compressive strength came out to be 9.73 kg/cm2 for uncured sample and 10.27kg/cm2 for cured samples.

The C.B.R. Value for unsoaked and soaked virgin soil was found to be 6.2% and 3.2% respectively. When 4.5% lime was added to soil the C.B.R> Value for unsoaked and soaked condition increased to 15.6% and 5.4% respectively. When 2.5% sodium silicate was added to this soil + 4.5% mix, C.B.R. (unsoaked and soaked condition) was observed to be 18.7% and 8.6% respectively.

References

[1] AI.Rawi (1981), “Behaviour of Granular Soils Reinforced with Discrete Randomly Oriented Inclusions,” Geotextiles and Geomembranes , Geotextile Society, Elsevier Science Publishers,England,10(4),pp.319- 333
[2] Bell, F.G. (1988),“Randomly Distributed Fibre Reinforcement Soil .”The state of the art, “Indian Geotechnical Journals, Vol. 70.
[3] Cokca (2001), “Jute Geotextile : An Ideal Eco-friendly ,Cost-Effective Geo-textile.”
[4] Dall Hunter (1988), “Lime induced heave in sulphate bearing clay soils,” Journal of Geotechnical Engg.Div.ASCE, Vol. 114,No. 2
[5] Goswami (2007), “Standardization of Geosynthetics materials and test methods in India an approach,”
[6] Mitcher (1981), “Performance studies on California Bearing ratio Value Geosynthetics.”
[7] Anders land and Khattak, (1979), “Shear strength of KaolinitieFibre Soil Mixtures ,” Proceedings, International Conference on soil reinforcement , Vol. I, Paris .France,pp.11-16
[8] Arora ,K.R., “Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering,”
[9] Bansal ,R.K . and Jain A. (2000), “Advance in Ground Improvement Techniques,”

How to cite

Journal

International Journal of Scientific & Technical Development

ISSN

2348-4047

Periodicity

Bi-Annual