See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/225497112

Use of Natural Pozzolana and Lime for Stabilization of Cohesive Soils

Article in Geotechnical and Geological Engineering · September 2011

DOI: 10.1007/s10706-011-9415-z

CITATIONS READS

132 12,223

4 authors:

Khelifa Harichane Mohamed Ghrici

Hassiba Benbouali University of Chlef, Algeria Hassiba Benbouali University of Chlef
42 PUBLICATIONS 659 CITATIONS 109 PUBLICATIONS 1,917 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

S. Kenai Khaled Grine

Saad Dahlab University Saad Dahlab University
161 PUBLICATIONS 5,133 CITATIONS 10 PUBLICATIONS 178 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

The Use of CFRP Composite for Strengthening RC Beams View project

5-Books of colleagues View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mohamed Ghrici on 28 May 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Geotech Geol Eng (2011) 29:759–769
DOI 10.1007/s10706-011-9415-z

ORIGINAL PAPER

Use of Natural Pozzolana and Lime for Stabilization

of Cohesive Soils
Khelifa Harichane • Mohamed Ghrici •

Said Kenai • Khaled Grine

Received: 22 August 2010 / Accepted: 10 May 2011 / Published online: 25 May 2011
 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Abstract The present study investigates the use of 1 Introduction

natural pozzolana combined with lime for ground
improvement applications. Laboratory tests were The reduction of available land resources and the
undertaken to study the effect of natural pozzolana, increased cost associated with the use of high quality
lime or a combination of both on the physical and the materials have led to a large need for using local soils
mechanical characteristics of cohesive soils. Natural in geotechnical construction. Many sites around big
pozzolana, lime and natural pozzolana-lime were cities such as Algiers present poor engineering
added to two cohesive soils at ranges of 0–20 and properties and land for construction projects is scarce.
0–8%, respectively. Consistency, compaction, Hence, sites with poor soils have to be used. Poor
undrained traxial shear and unconfined compressive engineering properties of some of these soils create
strength tests were performed on untreated and difficulties during construction and hence the need to
treated soil samples to assess the physical and stabilize these soils to improve their properties.
mechanical characteristics of the soil. Treated sam- More civil engineering structures are also built on
ples were cured for 1, 7, 28 and 90 days. The results soft soils, leading necessarily to the development of
show that the cohesive soils can be successfully various ground improvement techniques such as soil
stabilized by combining natural pozzolana and lime. stabilization. Soil stabilization is a technique intro-
duced many years ago with the main purpose to
Keywords Lime
Natural pozzolan
improve the physical and chemical characteristics of
Cohesive soil
Stabilization
Compaction
soils and render the soils capable of meeting the
Strength
Curing requirements of specific engineering projects (Kolias
et al. 2005). Several additives, such as cement, lime
and mineral additives such as fly ash, silica fume, rice
husk ash…, have been used for stabilisation of soft
soils (Al-Rawas and Goosen 2006).
Lime as an additive is most commonly used to
K. Harichane
M. Ghrici
Civil Engineering Department, University of Chlef, stabilise fine soils due to its effectiveness and
P.O. Box 151, 02000 Chlef, Algeria economic usage. As an additive, lime improves
significantly the engineering properties of soft soils.
S. Kenai (&)
K. Grine
Lime stabilisation is achieved through cations
Civil Engineering Department, University of Blida,
P.O. Box 270, Blida, Algeria exchange, flocculation agglomeration, lime carbon-
e-mail: [email protected] ation and pozzolanic reaction. Cations exchange and

123
760 Geotech Geol Eng (2011) 29:759–769

flocculation agglomeration reactions take place rap- 2005; Sezer et al. 2006; Prabakar et al. 2004; Basha
idly bringing immediate changes in soil properties, et al. 2003; Muntohar and Hantoro 2000; Kalkan
whereas pozzolanic reactions are time dependent. 2009; Basha et al. 2005; Rahman 1986) observed that
These pozzolanic reactions involve interactions soils treated with cementing additives show an
between soil silica and/or alumina and lime to form increase in optimum moisture content and a decrease
various types of cementation products thus enhancing in maximum dry density. Furthermore, the studies
the strength. (Sezer et al. 2006; Kolias et al. 2005; Senol et al.
The studies reported in the literature show that the 2006; Basha et al. 2005) indicate that the strength of
addition of lime increased the optimum moisture soils can be improved by addition of such cementing
content and strength, and reduce the plasticity index additives.
and maximum dry density of the soil (Guney et al. On the other hand, cementing additives react with the
2007). lime more effectively than alone. The efficiency of lime
Several investigators (Al-Rawas et al. 2005; stabilization may be greatly increased. Some investiga-
Goswami and Singh 2005; Rahman 1986; Muntohar tors (Goswami and Singh 2005; Muntohar and Hantoro
and Hantoro 2000; Attoh-Okine 1995; Nalbantoglu 2000; Bagherpour and Choobbasti 2003) found that
2006; Lasledj and Al-Mukhtar 2008; Osula 1996; Ola workability and strength behaviour of soft soils were
1977; Bagherpour and Choobbasti 2003; Kavak and greatly improved after a combined treatment.
Akyarli 2007; Manasseh and Olufemi 2008; Bell Hossain et al. (2007) utilized volcanic ash (VA)
1996; Okagbue and Yakubu 2000; Ansary et al. 2006) from natural resources of Papua New Guinea. Several
found that in most cases the effect of lime on the tests of compaction and unconfined compressive
plasticity of clay soils is more or less instantaneous. strength have been conducted for studying the
The works reported by several researchers (Ola influence of volcanic ash, finely ground natural lime,
1977; Rahman 1986; George et al. 1992; Bell 1996; cement and a combination of ash, cement and lime. In
Gay and Schad 2000; Hossain et al. 2007) indicate that term of compaction, the results showed that maxi-
soils treated with lime experienced notable increases in mum dry density decreased and optimum moisture
optimum moisture content while undergoing a content increased as VA content increased for both
decrease in maximum dry density. In addition, some soils tested. The combination of VA, lime and cement
investigators (Lin et al. 2007; Chen and Lin 2009) exhibited the same behaviour. On the other hand, the
postulated that failure behaviours similar to brittle compressive strength increased with the increase in
materials were observed in shear failure mode for soil curing time and VA content for both soils tested. For
specimens stabilized with lime. Moreover, some example, with a 20% volcanic ash content they
researchers (Ola 1977; Rahman 1986; Attoh-Okine observed an increase of 31 and 19 times compared
1995; Hossain et al. 2007; Manasseh and Olufemi with both tested untreated soils respectively after
2008) found that the strength behaviour of soils was 91 days of curing. In mixed mode of stabilization,
greatly improved after lime treatment. stabilizer combinations (VA, lime and cement) with
In recent years, industrial by-products have been higher dosages produced higher compressive
added and mixed with soft soils to improve their strength. For example, with the combination of
engineering properties. The improved characteristics 10%VA ? 4%L that both tested soils represented
of soft soils, resulting from the utilization of an increase of 10–21 times respectively compared
cementing additives like fly ash, rice husk ash and with untreated soils. But, apart from the study of
silica fume, bring about environmental and economic Hossain et al. (2007), the effect of the combination of
benefits. The effectiveness of these by-products for natural pozzolana (volcanic rock) and lime on soil
stabilization of soils has been investigated. The stabilization is not well documented in the literature.
addition of such materials reduced the plasticity Natural pozzolana is found abundantly in exten-
index (Parsons and Kneebone 2005; Goswami and sive areas of Beni-Saf quarry in the West of Algeria
Singh 2005; Kolias et al. 2005; Nalbantoglu 2004; (Ghrici et al. 2007). The use of natural pozzolana in
Basha et al. 2003; Basha et al. 2005; Rahman 1986; association with lime for the stabilization of cohesive
Muntohar and Hantoro 2000). In term of compaction, soils needs to be investigated. As the soil is a good
several researchers (Senol et al. 2006; Kolias et al. source of alumina, the effects of lime treatment can

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2011) 29:759–769 761

be enhanced to a great extent if the apparent shortage West of Algeria. The NP was ground in a laboratory
of silica can be adequately supplemented by the mill to a specific surface area of 420 m2/kg. The
addition of natural pozzolana, which is high in chemical composition of NP is presented in Table 2.
reactive silica content. However, the literature indi-
cates only very few investigations on soils stabiliza- 2.1.3 Lime
tion in Algeria.
This paper presents the results of the effect of The lime (L) used was a commercially available lime
lime, natural pozzolana and their combination on typically used for construction purposes. The chem-
Atterberg limits, compaction characteristics, ical and physical properties of lime are presented in
undrained triaxial shear behaviour and unconfined Table 3.
compressive strength of two Algerian cohesive soils
classified as CH and CL according to the unified soil 2.2 Laboratory Tests
classification system (USCS).
A series of laboratory tests consisting of Atterberg
limits, compaction, shear strength and unconfined
2 Experimental Investigation compressive strength were conducted on the two
selected clayey soils. Extensive combinations of
2.1 Materials Used natural pozzolana and lime were used for stabiliza-
tion of the two soils. The percentages of NP were 0,
2.1.1 Soils 10, and 20%, while the percentages of the lime were
0, 4, and 8%. A total of 18 combinations based on soil
The soils used in this study were obtained from a site 1 and soil 2 with single and mixed modes of
situated near Chlef town West of Algeria. These clays stabilizers were studied (Table 4).
were encountered at a depth of about 4–5 m.
Laboratory tests were carried out to classify each 2.2.1 Atterberg Limits Tests
type of soil. The engineering properties of clayey
soils are presented in Table 1. Plastic (PL), liquid (LL) limit and plasticity index
(PI) were obtained following the method given in the
2.1.2 Natural Pozzolana ASTM D4318 (2000). Variations in the plasticity
index of untreated clayey soils before and after
The natural pozzolana (NP) used in this investigation admixtures added were then studied. The air dried
was collected from a quarry at Beni-Saf region in the soils (passing the N 40 sieve) were initially mixed

Table 1 Physical characteristics of the soils Table 2 Chemical composition of natural pozzolana
Basic characteristics Soil 1 Soil 2 Chemical composition Natural pozzolana (%)

Color Grey Red SiO2 46.4

Depth (m) 4 5 Al2O3 17.5
Natural water content (%) 32.87 13.77 Fe2O3 9.69
Specific gravity 2.71 2.84 CaO 9.90
Passing 80 lm sieve (%) 85.0 97.5 MgO 2.42
Liquid limit (%) 84.8 47.79 CaO free –
Plastic limit (%) 32.78 23.23 SO3 0.83
Plasticity index (%) 52.02 24.56 Na2O 3.30
Classification (USCS) CH CL K2O 1.51
Optimum water content (%) 28.3 15.3 TiO2 2.10
Maximum dry density (kN/m3) 13.8 16.9 P2O3 0.80
Unconfined compressive strength (kPa) 55.6 222.5 Loss of ignition 5.34

123
762 Geotech Geol Eng (2011) 29:759–769

Table 3 Physical and chemical properties of lime 2.2.2 Compaction Tests

Chemical name Lime
The method given in the ASTM D698 (2000) was
Physical appearance Dry white powder applied to determine the maximum dry density (MDD)
CaO [83.3 and the optimum moisture content (OMC) of the soils.
MgO \0.5 The soil mixtures, with and without additives, were
Fe2O3 \2 thoroughly mixed for 1 h prior to compaction. The first
Al2O3 \1.5 series of compaction tests were aimed at determining
SiO2 \2.5 the compaction properties of the non treated soils.
SO3 \0.5 Secondly, tests were carried out to determine the
Na2O 0.4–0.5 proctor compaction properties of the treated soils with
CO2 \5 varying amounts of natural pozzolana and lime.
CaCO3 \10
Specific gravity 2 2.2.3 Shear Strength Tests
Over 90 lm (%) \10
Over 630 lm (%) 0 Triaxial compression tests according to ASTM
Insoluble material (%) \1 D2850 (2003) were conducted on treated and
Bulk density (g/l) 600–900 untreated samples compacted at maximum dry den-
sity and optimum moisture content. In order to avoid
excessive moisture loss, the specimens were wrapped
Table 4 Stabilizer combination scheme for stabilized soils up with a plastic film after removing from moulds.
Designation Sample mixture (%) They were kept in the laboratory at a temperature of
25C and a relative humidity of 50%. The unsatu-
Soil NP L
rated, unconsolidated undrained (UU) tests performed
P0L0 100 0 0 in the triaxial compression tests were conducted with
P0L4 96 0 4 confining pressure of 25 and 50 kPa.
P0L8 92 0 8
P10L0 90 10 0 2.2.4 Unconfined Compressive Strength Tests
P10L4 86 10 4
P10L8 82 10 8 Unconfined compressive strength tests on compacted
P20L0 80 20 0 specimens were conducted according to the ASTM
P20L4 76 20 4 D2166 (2000). Specimens were cured in plastic bag
P20L8 72 20 8 to prevent moisture change. Tests were performed at
different curing ages (1, 7, 28 and 90 days). For each
type of mixtures, the unconfined compressive
with the predetermined quantity of natural pozzolana, strength value was obtained as the average of two
lime or a combination of both in a dry state. Distilled unconfined compressive strength tests.
water was added to the soil mixture. To let the water
permeate through the soil mixture, the paste was
allowed to stand in an airtight container for about 3 Results and Discussion
24 h prior to testing. After this tempering, the paste
was remixed with each stabilizer thoroughly for at Table 5 presents the results of physical and mechan-
least 15 min before performing the first test. The ical properties of all stabilized soil mixtures with
plastic limit tests were performed on material various stabilizer combinations.
prepared for the liquid limit test. The plastic limit
was determined as the average of the two water 3.1 Atterberg Limits
contents and rounded to the nearest whole number.
Both liquid and plastic limit tests were conducted at The plasticity index (PI) variation for both untreated
room temperature. and treated soils are presented in Fig. 1. The decrease

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2011) 29:759–769 763

Table 5 Summary of physical and mechanical properties of stabilized soil mixtures

Specimen Atterberg’s limits Compaction Unconfined compressive strength (MPa)
Grey soil Red soil Grey soil Red soil Grey soil (days) Red soil (days)
PI (%) PI (%) OMC MDD OMC MDD 1 7 28 90 1 7 28 90
(%) (kN/m3) (%) (kN/m3)

P0L0 52.02 24.56 28.3 13.8 15.3 16.9 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.09 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.28
P0L4 21.47 22.63 30.4 13.2 17.8 16.4 0.27 0.57 1.03 1.95 0.33 0.48 0.69 2.11
P0L8 19.92 19.68 31.1 12.9 17.4 16.2 0.28 0.52 1.05 3.04 0.40 0.46 0.72 1.80
P10L0 52.99 17.41 27.6 14.0 14.3 17.1 0.05 0.07 0.08 0.13 0.25 0.25 0.27 0.37
P10L4 19.76 17.76 26.8 13.3 16.6 16.5 0.43 1.00 1.88 3.18 0.66 1.16 2.05 3.90
P10L8 19.25 20.64 29.8 13.3 17.7 16.1 0.35 0.88 1.74 4.69 0.66 1.10 2.00 4.75
P20L0 46.03 17.39 25.8 14.3 13.8 17.1 0.07 0.10 0.10 0.19 0.25 0.26 0.28 0.48
P20L4 20.15 18.03 29.0 13.6 18.7 16.4 0.41 1.11 1.66 2.45 0.87 1.63 2.89 4.70
P20L8 20.23 20.31 28.2 13.6 18.2 16.0 0.46 1.42 2.62 5.38 0.83 1.68 2.78 5.97

in plasticity index indicates an improvement in the

workability of the soil. The grey soil showed an
immediate decrease in plasticity index upon the
addition of lime. It is obvious that an addition of 4%
of lime was sufficient to enhance the workability of
the soil by reducing the plasticity index from 52 to
21.5%. Increasing the lime content beyond 4% had a
marginal effect on reducing the plasticity index. For
the same class soil, Nalbantoglu (2006) observed that
the plasticity index decreased from 45.6 to 13.5% for
the addition of 7% lime.
For the red soil, the plasticity index decreased
from 24.6 to 22.6% for an addition of 4% of lime.
Beyond this value, the plasticity index decreased
again from 24.6 to 19.7%, for 8% of lime addition.
For the same class soil, Okagbue and Yakubu (2000)
observed that the plasticity index decreased from
19.9 to 14.4% for 10% limestone addition. Simi-
lar behaviour was found by several researchers
(Attoh-Okine 1995; Bagherpour and Choobbasti
2003; Ansary et al. 2006).
The addition of natural pozolana alone to both
grey and red soils enhances their workability as a
result of a reduction on the plasticity of these soils. A
reduction of the plasticity index respectively from 52
to 46% and from 24.6 to 18% for the grey and the red
soil is observed. A similar trend was observed by
Parsons and Kneebone (2005) and Rahman (1986)
when they used fly ash and rice husk ash respectively.
Fig. 1 Effect of stabilizers on plasticity index. a Grey soil. The combination of natural pozzolana and lime
b Red soil exhibited a marginal effect on reducing the plasticity

123
764 Geotech Geol Eng (2011) 29:759–769

index compared to the use of the lime alone for the of either lime alone or lime combined with natural
grey soil. For red soil, the combination of 4%L ? NP pozolana. The addition of natural pozzolana alone
shows a similar decrease in plasticity index as that of results in a soil classified within the range falling
natural pozzolana alone. However, with high lime between a CL class and an ML class.
contents in the combination, the plasticity index The modification of the plasticity characteristics of
increases compared to natural pozzolana alone. the grey and red soils caused by the addition of
The consistency limits test results were plotted on natural pozzolana and lime is likely to render these
the Casagrande plasticity chart in order to determine soils satisfactory for most construction operations
the soil classification according to the unified soil even under severe environmental conditions such as
classification system (USCS) (Fig. 2). It is clearly rain.
seen from Fig. 2 that for the grey soil classified as CH
class clay, falls in the class of MH soil after addition 3.2 Compaction Characteristics
of a proportion of lime/or lime and natural pozzolana
except for the natural pozzolana alone. The compaction test was used to determine the effect
Similar trend was observed for the red soil of stabilizers on maximum dry density (MDD) and
classified as CL class, as it passes from CL class optimum moisture content (OMC). Fig. 3 shows the
clay to MH class soil after stabilization with addition effect of the addition of natural pozzolana (NP), lime

60
Grey soil
Lime U-line
50 NP
Soil+NP+4%Lime CH
Plasticity Index, PI(%)

Soil+NP+8%Lime
40 Soil+NP+10%Lime

A-line
30

20
CL

10
CL-ML ML or OL MH or OH
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Liquid Limit, LL(%)
(a)
60
Red soil
Lime U-line
50 NP A-line
Plasticity Index, PI (%)

Soil+NP+4%Lime
Soil+NP+8%Lime CH
40 Soil+NP+10%Lime

30

20 MH or OH
CL

10
CL-ML ML or OL
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Liquid Limit, LL (%)
(b)

Fig. 2 Location of untreated and treated cohesive soils in a Fig. 3 Variation of compaction characteristics of stabilized
plasticity chart. a Grey soil. b Red soil soils: Full line grey soil and dashed line red soil

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2011) 29:759–769 765

(L) and their combinations on the compaction

characteristics of the grey and red soils tested.
It can be clearly seen that adding lime increases
the OMC and decreases the amount of the MDD with
increasing lime content. Similar behaviour was also
observed in the literature in the case of lime stabilized
clayey soils (Ola 1977; Rahman 1986; George et al.
1992; Bell 1996; Gay and Schad 2000; Hossain et al.
2007; Kavak and Akyarli 2007; Manasseh and
Olufemi 2008). The explanation of this behaviour is
probably a consequence of the following reasons: (1)
the lime causes aggregation of the particles to occupy
larger spaces and hence alters the effective grading of
the soils, (2) the specific gravity of lime generally is
lower than the specific gravity of soils tested, (3) the
pozzolanic reaction between the clay present in the
soils and the lime is responsible for the increase in
OMC.
Variations in OMC and MDD with increasing
natural pozzolana contents for grey and red soils are
also presented in Fig. 3. The OMC decreases and the
MDD increases as natural pozzolana content
increases from 0 to 20%. The increase in dry density
is an indicator of soil properties improvement. A
similar trend has been observed by Hossain et al.
(2007) using volcanic ash from natural resources
when varying the proportion from 0 to 20%.
The decrease in OMC observed in this study, Fig. 4 Stress-Strain relationships of UUU tests for the
apparently results from the lower affinity of natural untreated soil specimens with different proportions of stabiliz-
pozzolana for water. In addition, the increase in MDD ers when effective confining pressure was designed at 25 kPa.
a Grey soil. b Red soil
is attributed to the relatively higher specific gravity of
the natural pozzolana. The addition of a combination
of natural pozzolana and lime to the grey soil As shown in Fig. 4, when stress reaches its
decreases the OMC and increases the MDD. How- maximum for untreated grey and red soils, the strain
ever, for the red soil, the combination of natural is about 9 and 12%, respectively. However, peak
pozzolana and lime increases the OMC and reduces shear stresses and failure behaviours similar to brittle
the MDD particularly at 20%NP content. Several materials were observed in the shear failure mode for
researchers (Ola 1977; Rahman 1986; Basha et al. specimens of both soils stabilized with lime or with
2005) revealed that the change in dry density occurs combinations of natural pozzolana-lime. Similar
because of both particles size and specific gravity of failure mode was observed by other researchers
the soil and the stabilizer used. (Lin et al. 2007; Chen and Lin 2009). Moreover, the
curves shapes for specimens stabilised with natural
pozzolana alone are nearly similar to those of
3.3 Shear Strength untreated samples for both soils. In addition, a
marginal effect on shear stresses was observed for
The effects of natural pozzolana, lime and their the soil specimens stabilized with natural pozzolana.
combinations on the stress–strain relationships of the The maximum shear stress is given by samples
grey and red soils at the confining pressure of 25 and stabilized with a combination of both natural pozzo-
50 kPa are shown in Figs. 4 and 5 respectively. lana and lime.

123
766 Geotech Geol Eng (2011) 29:759–769

Fig. 5 Stress-Strain relationships of UUU tests for the Fig. 6 Influence of stabilizers on unconfined compressive
untreated soil specimens with different proportions of stabiliz- strength. a Grey soil. b Red soil
ers when effective confining pressure was designed at 50 kPa.
a Grey soil. b Red soil
It can be seen from Fig. 6 that the addition of lime
Similar stress–strain relationships at the confining increases the compressive strength of stabilized soil
pressure of 50 kPa are illustrated in Fig. 5. The specimens. The compressive strength increases with
maximum shear stress is given by both samples of the increase in lime content from 0 to 8% for both
soils stabilized with lime alone and combined with grey and red soils. This increase is in agreement
natural pozzolana. Moreover, red soil specimens with earlier findings (Ola 1977; Rahman 1986;
exhibited a significant increase in shear stress com- Attoh-Okine 1995; Hossain et al. 2007; Lin et al.
pared to grey soil specimens. Maximum shear 2007; Manasseh and Olufemi 2008). This is attrib-
strengths are observed for clayey soils stabilized uted to soil lime reaction, which results in the
with a combination of natural pozzolana-lime com- formation of cementitious compounds that binds soil
pared to those stabilized with lime or natural particles together. In general, compressive strength
pozzolana alone. increases with increasing curing age. The grey soil
gave higher compressive strength than red soil. For
3.4 Unconfined Compressive Strength example, with 8% lime content, grey soil developed
an unconfined compressive strength of 3 MPa after
The trend of changes in unconfined compressive 90 days of curing which represented an increase of 33
strength (UCS) with various percentages of stabiliz- times compared to untreated soil. For red soil and for
ers for grey and red soils is presented in Fig. 6. the same lime content and curing, the soil developed

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2011) 29:759–769 767

an unconfined compressive strength of 1.8 MPa lime and natural pozzolana will result in lower
which represented an increase of 6.3 times compared construction cost. For example, if stabilisation with
to untreated soil. 4% of cement for a high moisture content soil is
In contrast, the addition of natural pozzolana replaced with a mixture of lime (4%) and natural
slightly increases the strength for both grey and red pozzolana (20%), and assuming an average price for
soils. For example, with a 20% NP content both grey one ton of Portland cement, lime and natural
and red soils show a marginal increase of 2 times pozzolana of 80 €, 50 € and 5€ respectively, the cost
compared with the untreated soil after 90 days of reduction on materials could be about 20%.
curing. However, Hossain et al. (2007) observed,
after 91 days of curing of two untreated soils (S1 and
S2), an increase of 31 and 19 times, respectively
4 Conclusions
when 20% volcanic ash was used.
Stabilizer combinations with higher contents pro-
This study presents the effect of natural pozzolana,
duced higher compressive strength. It can be seen that
lime and their combinations on Atterberg limits,
at 90 days and with a combination of 10%NP ? 4%L
compaction, shear strength and unconfined compres-
for grey and red soils represented an increase of 34 and
sive strength of cohesive soils. On the basis of the test
14 times respectively compared with both untreated
results, the following conclusions can be drawn:
soils. Hossain et al. (2007) observed that the combi-
nation of 10%VA ? 4%L for both S1 and S2 soils • The plasticity index decreased with increasing
represented an increase of 21 and 10 times respectively lime contents. Moreover, when both natural
compared with both untreated soils. Also, it can be pozzolana and lime were added to the cohesive
noted that at 90 days, the combination NP ? 8%L soils, an appreciable change of the plasticity
produced higher compressive strength for both grey behaviour was observed. However, the addition of
and red soils. For example, with the combination of natural pozzolana has a minor effect on the
20%NP ? 8%L, grey soil developed an unconfined plasticity index of the grey soil. Both grey and red
compressive strength of 5.4 MPa after 90 days of soils tend to change according to the unified soil
curing which represented an increase of 1.8 times classification system. The use of lime alone and
compared with 8% lime alone and 58 times compared the combination of natural pozzolana-lime, trans-
with untreated soil. For red soil and the same combi- formed grey soil (CH) and red soil (CL) into MH
nation and curing age, the soil developed an unconfined class soils.
compressive strength of 6 MPa which represented an • The maximum dry density of lime stabilized soils
increase of 3.3 times compared with 8% lime alone and decrease with increasing lime content, in contrast
21 times compared with untreated soil. with natural pozzolana stabilized soils. The
Finally, for both soils, compressive strength combination lime-natural pozzolana increases
increases with increasing curing time and stabilizers the maximum dry density for grey soil and
content. The natural pozzolana- lime combinations decreases that of red soil. On the other hand, the
produced higher strength than stabilization with lime optimum moisture content of lime stabilized soils
alone or natural pozzolana alone. Therefore, natural increased with the increase in lime content, in
pozzolana cannot be used solely for soil stabilization. contrast with natural pozzolana stabilized soils.
However, lime stabilized soils can be intensified by The combination lime-natural pozzolana
adding between 10 and 20% of natural pozzolana. decreased the optimum moisture content for the
The better performance of natural pozzolana-lime grey soil and increased that of the red soil.
combination stabilized soil can be attributed to the • The failure modes were similar to that of brittle
pozzolanic properties of the mixture and to the materials for both soils stabilized with lime or
utilization of readily available silica and alumina with a combination of natural pozzolana-lime.
from natural pozzolana by the calcium from the lime Furthermore, maximum shear strengths were
to form cementitious compounds which binds the soil observed for samples stabilized with a combina-
particles together. Since lime is more costly than tion of natural pozzolana-lime compared to those
natural pozzolana, the use of a combination of both stabilized with lime or natural pozzolana alone.

123
768 Geotech Geol Eng (2011) 29:759–769

• The addition of lime improved the unconfined Gay G, Schad H (2000) Influence of cement and lime additives
compressive strength. The improvement is more on the compaction properties and shear parameters of fine
grained soils. Otto-Graf J 11:19–31
significant with increasing curing time. The George SZ, Ponniah DA, Little JA (1992) Effect of tempera-
combination natural pozzolana-lime can substan- ture on lime-soil stabilization. Construct Build Mater
tially improve the unconfined compressive 6:247–252
strength. Ghrici M, Kenai S, Said Mansour M (2007) Mechanical
properties and durability of mortar and concrete contain-
• Combining two local materials (natural pozzolana ing natural pozzolana and limestone blended cements.
and lime) can effectively improve the properties Cem Concr Compos 29:524–549
of cohesive soils and help in increasing land Goswami RK, Singh B (2005) Influence of fly ash and lime on
availability for construction projects. plasticity characteristics of residual lateritic soil. Ground
Improv 9:175–182
• For future research it is recommended to test the Guney Y, Sari D, Cetin M, Tuncan M (2007) Impact of cyclic
influence of the addition of lime and natural wetting-drying on swelling behaviour of lime-stabilized
pozzolana in cohesive soils, making more com- soil. Build Environ 42:681–688
binations on the quantities of the additives. Hossain KMA, Lachemi M, Easa S (2007) Stabilized soils for
construction applications incorporating natural resources of
Papua New Guinea. Resour Conserv Recycling 51:711–731
Kalkan E (2009) Influence of silica fume on the desiccation cracks
of compacted clayey soils. Appl Clay Sci 43:296–302
Kavak A, Akyarli A (2007) A field application for lime sta-
References bilization. Env Geol 51:987–997
Kolias S, Kasselouri-Rigopoulou V, Karahalios A (2005) Sta-
Al-Rawas AA, Goosen MFA (2006) Expansive soils-Recent bilization of clayey soils with high calcium fly ash and
advances in characterization and treatment. London, cement. Cem Concr Compos 27:301–313
Taylor & Francis group Lasledj A, Al-Mukhtar M (2008) Effect of hydrated lime on the
Al-Rawas AA, Hago AW, Al-Sarmi H (2005) Effect of lime, engineering behaviour and the microstructure of highly
cement and sarooj (artificial pozzolan) on the swelling expansive clay. In: International conference on computer
potential of an expansive soil from Oman. Build Environ methods and advances in geomechanics
40:681–687 Lin DF, Lin KL, Hung MJ, Luo HL (2007) Sludge ash/
Ansary MA, Noor MA, Islam M (2006) Effect of fly ash sta- hydrated lime on the geotechnical properties of soft soil.
bilization on geotechnical properties of Chittagong coastal J Hazard Mater 145:58–64
soil. In soil stress-strain behavior geotechnical symposium Manasseh J, Olufemi AI (2008) Effect of lime on some geo-
ASTM D4318 (2000) Standard test methods for liquid limit, plastic technical properties of Igumale shale. Electron JGeotech
limit, and plasticity index of soils. ASTM International Eng 13:1–12
ASTM D698 (2000) Standard test methods for laboratory Muntohar AS, Hantoro G (2000) Influence of rice husk ash and
compaction characteristics of soil using standard effort. lime on engineering properties of a clayey subgrade.
ASTM International Electron J Geotech Eng 5:1–9
ASTM D2166 (2000) Standard test methods for unconfined Nalbantoglu Z (2004) Effectiveness of class C fly ash as an
compressive strength of cohesive soil. ASTM International expansive soil stabilizer. Construct Build Mater 18:377–381
ASTM D2850 (2003) Standard test methods for unconsoli- Nalbantoglu Z (2006) Lime stabilization of expansive clay. In:
dated-undrained triaxial compression test on cohesive Al Rawas AA, Goosen MFA (eds) Expansive soils-recent
soils. ASTM International advances in characterization and treatment. London,
Attoh-Okine NO (1995) Lime treatment of laterite soils and Taylor & Francis group, pp 341–348
gravels-revisited. Construct Build Mater 9:283–287 Okagbue CO, Yakubu JA (2000) Limestone ash waste as a
Bagherpour I, Choobbasti AJ (2003) Stabilization of fine- substitute for lime in soil improvement for engineering
grained soils by adding micro silica and lime or micro construction. Bull Eng Geol Environ 58:107–113
silica and cement. Electron J Geotech Eng 8:1–10 Ola SA (1977) The potentials of lime stabilization of lateritic
Basha EA, Hashim R, Muntohar AS (2003) Effect of the soils. Eng Geol 11:305–317
cement-rice husk ash on the plasticity and compaction of Osula DOA (1996) A comparative evaluation of cement and
soil. Electron J Geotech Eng 8:1–8 lime modification of laterite. Eng Geol 42:71–81
Basha EA, Hashim R, Mahmud HB, Muntohar AS (2005) Parsons RL, Kneebone E (2005) Field performance of fly ash
Stabilization of residual soil with rice husk ash and stabilized subgrade. Ground Improv 9:33–38
cement. Construct Build Mater 19:448–453 Prabakar J, Dendorkar N, Morchhale RK (2004) Influence of
Bell FG (1996) Lime stabilization of clay minerals and soils. fly ash on strength behavior of typical soils. Construct
Eng Geol 42:223–237 Build Mater 18:263–267
Chen L, Lin DF (2009) Stabilization treatment of soft subgrade Rahman MDA (1986) The potentials of some stabilizers for the
soil by sewage sludge ash and cement. J Hazard Mater 162: use of lateritic soil in construction. Build Environ
321–327 21:57–61

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2011) 29:759–769 769

Senol A, Edil TB, Bin-Shafique MS, Acosta HA, Benson CH Sezer A, Inan G, Yilmaz HR, Ramyar K (2006) Utilization of a
(2006) Soft subgrades’ stabilization by using various fly very high lime fly ash for improvement of Izmir clay.
ashes. Resour Conserv Recycling 46:365–376 Build Environ 41:150–155

123

View publication stats