Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, Volume 15, No.

1, 2021

Effect of Rice Husk Ash and Stone Dust on Selecting Engineering Properties of
Poor Subgrade Soil

Ayush Mittal 1)*

1)
Assistant Professor, Rajkiya Engineering College, Ambedkar Nagar, UP, India. PIN-224122, India.
* (Corresponding Author). E-Mail: ayushmittalce0012@[Link]

ABSTRACT
Roads are one of the major contributing factors for the economic and social enhancement of any country. Its
importance further increases if the economy of a country is based on agriculture. From the total land area of
India, more than 20% is covered with soils having high swelling and shrinkage potential and low strength. Any
type of construction over such soils will not last long due to subsidence and crack formation. So, in order to
overcome such situations, some soil stabilization techniques have to be adopted, since removal and replacement
will lead to heavy economic burden. This paper presents the effect of adding rice husk ash (RHA) and stone
dust on various index and engineering properties of weak soil. Various doses of RHA (5, 10 and 20%) along
with 6% cement and stone dust (10, 20, 30 and 40%) are used for stabilization. Tests are carried out to determine
consistency limits, specific gravity, differential free swell, compaction characteristics and soaked California
Bearing Ratio (CBR). Test results indicated significant reduction in swelling potential and improvement in
CBR value of soil, thus decreasing the thickness requirement of pavement and saving costly base and sub-base
aggregate materials.

KEYWORDS: Rice husk ash, Stone dust, Subgrade, Expansive soil, Pavement.

INTRODUCTION of 54% in soaked CBR and a reduction of 30% in swell

potential were reported. Sabat (2012) conducted
Expansive soils are mostly found in the arid and laboratory tests on clayey soil reinforced with RHA and
semi-arid regions of the world and are in abundance polypropylene fibers in various proportions. Significant
where average annual evaporation is more than improvements in UCS, soaked CBR, hydraulic
precipitation (Le and Ludwig, 2016). These are residual conductivity and a reduction in swelling pressure were
deposits formed from sedimentary rocks (Pham and observed up to 1.5% fiber addition. Chouksey et al.
Tran, 2019). These soils pose serious problems to (2019) studied the effect of adding potassium chloride
highways and structures constructed on them. In India, (KCI) and RHA on the strength and swelling properties
more than 8 lakh square km land area is covered with of clayey soil. 1% KCI and 12% RHA content caused
such soils, which includes the states of Maharashtra, maximum improvement, where unconfined
Bihar, Tamil Nadu, the southern part of Uttar Pradesh, compressive strength (UCS) has increased by 515%.
the southern and western parts of Madhya Pradesh, Various studies have been conducted on soil samples
Gujarat, the eastern part of Rajasthan and a few parts of stabilized with lime, fly ash, bagasse ash, geogrid sheet,
Andhra Pradesh and Chennai (Mittal and Shukla, 2020). pond ash and polypropylene fibers (Subrahmanyam et
Le et al. (2015) studied the effect of adding RHA, lime al., 1981; Jongpradist et al., 2018; Gartner and Macphee,
and gypsum on various properties of marine clay. 5% 2011; Ganesan, 2008; Raj et al., 2016; Huang et al.,
lime + 20% RHA + 3% gypsum at 28 days of curing 2017; Dakroury and Gasser, 2008; Akinyele et al., 2015;
were found to be the optimum doses, where an increase Van et al., 2011; Kuity and Roy, 2013; Payá et al., 2001;
Feng et al., 2005; Fapohunda et al., 2017), while limited
Received on 7/5/2020. literature was available on the use of RHA and stone
Accepted for Publication on 25/12/2020. dust on expansive soil.

‐ 133 -
Effect of Rice Husk Ash… Ayush Mittal

The present work focuses on the effect of adding 1m below the ground level, as the top soil is likely to
RHA along with cement and stone dust on strength and contain organic matter and other foreign materials. The
swelling behaviour of poor subgrade soil. area is largely covered with expansive soil having low
bearing capacity. The soil is classified as clay of high
MATERIALS compressibility (CH) as per Indian standard
Soil classification system (IS: 1498-1970). Figure 1 shows
The soil sample used in this study is collected from the grain size distribution curve of soil. Table 1 shows
Darri (25.30°N, 78.48°E), Jhansi district, Uttar Pradesh. the various index and engineering properties of CH soil.
The soil is collected by digging trial pits at a depth of

100
Percent Finer (%)

80
60
40
20
0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
Particle Size (mm)

Figure (1): Grain size distribution curve for Jhansi soil

Table 1. Properties of Jhansi soil

Property Value
Specific Gravity 2.31
Atterberg’s Limits
(a) Liquid Limit (%) 64.41
(b) Plastic Limit (%) 31.67
(c) Plasticity Index (%) 32.74
Grain Size Distribution
(a) Gravel (%) 0.00
(b) Sand (%) 2.20
(c) Silt (%) 5.30
(d) Clay (%) 92.50
Soil Classification (ISCS) Clay of High Compressibility (CH)
Water Content (%) 9.39
Differential Free Swell (%) 53.45
pH Value 7.21
Optimum Moisture Content (%) 18.98
Maximum Dry Density (kN/m3) 17.10
Soaked CBR (%) 2.26

- 134 -
Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, Volume 15, No. 1, 2021

Rice Husk Ash (RHA) Stone Dust (SD)

Rice husk is an agricultural waste obtained as a by- Stone dust (SD) is a solid waste material obtained
product of rice milling. From the 110 million tons of husk from crushing of stones at quarry sites (Agarwal, 2015).
produced globally every year, India produces 24 million It contains a little amount of pozzolanic properties and
tons of husk and 4.4 million tons of RHA (Yu et al., has a high CBR value (Ali and Koranne, 2012). The use
1999). During milling of paddy, around 75% is obtained of stone dust as a stabilizer is the best method for its
as rice and bran and the remaining 25% as husk (Ali and disposal (Satyanarayana et al., 2013). For the purpose of
Koranne, 2012). Upon burning, 25% husk gets converted investigation in this study, stone dust is obtained from
into ash and the remainder is a volatile matter (Real et al., local market in Meerut, Uttar Pradesh. Table 4 shows the
1996). This RHA is a great threat to the environment, as various physical properties of stone dust.
it can damage the surrounding area and land where it is
dumped (Memon et al., 2011). It can be used as a Table 4. Physical properties of stone dust
pozzolanic material in concrete production, absorbent for Particulars Description
oils and chemicals and for soil stabilization (Reddy et al., Specific Gravity 2.62
2006). Table 2 shows the chemical composition of RHA. Liquid Limit (%) Non-plastic
Table 3 shows the various physical and index properties Plastic Limit (%) Non-plastic
of RHA. For the purpose of investigation in this study, Grain Size Distribution
RHA is obtained from a rice mill located in Ambedkar
Coarse Sand (2-4.75mm) % 8.12
Nagar, Uttar Pradesh.
Medium Sand (0.425μ-2mm) % 35.90
Fine Sand (0.075μ-0.425μ) % 41.78
Table 2. Chemical composition of RHA
Silt (2μ-75μ) % 14.20
Constituent Percentage (%)
Clay (<2μ) 0.00
Silica (SiO2) 87.12
Optimum Moisture Content (%) 12.10
Aluminium Oxide (Al2O3) 3.27
Maximum Dry Density (kN/m3) 18.50
Ferric Oxide ( Fe2O3) 1.45
CBR (%) 21.67
Calcium Oxide (CaO) 2.79
Magnesia (MgO) 0.63
EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS
Loss on Ignition 4.50
Source: Subrahmanyam et al. (1981).
Liquid limit, plastic limit, specific gravity,
differential free swell (DFS), light compaction and CBR
Table 3. Physical and index properties of RHA
tests are performed on soil samples with and without
Particulars Description treatment. Liquid and plastic limit tests are conducted as
Specific Gravity 2.07 per IS: 2720 (Part 5)-1985, specific gravity test as per
Liquid Limit (%) Non-plastic IS: 2720 (Part 3/section 1)-1980, DFS test as per IS:
Plastic Limit (%) Non-plastic 2720 (Part 40)-1977, light compaction as per IS: 2720
Grain Size Distribution (% Finer than) (Part 7)-1980 and CBR test as per IS: 2720 (Part 16)-
4.75mm 100 1987. Three different percentages of RHA (i.e., 5, 10
2mm 95.45 and 20%) are mixed with soil. To provide adequate
600μ 89.63 cementation property, soil-RHA mix is mixed with 6%
300μ 79.42 cement. Stone dust is mixed in various percentages (i.e.,
75μ 17.90 10, 20, 30 and 40%) by dry weight of soil. The above
Optimum Moisture Content (%) 42.20 percentages of RHA and stone dust used are based on
Maximum Dry Density (kN/m3) 6.90 rigorous literature review and trial tests; i.e., 15%, 30%
CBR (%) 16.12 and 45% RHA and stone dust each are added in soil
Color Grey samples separately in order to get a rough idea about the
Shape Texture Irregular optimum ranges depending on un-soaked CBR values.
Appearance Very Fine

- 135 -
Effect of Rice Husk Ash… Ayush Mittal

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 30.23% for 10%, 20%, 30% and 40% addition of stone
dust, respectively. Similar trend in values of plastic limit
Atterberg’s Limits and plasticity index was reported. The plastic limit
The effects of adding RHA along with cement and decreases from 31.67% to 31.20%, 28.08% and 26.75%
stone dust on soil properties are shown in Table 5. The for various RHA percentages and 24.36%, 22.15%,
liquid limit for virgin soil is 64.41%, which decreases to 19.63% and 17.40% for various stone dust contents,
55.62%, 52.39% and 49.98%, respectively, for 5%, 10% respectively. This reduction in Atterberg’s limit of
and 20% RHA addition along with 6% cement in each modified soil is due to mechanical or granular
case. It further changes to 44.40%, 38.54%, 32.67% and stabilization and addition of non-plastic material.

Table 5. Atterberg’s limits of soil modified with RHA, cement and stone dust
Percentages of Stabilizers Mixed
Property Virgin 5% RHA + 10% RHA + 20% RHA + 10% Stone 20% Stone 30% Stone 40% Stone
Soil 6% Cement 6% Cement 6% Cement Dust Dust Dust Dust
Liquid Limit (%) 64.41 55.62 52.39 49.98 44.40 38.54 32.67 30.23
Plastic Limit (%) 31.67 31.20 28.08 26.75 24.36 22.15 19.63 17.40
Plasticity Index (%) 32.74 24.42 24.31 23.23 20.04 16.39 13.04 12.83

Specific Gravity increases, specific gravity also increases (i.e., 2.42, 2.53,
The specific gravity for un-modified soil is 2.31, 2.67 and 2.78), indicating greater denseness as
which decreases as RHA content increases in soil (i.e., compared to soil. Figure 2 shows the variation in
2.28, 2.21 and 2.18), indicating that RHA is lighter than specific gravity value of soil against admixture contents.
soil. On the other hand, as the percentage of stone dust
2.9
2.8 2.67 2.78
2.7
Soecific Gravity

2.6 2.53
2.5 2.42 RHA + Cement soil
2.4 2.31
2.3 Stone Dust Soil
2.2 2.28 2.18
2.1 2.21
2
0 10 20 30 40 50
Admixtures (RHA+Cement and Stone Dust)
Figure (2): Effect of addition of RHA, cement and stone dust on specific gravity

Differential Free Swell of expansiveness has changed from very high category
The addition of RHA and stone dust resulted in to moderate category (below 35%). This behavioral
significant reduction in free swell of soil. The free swell change in soil is due to addition of non-plastic materials,
value for un-modified soil is 53.45%, which decreases like cement, RHA and stone dust. The cation exchange
to 42.63%, 28.57% and 23.07%, respectively, for soil phenomenon comes into action where sodium ions in
sample mixed with 5%, 10% and 20% RHA along with soil are replaced by calcium ions present in additives.
6% cement in each case. DFS further reduces to 40.98%, Figure 3 shows the variation in DFS value of soil against
32.81%, 25.75% and 20.59% for 10%, 20%, 30% and admixture contents.
40% addition of stone dust in soil, respectively. Degree

- 136 -
Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, Volume 15, No. 1, 2021

60

Differential Free Swell (%)

53.45 RHA + Cement Soil
50
40.98
Stone Dust Soil
40 32.81
42.63
30 25.75

20 28.57 23.07 20.59

10

0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Admixtures (RHA+Cement and Stone Dust)

Figure (3): Effect of addition of RHA, cement and stone dust on differential free swell

Compaction Characteristics RHA has a lower specific gravity and stone dust has a
The maximum dry density value for un-reinforced higher specific gravity as compared to soil; thus, as the
soil is 1.71g/cc, which decreases to 1.66g/cc, 1.62g/cc percentage of additives increases, MDD decreases for
and 1.57g/cc, respectively, for 5%, 10% and 20% RHA RHA-reinforced soil samples and increases for stone
addition along with 6% cement in each case. It further dust-reinforced soil samples. Figure 4 shows the
changes to 1.74g/cc, 1.78g/cc, 1.82g/cc and 1.85g/cc for variation in MDD value of soil against admixture
10%, 20%, 30% and 40% addition of stone dust, contents.
respectively. This change in MDD is due to the fact that

1.9
Maximum Dry Density

1.85 1.82 1.85

1.8 1.78
1.74
1.75 1.71
(g/cc)

1.7 RHA + Cement Soil

1.65
1.66 Stone Dust Soil
1.6 1.62 1.57
1.55
0 10 20 30 40 50
Admixtures (RHA+Cement and Stone Dust)

Figure (4): Effect of addition of RHA, cement and stone dust on MDD of soil

The optimum moisture content value for un- OMC in case of RHA-reinforced soil is due to high
reinforced soil is 18.98%, which increases to 21.54%, water absorption tendency of rice husk. The reasons for
21.87% and 24.17%, respectively, for 5%, 10% and 20% reduction in OMC by addition of stone dust are due to
RHA addition along with 6% cement in each case. proper rearrangement of particles and reduction in
However, reduction in OMC is reported when modified surface area of modified soil mass. Figure 5 shows the
with stone dust having values of 18.04%, 17.63%, variation in OMC value of soil against admixture
17.06% and 16.32% for 10%, 20%, 30% and 40% contents.
addition of stone dust, respectively. This increase in

- 137 -
Effect of Rice Husk Ash… Ayush Mittal

30

Optimum Moisture
25 21.54 21.87 24.17

Content (%)
20
15 18.98 18.04 16.32
17.63 17.06
10 RHA + Cement Soil
5
Stone Dust Soil
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Admixtures (RHA+Cement and Stone Dust)
Figure (5): Effect of addition of RHA, cement and stone dust on OMC of soil

California Bearing Ratio 10%, 20%, 30% and 40% addition of stone dust to poor
The soaked CBR value of un-reinforced soil is subgrade soil. This increase in CBR is due to proper
2.26%, which increases to 3.83%, 5.40% and 4.96%, bonding of additives with expansive soil, thus offering
respectively, for 5%, 10% and 20% RHA addition along greater resistance to penetration of plunger: Figure 6
with 6% cement in each case. This value further changes shows the variation in CBR value of soil against
to 3.66%, 4.71%, 6.10% and 5.75%, respectively, for admixture contents.

7
6.1
California Bearing Ratio (%)

6 5.4 5.75
4.96
5
3.83 4.71
4
3 3.66
RHA+Cement Soil
2 2.26
1 Stone Dust SSoil
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Admixtures (RHA+ Cement and Stone Dust)

Figure (6): Effect of addition of RHA, cement and stone dust on CBR of soil

CONCLUSIONS modified sample. However, all stone dust-modified

soil samples have greater MDD (maximum of
Based on the experimental results and discussion 1.85g/cc for 40% stone dust) as compared to virgin
made, the following conclusions are drawn: soil.
1. As the percentage of additives increases, reductions 3. The OMC values for all RHA- and stone dust-
in liquid limit, plastic limit, plasticity index and reinforced samples are more and less, respectively,
differential free swell values are reported. Such as compared to OMC value of virgin soil. The value
reductions are due to addition of non-expansive/non- has changed from 18.98% for virgin soil to 24.17%
plastic materials in soil. for (20% RHA + 6% cement)-modified sample and
2. The MDD value decreases for all RHA-reinforced to 16.32% for 40% stone dust addition.
samples. The value has changed from 1.71g/cc for 4. This behavioral change in MDD and OMC values is
virgin soil to 1.57g/cc for (20% RHA + 6% cement)- due to difference in specific gravity and water

- 138 -
Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, Volume 15, No. 1, 2021

absorption tendency of soil, RHA and stone dust. construction, backfilling and pavement on soft soils.
5. Maximum increase of 138% and 170% in CBR, The effective use of rice husk ash and stone dust will
respectively, is reported for soil samples reinforced significantly reduce waste disposal problems and
with (10% RHA + 6% cement) and 30% stone dust, lead to better environmental conditions. It will also
thus changing the subgrade class from very poor to pave a way for developing new and improved
fair category. stabilization techniques. However, more research is
6. This increase in CBR will cause 32% reduction in required to fully understand the working mechanism
pavement thickness as per IRC:SP:72-2015 design of additives in poor subgrade soils. Hence, it’s time
catalogues of flexible pavements for low-volume to support more and more use of agricultural waste
rural roads, leading to a cost reduction of 12%. like rice husk ash and industrial waste like stone
7. It is recommended to use 30% stone dust treatment dust.
to clayey soil when considered on the basis of
strength improvement and thickness and cost Acknowledgements
reduction. The author wishes to acknowledge Rajkiya
8. These conclusions can be effectively used in various Engineering College Ambedkar Nagar, India for
Civil Engineering applications, such as embankment providing all the facilities for carrying out this work.

REFERENCES Dakroury, A.E., and Gasser, M.S. (2008). “Rice husk ash
(RHA) as cement admixture for immobilization of
Agarwal, N. (2015). “Effect of stone dust on some liquid radioactive waste at different temperatures.”
geotechnical properties of soil”. IOSR Journal of Journal of Nuclear Materials, 381 (3), 271-277.
Mechanical and Civil Engineering (IOSR-JMCE), 12 Fapohunda, C., Akinbile, B., and Shittu, A. (2017).
(1), 61-64. “Structure and properties of mortar and concrete with
Akinyele, J.O., Salim, R.W., Oikelome, K.O., and Olateju, rice husk ash as partial replacement of ordinary
O.T. (2015). “The use of rice husk ash as a stabilizing Portland cement: A review.” International Journal of
agent in lateritic clay soil.” International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment, 6, 675-692.
Civil and Environmental Engineering, 9, 1418-1422. Feng, Q., Sugita, S., Shoya, M., and Yamamichi, H. (2005).
Ali, M.S., and Koranne, S.S. (2012). “Performance analysis “Study on the pozzolanic properties of rice husk ash by
of expansive soil treated with stone dust and fly ash.” hydrochloric acid pretreatment.” Cement and Concrete
Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 16, Research, 35 (5), 1018-1019.
973-982. Ganesan, E.K., Rajagopal, K., and Thangavel, K. (2008).
Anupam, A.K., Kumar, P., and Ransinchung, G.D. (2013). “Rice husk ash blended cement: Assessment of optimal
“Use of various agricultural and industrial waste level of replacement for strength and permeability
materials in road construction.” (2nd CTRG), Procedia- properties of concrete.” Construction and Building
Social and Behavioral Sciences, ELSEVIER, 264-273. Materials, 22, 1675-1683.
Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), New Delhi. (Second Gartner, E.M., and Macphee, D.E. (2011). “A physico-
Reprint, t September 1994). chemical basis for novel cementitious binders.” Cement
Chouksey, A., Dev, N., and Kumari, S. (2019). “Review and Concrete Research. Journal of Cement and
paper on utilization potential of rice husk ash as a Concrete, 41 (7), 736-749. [Link]
supplementary cementitious material.” In: Das, B.B. & [Link].2011.03.006
Neithalath, N. (eds.), Sustainable Construction and Huang, H., Gao, X., Wang, H., and Ye, H. (2017).
Building Materials, Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, “Influence of rice husk ash on strength and permeability
vol. 25. Springer, Singapore. [Link] of ultrahigh- performance concrete.” Construction and
10.1007/978-981-13-3317-0_60 Building Materials, 149, 621-628.

- 139 -
Effect of Rice Husk Ash… Ayush Mittal

IS: 1498-1970. “Classification and identification of soils Kuity, A., and Roy, T.K. (2013). “Utilization of geogrid
for general engineering purposes (first revision)”. mesh for improving the soft subgrade layer with waste
Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), New Delhi. (Eighth material mix compositions.” (2nd CTRG), Procedia-
Reprint, June 2000). Social and Behavioral Sciences, ELSEVIER, 255-263.
IS: 2720 (Part 16)-1987. “Methods of test for soils: Le, H. T., and Ludwig, H. M. (2016). “Effect of rice husk
Determination of California bearing ratio (second ash and other mineral admixtures on properties of self-
revision)”. Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), New compacting high-performance concrete.” Materials &
Delhi. Design, 89, 156-166.
IS: 2720 (Part 3/Sec 1)-1980. “Methods of test for soils: Le, H. T., Siewert, K., and Ludwig, H. M. (2015). “Alkali
Determination of specific gravity, Section 1: Fine silica reaction in mortar formulated from self-
grained soils (first revision)”. Bureau of Indian compacting high-performance concrete containing rice
Standards (BIS), New Delhi. (First Reprint, April husk ash.” Construction and Building Materials, 88, 10-
1989). 19.
IS: 2720 (Part 4)-1985. “Methods of test for soils: Grain Memon, S. A., Shaikh, M. A., and Akbar, H. (2011).
size analysis (second revision)”. “Utilization of rice husk ash as viscosity-modifying
IS: 2720 (Part 40)-1977. “Methods of test for soils: agent in self-compacting concrete.” Construction and
Determination of free swell index of soils”. Bureau of Building Materials, 25, 1044-1048.
Indian Standards (BIS), New Delhi. (Third Reprint, Mittal, A., and Shukla, S. (2020). “Effect of random
August 1997). inclusion of kenaf fibres on strength behaviour of poor
IS: 2720 (Part 5)-1985. “Methods of test for soils: subgrade soils.” Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering,
Determination of liquid and plastic limit (second 14 (1), 43-56.
revision)”. Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), New Payá, J., Monzó, J., Borrachero, M., Mellado, A., and
Delhi. Ordoñez, L. (2001). “Determination of amorphous
IS: 2720 (Part 7)-1980. “Methods of test for soils: silica in rice husk ash by a rapid analytical method.”
Determination of water content-dry density relation Cement and Concrete Research, 31, 227–231.
using light compaction (second revision)”. Bureau of Pham, V.P., and Tran, V.T. (2019). “Rice husk ash burnt in
Indian Standards (BIS), New Delhi. (Fifth Reprint, simple conditions for soil stabilization.” In: Long, P.D.
August 1997). & Dung, N.T. (eds.), Geotechnics for Sustainable
Islam, S., Hoque, N., Uddin, M., and Chowdhury, M. Infrastructure Development, Lecture Notes in Civil
(2018). “Strength development in clay soil stabilized Engineering, vol. 62. Springer, Singapore.
with fly ash.” Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, 12 [Link]
(2), 188-201. Raj, R.R., Banupriya, S., and Dharani, R. (2016).
Jongpradist, P., Homtragoon, W., Sukkarak, R., “Stabilization of soil using rice husk ash.” International
Kongkitkul, W., and Jamsawang, P. (2018). Journal of Computational Engineering Research, 6, 43-
“Efficiency of rice husk ash as cementitious material in 50.
high-strength cement-admixed clay.” Advances in Real, C., Alcalá, M.D., and Criado, J.M. (1996).
Civil Engineering, 1-11. [Link] “Preparation of silica from rice husks.” Journal of the
8346319 American Ceramic Society, 79 (8), 2012-2016.
Karkush, M.O., Al-Murshedi, M.O., and Karim, H.H. Reddy, O.E., Gopinath, E., Shrinivasan, K.S., and
(2020). “Investigation of the impacts of nano-clay on Poornima, C.A. (2006). “Effect of quarry dust on
the collapse potential and geotechnical properties of compaction properties of clay”. Proceedings of
gypseous soils.” Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, National Conference on Corrective Engineering
14 (4), 537-547. Practices in Troublesome Soils, 31-34.
Khan, R.A., and Sharma, R. (2018). “Strength and Sabat, A.K. (2012). “Effect of polypropylene fibre on
durability characteristics of rice husk ash concrete engineering properties of rice husk ash-lime-stabilized
reinforced with polypropylene fibres.” Jordan Journal expansive soil.” Electronic Journal of Geotechnical
of Civil Engineering, 12 (4): 653-668. Engineering, 17, 651-660.

- 140 -
Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, Volume 15, No. 1, 2021

Satyanarayana, P.V.V., Raghu, P., Kumar, R.A., and Van, T.N., Ye, G., van Breugel, K., and Copuroglu, O.
Pradeep, N. (2013). “Performance of crusher dust in (2011). “Hydration and microstructure of ultrahigh-
highly plastic gravel soils as road construction performance concrete incorporating rice husk ash.”
material.” IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Cement and Concrete Research, 41, 1104-1111.
Engineering, 10 (3), 01-05. Yu, Q., Sawayama, K., Sugita, S., Shoya, M., and Isojima,
Subrahmanyam, M.S., Cheran L.L., and Cheran, L.S. Y. (1999). “The reaction between rice husk ash and
(1981). “Use of rice husk ash for soil stabilization.” Ca(OH)2 solution and the nature of its product.”
GSM Geotechnical Engineering Seminar, Geol. Soc. Cement and Concrete Research, 29 (1), 37-43.
Malaysia Bulletin, 14, 143-151.

- 141 -