Compaction characteristics of lime-treated tropical soil

11th International Conference on Geotechnical Engineering in Tropical Regions;1st International Conference on Highway and Transportation Engineering 2019

矿业工程;运输工程

Azril Hezmi, Muhammad^1 ; Ahmad, Kamarudin^1 ; Mohd Yunus, Nor Zurairahetty^1 ; Anuar Kassim, Khairul^1 ; Rashid, Ahmad Safuan A.^1 ; Abdul Hassan, Norhidayah^1

School of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai, Johor

81310, Malaysia^1

关键词: Compaction characteristics;    Engineering characteristics;    Lime-treated soils;    Maximum dry density;    Optimum moisture content;    Project site;    Soil stabilization;    Tropical soils;   

Others  :  https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1757-899X/527/1/012007/pdf
DOI  :  10.1088/1757-899X/527/1/012007

来源: IOP

【 摘 要 】

Like soils of other regions in the world, some tropical soils are also associated with problems of low strength. To improve engineering characteristics of soils, several methods have been employed worldwide which are categorized as mechanical, chemical, thermal and electrical. The aim of this research is to compare the compaction characteristics of untreated and lime-treated soils. Soil samples obtained from three different points within a project site in Klang, Selangor were utilized in this study. Each sample was subjected to Eades and Grimm's test in accordance with ASTM D6276-99a to determine the appropriate lime dosage for soil stabilization. The required lime dosage was found between 1.3% and 3.4%. Then each untreated soil and soil sample mixed with 5% lime, higher than that obtained from Eades and Grimm's tests were compacted in accordance with BS 1377:1990. Generally, each soil sample achieved lower values of maximum dry density after treated with 5% lime than those of the untreated soils. Such observations were in good agreement with those obtained by previous researchers working on lime-treated soils. Nonetheless, the optimum moisture content of the lime-treated sample from Points 1 was slightly higher than that of the untreated sample. This finding was different from those obtained by previous researchers. Such contradicting observation might be due to the type and quantity of mineralogical contents of the soils studied.