The California Bearing Ratio (CBR) Value for Banting Soft Soil Subgrade Stabilized Using Lime-Pofa Mixtures

Norazlan Khalid
Faculty of Civil Engineering, UiTM Shah Alam, Malaysia e-mail: aln_kh82@yahoo.com

Mohd Fadzil Arshad

Faculty of Civil Engineering, UiTM Shah Alam, Malaysia Institute of Infrastructure Engineering and Sustainability Management UiTM Shah Alam, Malaysia

Mazidah Mukri
Faculty of Civil Engineering, UiTM Shah Alam, Malaysia

Faizah Kamarudin
Faculty of Civil Engineering, UiTM Shah Alam, Malaysia

Abdul Halim Abdul Ghani

Faculty of Civil Engineering, UiTM Shah Alam, Malaysia

ABSTRACT
The effectiveness of using mixtures of lime with palm oil fly ash (Lime-POFA) in soft soil stabilization was investigated by mean of laboratory testing to evaluate the California Bearing Ratio (CBR) value. The Banting soft soil sample classified as slightly sandy clay of intermediate plasticity was used in this studies was collected from Banting Selangor, Malaysia. The Palm Oil Fly Ash (POFA) additives used in this study is a finely waste product material from the process of burning palm oil fiber. The POFA used in this study has been tested and classified as Class-F fly ash accordingly to ASTM C618 and describe as siliceous and aluminous materials with possess little or no cementitious value. In that condition, POFA need to combines with small quantities of lime for pozzolanic reaction. The optimum of 6% hydrated lime used in this study as an active additive to the various percentage mixtures of POFA for the pozzolanic reaction. The aim of this study to determine the optimum proportion percentage of POFA to be mixed with 6% lime to stabilize the clay soil based on the California bearing ratio (CBR) value for soaked condition and unsoaked condition. This is laboratory study involved in California Bearing Ratio testing to determine the CBR value of stabilized soft soil. The result shows, the mixing of 6% Lime with 3% POFA were giving the higher CBR value for soaked and unsoaked condition. It shows the POFA can be used as additives to stabilized soft soil subgrade.

KEYWORDS:

Soft soil, California Bearing Ratio, palm oil fly ash and lime.

- 155 -

Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. A

156

INRODUCTION
Soil Soft possess high amount of moisture, up to more than 85% they can also be easily interrupted by activities on its surface (Taha, 2009) with having low strength, low permeability, low bearing capacity and high compressibility. Structures constructed on soft soil can encounter engineering problems, especially during settlement. Soft soil is found in coastal and lowland areas with high compressibility and low shear strength. Based on that characteristic, soft soil classified as problematic soil. Soft soils with low bearing capacity are not suitable as subgrade and would require be improving or stabilizing with cement, lime, chemical additive and other additives or replaced with better quality of soil. Abdullah and Chandra (1989) stated that, soft soil usually found in coastal area or river area and the thickness is different depending on that area. The soft soil in Malaysia usually found in coastal area at west coast of Peninsular Malaysia. Soil stabilization is a treatment of natural soil to improve its engineering properties that become totally suitable for construction. Recently, it has been found that appropriate chemical stabilization can improve undesirable characteristics of such soil. (Nontananandh et. al. 2003). The methods of soil stabilization using lime and/or cement are well established and were published by many researches. Indiana Department of Transportation (2008) reported the hydrated lime or quicklime to be used to stabilize of soil in between 4% to 7% by percentage of dry weight of soil. Meanwhile to Khairul and Kok (2004) the optimum lime content for stabilizing the tested Malaysian cohesive soils range between 3%-6%. Fly ash stabilization offered increased the unconfined compressive strength and the CBR values substantially and has the potential to offer an alternative for soft subgrade improvement of highway construction (Senol et. al 2005). Meanwhile, Norazlan et. al (2012) stated the addition of 10% class-c fly ash (WPSA) was enhance CBR value of clay soil with increased the CBR value about 1.5 and 3.6 times for unsoaked and soaked condition compared to control samples. The wastes products from manufacturing industry classified and considered as fly ash, which continuously created due to populations increasing demand in energy uses, utility services and infrastructures in several cities. Generally, fly ash considered as pozzolana, which is not cementitious itself. Palm oil fly ash (POFA) is a waste product in ash condition was produced from burning the waste of palm oil until it is in fly ash condition. Previous study from chemical analysis showed POFA has good pozzolanic properties grouped in between Class-C and Class-F according to ASTM C618 and was used as cement substitute or as additives in cement concrete. (Awal and Husin,1997). POFA considered pozzolanic materials due to the moderately rich in silica content meanwhile containing lime (CaO) is very low. However the chemical composition of POFA can be varied due to operating system in palm oil mill. From this, POFA may also suitable in stabilizing soft problematic soil and can improve the strength of the soil. This study has been performed to show the effectiveness of using Lime-POFA mixtures on California bearing ratio (CBR) value to stabilize soft soil. From the results, it show the application of 6% lime mixed with 3%POFA was improved the CBR value of soft soil. Its indicate that palm oil fly ash (POFA) can be used as additives to the strengthen clay soil.

MATERIALS
Soft soil
The soft soil sample was in grey colour used in this study was collected in disturbed and undisturbed bulk samples from Kampung Sijangkang, Banting, Selangor, Malaysia at an approximate depth between 1m and 2m from ground surface. The samples were tightly sealed and wrapped with plastic after collecting to maintain the original moisture contents before stored and

Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. A

157

testing in the laboratory. The samples of soft soil had been tested for physical and engineering properties in accordance to BS 1377: Part 2: 1990 and the result shown in Table 1. Based on the physical properties, the soil sample can be classified as slightly sandy CLAY of high plasticity. Meanwhile, the chemical composition of Banting soft soil shown in Table 2 was conducted by Energy Disperse X-Ray (EDX). It shows, the Banting soft soil samples having pozzolanic properties due to the percentage for major constituent components composition such as silicon dioxide (SiO2), alumina oxide (Al2O3) and iron oxide (Fe2O3). Table 1: Physical properties of Banting soft soil sample
Properties Depth (m) Natural Moisture Content (%) Specific Gravity, (Gs) Liquid Limit, LL (%) Plastic Limit, PL (%) Plasticity Index (%) Particle size Distribution: Sand (%) Silt (%) Clay (%) Compaction Characteristic: Optimum water content (%) Maximum dry density (Mg/m3) Classification Values 12 77 2.65 51 24 27 13.5 39.4 47.1 20 1.55 Slightly Sandy CLAY of high plasticity, CH

Table 2: Chemical composition of Banting soft soil

Chemical Constituents Silicon Dioxide (silica) , SiO2 Alumunium trioxide, Al2O3 Calcium Oxides (lime) CaO Magnesium oxide, MgO Iron oxide, Fe2O3 Potasium oxide , K2O Sodium oxide , Na2O Sulphate, SO3 Concentration (%) 63.02 17.27 0.15 1.03 3.59 2.05 0.21 0.67

Palm Oil Fly Ash (POFA) samples

Palm Oil Fly Ash (POFA) additives used in this study is a waste product from the process of burning palm oil fiber at temperatures ranging from 8001000 C until it is in fly ash condition. This POFA samples obtained from Sg. Tengi Palm Oil Factory at Kuala Kubu Bharu, Selangor, Malaysia.

Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. A

158

From the physical properties result shown in Table 3, it shows POFA considered as light materials due to the specific gravity is about 1.66 and considered as fine materials due to the fine sizes. Meanwhile, based on the chemical constituent shown in Table 4, POFA classified as siliceous materials due to the higher content of silica oxide. According to ASTM C618 for ash requirement shown in Table 5, this POFA samples categorized as Class F fly and it indicating that POFA having pozzolanic properties due to the major main constituent components as silicon dioxide (SiO2), alumina oxide (Al2O3) and iron oxide (Fe2O3). Furthermore the class-F POFA considered as non self-cementing ash because having pozzolanic properties and no or small quantities of self cementing properties sources of calcium and magnesium ions. Table 3: Physical properties of palm oil fly ash (POFA)
Properties Specific Gravity, (Gs) Particle size Distribution: Sand (%) Silt (%) Clay (%) Classification (ASTM C618) Values 1.66 0.06 99.4 0.0 Class-F

Table 4: Chemical composition of Palm Oil Fly Ash (POFA)

Chemical Constituents Silicon Dioxide (silica) , SiO2 Alumunium trioxide, Al2O3 Calcium Oxides (lime) CaO Magnesium oxide, MgO Iron oxide, Fe2O3 Potasium oxide , K2O Sodium oxide , Na2O Sulphate, SO3 Concentration (%) 69.01 5.41 5.58 3.07 4.18 8.76 0.14 0.06

Table 5: Classification of POFA compliance with ASTM C618

Chemical Requirements for Fly Ash Classification (ASTM C618) Properties SiO2 + Al2O3 + Fe2O3 SO3 Loss on ignition Requirement Min (%) Max (%) Max (%) Class F 70 5 6 Class C 50 5 6 78.29 0.06 4.5 Result of chemical composition of POFA (%)

Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. A

159

Lime samples
The 6% hydrated lime was used as a main active additive for the pozzolanic reaction and to improve some engineering properties. The chemical concentration of hydrated lime listed in Table 6. Table 6: Chemical composition of hydrated lime (Hafez et al. 2008)
Element Silicon Dioxide (silica), SiO2 Alumunium trioxide, Al2O3 Calcium Oxides, CaO Iron oxide, Fe2O3 Magnesium oxide, MgO Potasium oxide, K2O Sodium oxide, Na2O Sulphate, SO3 L.O.I Concentration (%) 20.63 5.87 63.55 2.52 2.79 0.63 0.85 1.62 1.54

EXPERIMENTAL TESTING
Laboratory test and samples preparations
The laboratory testing been done in this study to determine the physical properties of soft soil and POFA samples such as particle size distribution, specific gravity, atterberg limit, moisture content, compaction characteristic and natural moisture content. All the entire testing is based on BS 1377:1990. Meanwhile, there is series different mixtures of POFA are 2%, 3%, 4% and 5% were used for mixed with 6% of lime to determine the California bearing ratio (CBR) value of stabilized soft soil. All the entire samples were mixed and compacted at maximum dry density and at optimum moisture content. All specimens were prepared into CBR mould accordingly to BS1377-4: 1990.

California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test

California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test is conducted to determine the CBR value of the samples and to evaluate the effective of soft soil sample stabilized using POFA. This test carried out based on the standard procedure given in BS1377-4: 1990. CBR defined as the ratio of the load sustained by the specimen at 2.5 or 5.0 mm penetration to the load sustained by standard load aggregates at corresponding penetration level. All the entire samples were tested for CBR based on soaked and unsoaked condition. This laboratory study involved various percentage of POFA. The samples were prepared at maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of soft soil.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

The laboratory result of California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test conducted on soft soil stabilized using mixing of 6% lime and various percentage of POFA shown in Figure 1 for soaked condition and Figure 2 for unsoaked condition. Generally, from the result it can be seen the loads are

Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. A

160

increase for stabilized soft soil within addition of POFA compared to unstabilized soil (control sample) for soaked and unsoaked condition. Instead, the bottom part of samples able to sustain a higher load compared to top part of sample for unsoaked condition. It may be attributed to the fact that, the bottom portion is well compacted than top portion. Meanwhile, it can be seen that certain bottom part of sample able to sustain higher load compared to top part for soaked conditioned due to the saturated conditioned. Table 7 show the tabulated result of CBR value getting from the graph shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2 of soft soil stabilized with various percentage of POFA.

(a)

(b)

Figure 1: The laboratory result for CBR value for soaked condition (a) Top value (b) Bottom value

(a)

(b)

Figure 2: The Laboratory result for CBR value for unsoaked condition (a) Top value (b) Bottom value

Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. A

161

Table 7: The results of CBR value for soaked and unsoaked

Sample Clay Soil (Control) Clay soil + Lime 6% Clay soil + Lime 6% + POFA 2% Clay soil + Lime 6% + POFA 3% Clay soil + Lime 6% + POFA 4% Clay soil + Lime 6% + POFA 5% California Bearing Ratio (%) Unsoaked Soaked 49.0 60.0 83.87 105.0 87.0 55.25 16.82 36.70 61.00 69.80 59.09 47.13

As can be seen below, Figure 3 illustrates the effect on CBR value by using 6% lime mixed with various percentage of POFA to stabilized soft soil in soaked and unsoaked condition. It can be seen, unsoaked condition shows higher of CBR value compared to soaked condition. Meanwhile the result shows the combination of lime and POFA were giving the higher of CBR value for soaked and unsoaked condition compared to unstabilized soil (control) and soft soil stabilized with 6% lime. It was observed, the CBR value increase with the increment percentage from 2% to 3% of POFA mixed with 6% for both condition. However, the CBR value decrease for 6% lime mixed with 4% to 5% of POFA for both condition. The result showed the mixing of 6% lime with 3% POFA was giving the highest of CBR value for both condition compared to others mixes. Instead, these optimum mixtures showed an increment about 116% for unsoaked condition and increment about 337% for soaked condition compared unstabilized soil (control). Meanwhile, these optimum mixtures showed an increment about 77% for unsoaked condition and increment about 46% for soaked condition compared soft soil stabilized with 6% lime. Hence, 6% lime mixed with 3%POFA can potentially and effectively improve clay soil subgrade from poor to good conditions due to the pozzolanic reaction. Koslanant et al. (2006) mentioned the use of lime as stabilizing for clay will produce a binder by chemical reaction with silicate in clay mineral. Calcium hydroxide formed due to hydration process when lime (CaO) is added to soil. However, from this result, it shows the used of lime was produced a binder by chemical reaction with silicate in clay soil and POFA mineral for pozzolanic reaction. This calcium hydroxide in the soil water reacts with the silicate and aluminate in clay soil and POFA to form cementing and binders consisting of calcium silicate and/or aluminate hydrate. The dissolved dissociated Ca++ ion react with dissolved SiO2 and Al2O3 from clay particle and formed hydrated gels and resulting in combination of soil particle. These new compounds of calcium silicate hydrate and calcium aluminate hydrate gels are formed as a result of pozzolanic reaction and subsequently crystallize to bind the structure together (Rogers et al., 1996)

Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. A

162

Figure 3: Summarizing of CBR value for clay soil stabilized using Lime-POFA mixtures

CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion from the experimental based study, the mixture of lime and POFA can be used to stabilize the soft soil subgrade. The mixtures of 6% lime and 3% POFA is the optimum concentration mixtures to stabilize the soft soil of sandy CLAY of high plasticity soils at the highest of CBR value about 105% for unsoaked condition and 69% for soaked condition. This optimum mixture was giving the higher of CBR value compared to unstabilized soil and soft soil stabilized with 6% lime. From the study, it shown the soft soil of clay stabilized using mixed of 6%lime with 3%POFA considered effective to enhance CBR value. Furthermore, this will solve disposal problems and towards the green environmentally without disposal materials.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This study was supported by the Research Intensive Faculty (RIF) Grant from the Research Management Institute, UiTM Shah Alam, Malaysia. Therefore, the author would like to express an acknowledgement to the Research Management Institute, UiTM Shah Alam for providing that fund to complete this study and also to Faculty of Civil Engineering, UiTM Shah Alam, Malaysia, and for providing the facilities such as the geotechnical laboratory and advanced geotechnical laboratory to accomplish this study. The author also wishes to acknowledge cooperation given by laboratory technician and the undergraduate student from Faculty of Civil engineering, UiTM Shah Alam for this study

REFERENCES
1. Abdullah, A. I. M. B. and Chandra, P. (1987) Engineering Properties for Coastal Subsoils in Peninsula Malaysia Proc. of the 9th South East Asia Geotechnical Conference, Vol. 1, Bangkok: Thailand. pp127-138. American Society for Testing and Materials, ASTM C618 (2008) Specification for Coal Fly Ash and Raw or Calcined Natural Pozzolanic for Use as a Mineral Admixture in Portland Cement Concrete Annual Book of ASTM Standards, ASTM, Philadelphia, USA.

2.

Vol. 19 [2014], Bund. A

163

3.

Awal, A.S.M and Hussin, M.W. (1997) Some Aspects of Durability Performances of Concrete Incorporating Palm Oil Fuel Ash Proceedings Of Fifth International Conference On Structural Failure, Durability and Retrofitting, Singapore, 210-217. BS 1377, Part 1 4 (1990) Methods of test for Soils for civil engineering purposes. British Standards Institution. London. UK. Hafez M.A., Sidek N. and Md. Noor M.J. (2008) Effect of Pozzolanic Process on the Strength of Stabilized Lime Clay Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 13, Bund. K, pp 1-19. Indiana Department of Transportation (2008) Guidelines Design Procedures for Soil Modification or Stabilization. Khairul A.K. and Kok K.C. (2004) Lime stabilized cohesive soils Jurnal Kejuruteraan Awam 16(1), pp 13-23. Koslanant, Onitsuka K. and Negami T. (2006) Influence of Salt Additives In Lime Stabilization on Organic Clay Journal of The Southeast Asian Geotechnical Society, pp95101 M.R. Taha (2009) Geotechnical Properties of Soil-Ball Milled Soil Mixtures. In Proceedings of third International Symposium on Nanotechnology in Construction Prague.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10. Nontananandh S., Amornfa K. and Jirathanathaworn T. (2003) Engineering Properties of Remolded Soft Clayey Soil Mixed with Cement Proceedings of the 4th Regional Symposium on Infrastructure Development (4th RSID), Bangkok, Thailand, Apr 3rd- 5th. 11. Norazlan Khalid, Mazidah Mukri and Faizah Kamarudin (2012) Clay soil stabilized using Waste Paper Sludge Ash (WPSA) Mixtures Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 17, Bund. I, pp. 1215-1225. 12. Rogers. F.D.C., S. Glendinning, (1997) Improvement of clay soils in situ using lime piles in the UK Journal of Engineering Geology, V42, Pp 243-257. 13. Senol A., Edil T.B., Acosta H.A., Benson C.H. (2005) Soft subgrades stabilization by using various fly ashes Resources, Conservation and Recycling 46 (2006) 365376.

2014 ejge