Experimental Evaluations of Stabilization Methods for High Sulfate Soils in Iran Desert Roads

Author
H. Noferesti
null
Abstract
In this paper, the approach proposed methods for soil stabilization in road construction projects has been explored in the literature. Geological studies, chemical status and soil salinity, along with relevant tests, analyze data and present the results of theoretical studies, field and laboratory tests have been done. As a case study, Khur- Arababad Desert Road (KADR) is used. KADR is located in South Khorasan province, which has a desert climate and the plain- hills are evaluated in terms of topography. The annual average daily traffic volume of the road between 8500 to 9000 has fluctuated. A total of 11 soil samples were taken for studies of soil chemistry. In this context soil samples to determine the texture, pH, Electrical Conductivity (EC), the percentage of lime and plaster were tested. Results showed that most samples are placed in the category of saline soils. Defining what type of soil salinity that the region is facing, to determine the exact concentration of sodium, calcium and magnesium ions in the samples, advanced atomic absorption method was used. The soil is very high sulfate content at all stations. To study the physical and mechanical properties of soil 7 samples were chosen. The experiments included sieve test, the sand equivalent, the determination of specific gravity, determine the plastic limit and liquid limit, proctor compaction, California Bearing Ratio (CBR) and swelling test. The results showed that the use of lime for soil stabilization with respect to the necessary CBR number is quite responsive. It also seems that even in relation to the amount of lime, Lime 2% would suffice, although higher percentages such as 5 percent of lime will obtain more reliable results. The volume changes average with increasing the percentage of lime almost showed an increasing trend. Soil stabilization options including limestone, blast furnace lump slag and Ground-Granulated Blast-Furnace Slag (GGBFS), copper and magnesium oxide tailings. To determine the optimal amount of lime, examples of the 2, 5 and 10 percent of lime was prepared. The addition of four other factors, according to previous studies was 5% and 2% lime was added to half of the samples as a catalyst. Three modes including lime 5%, fine-grained magnetite 5% with lime 2% and copper tailings 5% showed the best performance in terms of increasing the CBR, uniform effect on all the samples, and a little swelling in treated samples in 7 days. Iron slags, especially when they are combined with lime, have demonstrated effective performance to CBR increasing, But this performance fluctuated sharply and not uniform in different sampling stations. Another reason was that the exclusion of iron slags was the economic disadvantage due to the long transport distance. There is also concern regarding the use of fine-grained magnetite that Inflationary in the long run to the formation of the mineral magnesium sulfate (MgSO4) in soil. Copper tailings and lime performance in preventing soil volume changes in processed samples approximately the same and a small amount of swelling has been observed in some samples. Therefore, the use of two additives including lime 5% or copper tailings 5% more is recommended.

Keywords

Subjects

1- Merkler D. 2004 Chemical Heave and Expansive Salts, In Muckel G.B. Editor, Understanding Soil Risks and Hazards: Using Soil Survey to Identify Areas with Risks and Hazards to Human Life and Property, United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, National Soil Survey Center.
2- Biggs A.J.W., and Mahony K.M. 2004 Is Soil Science Relevant to Road Infrastructure, 13th International Soil Conservation Organisation Conference – Brisbane.
3- Mitchell J. K. 1986 Practical Problems from Surprising Soil Behavior. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, 112 ( 3), 259-289.
4- Hunter D. 1988 Lime-Induced Heave in Sulfate-Bearing Clay Soils,. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 114, 50-167
5- Puppala A. J., Hanchanloet S., Jadeja M., Burkart B. 1999 Sulfate Induced Heave Distress: A Case Study. Proceedings, Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, Washington D.C, USA.
6- Puppala A. J., Wattanasanticharoen E. and Punthutaecha K. 2003 Experimental Evaluations of Stabilization Methods for Sulphate rich Expansive Soils. Ground Improvement, 7(1), 25-35.
7- Puppala A.J., Naga S. Talluri., Bhaskar S. Chittoori and Gaily A. 2012 Lessons Learned from Sulfate Induced Heaving Studies in Chemically Treated Soils. Proceedings of the International Conference on Ground Improvement and Ground Control. Research Publishing, Vol. 1, November, pp.85-98.
8- Rajasekaran G. 2005 Sulphate Attack and Ettringite Formation in The Lime and Cement Stabilized Marine Clays, Ocean Engineering, 32(55), 1133-1159.
9- Little D. N. and R. Graves, 1995 Guidelines for Use of Lime in Sulfate-bearing Soils, Chemical Lime Company.
10- Berger E., Little D. N. and Graves R. 2001 Technical Memorandum: Guidelines for Stabilization of Soils Containing Sulfate. http://www.lime.org/publications.html.
11- Harris J. P., Sebesta S., and Scullion T. 2004 Hydrated Lime Stabilization of Sulfate-bearing Vertisols in Texas. Transportation Research Record 1868, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., pp. 31-39.
12- Puppala A.J., Talluri N., Gaily A., Bhaskar, Chittoori, C.S. 2013 Heaving Mechanisms in High Sulfate Soils. Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Paris, pp.3125-3128.
13- Harris P., VonHoldt J., Sebesta S., and Scullion T. 2006 Recommendations for Stabilization of High-Sulfate Soils in Texas, Texas Transportation Institute, Report No: 0-4240-3, Texas.
14- Cokca E. Yazici V. and Ozaydin V. 2009 Stabilisation of Expansive Clays Using Granulated Blast Furnace Slag (GBFS) and GBFS-Cement, Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 27(4), 489-499.
15- Sharma A.K. and Sivapullaiah P.V. 2012 Improvement of Strength of Expansive Soil With Waste Granulated Blast Furnace Slag, Proceedings of Geo Congress-2012 , 3920-3928.
16- Osinubi K.J., Diden R., Ijimdiya T.S. and Eberemu A.O. 2012 Effect of Elapsed Time after Mixing on the Strength Properties of Black Cotton Soil Cement Blast Furnace Slag Mixtures, Journal of Engineering Research, 17(4), 63-75.
17- Celik E. and Nalbantoglu Z. 2013 Effects of Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag (GGBS) on the Swelling Properties of Lime-Stabilized Sulfate – Bearing Soils, Engineering Geology, 163, 20-25.
18- Naderi H. 2010 The Effect of Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag (GGBS) of Esfahan
Steel Company on Strength and Swelling Properties of Clay Stabilized with Lime in Presence of Sulfate, MSc. Thesis, University of Bu Ali Sina, Hamadan, Iran (In Persian).
19- Rengasamy P., Olsson K.A. 1991 Sodicity and Soil Structure. Australian Journal of Soil Research, 29, 935-952.
20- Plaster E.J. 2009 Soil Science and Management, 5th edition, Cengage Learning, 512p.
21- ASTM D4318, 1998 Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils, Annual book of ASTM standards, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
22- ASTM D854-00, 2000 Standard Test Methods for Specific Gravity of Soil Solids by Water Pycnometer, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
23- ASTM D422, 1963 Standard Test Method for Particle-Size Analysis of Soils, Annual book of ASTM standards, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
24- ASTM D2419-02, 2002 Standard Test Method for Sand Equivalent Value of Soils and Fine Aggregate, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
25- ASTM D2487, 1998 Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System), Annual book of ASTM standards, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
26- ASTM D3282-93(1997)e1, 1998 Standard Classification of Soils and Soil-Aggregate Mixtures for Highway Construction Purposes, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
27- ASTM D1557-12e1, 2012 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort (56,000 ft-lbf/ft3 (2,700 kN-m/m3)), ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
28- Akrami A., 2006 Investigation of Clay Stabilized with Lime and Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag (GGBS) in Presence of Sulfate, MSc. Thesis, University of Bu Ali Sina, Hamadan, Iran (In Persian).
29- AASHTO, T., 1993 Standard Method of Test for the California Bearing Ratio, In Standard Specifications for Transportation Materials and Methods of Sampling and Testing, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), Washington DC.
30- Havanagi V.G., Prasad P.S., Guruvittal U.K. and Mathur S. 2006 Feasibility of Utilization of Copper Slag –Fly Ash –Soil Mixes for Road Construction, Highway Research Bulletin, 75, 59-67.
31- Gupta R.C., Thomas B. S., Gupta P., Rajan L., Thagriya D., 2012 An Experimental Study of Clayey Soil Stabilized By Copper Slag. Int J Struct Civ Eng Res 1(1):110–9.
Modares Civil Engineering journal
Volume 18, Issue 3
September and October 2018
Pages 141-151