Sally Fitzgibbons Foundation

Beginning the Academic Essay

“AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF NATURAL SOIL SUBGRADE STABLIZED WITH RICE HUSK ASH AND POLYPROPYLENE”
A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of the degree of
FIVE YEAR DUAL DEGREE INTEGRATED POST GRADUATE PROGRAMME
In
Civil Engineering
Specialization in Structural Engineering
Submitted By
SOMESH UPADHYAY
Enrolment No. 0007CE13DD15
Under the supervision of
Dr. SURESH SINGH KUSHWAHA
(PROFFESSOR, Department of civil engineering)
20834353810
Department of Civil Engineering
Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal
June 2018
CERTIFICATE
222885354965This is to certify that the dissertation titled, “AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF NATURAL SOIL SUBGRADE STABLIZED WITH RICE HUSK ASH AND POLYPROPYLENE”, submitted by SOMESH UPADHYAY Enrolment no.

0007CE13DD15 in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of Five Year Dual
Degree Integrated Post Graduate Program in Civil Engineering specialization in Structural
Engineering to Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal is a bonafide record
of the work carried out by him/her under my supervision and guidance during the
2017-2018 academic year.

Supervisors: Dr. SURESH SINGH KUSHWAHA Mrs. DEVANSH JAIN
Professor Lecturer
Department of Civil Engineering Department of Civil Engineering
UIT, Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki UIT, Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki
Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal
Dr. SUDHIR SINGH BHADAURIA
Professor &Head
Department of Civil Engineering
Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal
Dr. SALEEM AKHTAR
Coordinator
Five Year Dual Degree Integrated PG Programme
Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal
DECLARATION
316230528320
I hereby declare that the work presented in this dissertation entitled “AN
EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF NATURAL SOIL SUBGRADE STABLIZED WITH RICE HUSK ASH AND POLYPROPYLENE” as a partial fulfilment of
requirement for the degree of Five Year Dual Degree Integrated Post Graduate Programme
submitted in Department of Civil Engineering is an authentic record of my own work
carried under the supervision of Dr. SURESH SINGH KUSHWAHA and Mr. DEVANSH JAIN. I have not submitted the matter embodied in this dissertation for award of any other degree. I also declare that “check of plagiarism” has been carried out on the thesis and is found within the acceptable limit and record of which is enclosed herewith.

SOMESH UPADHYAY
Enrolment No.:0007CE13DD15
Five Year Dual Degree Integrated Post Graduate Programme
Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki Vishwavidyalaya Bhopal
Forwarded by:
Supervisors: Dr. SURESH SINGH KUSHWAHA Mrs. DEVANSH JAIN
Professor Lecturer
Department of Civil Engineering Department of Civil Engineering
UIT, Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki UIT, Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki
Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal
Dr. SUDHIR SINGH BHADAURIA
Professor & Head
Department of Civil Engineering
Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I am deeply indebted to and would like to express my deep sense of gratitude towards Dr. Suresh Singh Kushwah and Mr. Devansh Jain for their guidance and help in carrying out my dissertation work. I also thank Dr. Sudhir Singh Bhadauria, who provided guidance, encouragement and supervision at each stage of work, the timely completion of the dissertation was possible only because of the enthusiastic help received from him at all stages of work. I would also thank to Dr. Saleem Akhtar, Co-ordinator of Dual Degree Program for providing all facilities for carrying out this dissertation work.

I also want to thank my colleagues for their continuous motivation and encouragement for almost the entire span of dissertation work.

Finally I would like to thank my family members father, mother, and sister for their constant encouragement, motivation and moral support during my post graduation studies.

SOMESH UPADHYAY
0007CE13DD15
Bhopal
June 2018
AbstractPavement quality depends upon on the strength of the soil. Strength of sub grade is the big parameter for calculating the thickness of pavement. In case of pavement the sub-grade should be uniform in terms of geotechnical properties like shear strength, compressibility etc. Construction of pavement could be natural soil which can also be expansive, clayey or organic. Natural soils, suffer volume amendment due to wet contentthat causes heaving, cracking and the break-up of the road pavement. As a result of this reason,stabilization of those kinds of soil is important, to suppress swelling and increase the strength of the soil.
The growing cost of traditional stabilizing agents and the need for the economical utilization of industrial and agricultural wastes for beneficial engineering purposes has prompted an investigation into the stabilizing potential of Rice Husk Ash(RHA) and Polypropylene (PP) in subgrade soil. The objective of this work is to utilize the effectiveness of Rice Husk Ash and Polypropylene material to enhance the properties of natural soil used for subgrade material in pavement. The soil was stabilized different percentages (5, 10, 15, 20, 25 & 30) of RHA and after getting optimum percentage of RHA, PP with percentage of 0.25%, 0.50%, 0.75%, 1.00%, is added along with RHA individually, for the construction of sub grade soil and test like Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, Plasticity Index, Specific Gravity, Optimum Moisture Content, Maximum Dry Density, Swelling Pressure and CBR is performed.
Keywords:Rice Husk Ash(RHA), Polypropylene (PP), Swelling, OMC, MDD, CBR
Table of Contents
TOC o “1-3” h z u Abstract PAGEREF _Toc515835781 h i1.INTRODUCTION PAGEREF _Toc515835782 h 11.1 General PAGEREF _Toc515835783 h 11.2 Need of the study PAGEREF _Toc515835784 h 41.3 Aim of the study PAGEREF _Toc515835785 h 41.4 Objectives of the study PAGEREF _Toc515835786 h 41.5 Scope of the study PAGEREF _Toc515835787 h 51.6 Thesis Organization: PAGEREF _Toc515835788 h 52.LITERATURE REVIEW PAGEREF _Toc515835789 h 62.1 General PAGEREF _Toc515835790 h 62.2 Pavement PAGEREF _Toc515835791 h 72.2.1 Classification of pavement PAGEREF _Toc515835792 h 72.2.2 Causes of failures of pavement PAGEREF _Toc515835793 h 82.3 Stabilization PAGEREF _Toc515835794 h 82.3.1 Methods of Stabilization PAGEREF _Toc515835795 h 92.4 Research Background PAGEREF _Toc515835796 h 113.METHODOLOGY & EXPERIMENTAL WORK PAGEREF _Toc515835797 h 323.1 General PAGEREF _Toc515835798 h 323.2 Material Used in Research Work PAGEREF _Toc515835799 h 333.2.1 Natural Soil PAGEREF _Toc515835800 h 333.2.2 Rice Husk Ash (RHA) PAGEREF _Toc515835801 h 333.2.3 Polypropylene (PP) PAGEREF _Toc515835802 h 333.2.4 Water PAGEREF _Toc515835803 h 333.3 Experimental Program PAGEREF _Toc515835804 h 333.3.1 Particle Size Analysis PAGEREF _Toc515835805 h 333.3.2 Specific Gravity PAGEREF _Toc515835806 h 343.3.3Atterberg’s limits PAGEREF _Toc515835807 h 353.3.4 Compaction test PAGEREF _Toc515835808 h 373.3.5 Swelling Pressure PAGEREF _Toc515835809 h 383.3.6 California Bearing Ratio (CBR) PAGEREF _Toc515835810 h 383.4 Mix Preparation of Samples used in the Research Work PAGEREF _Toc515835811 h 404.RESULT ; DISCUSSION PAGEREF _Toc515835812 h 424.1 General PAGEREF _Toc515835813 h 424.2 Tests Results of Natural soil PAGEREF _Toc515835814 h 424.2.1 Grain Size Distribution PAGEREF _Toc515835815 h 424.2.2 Liquid Limit PAGEREF _Toc515835816 h 464.2.3 Plastic Limit PAGEREF _Toc515835817 h 474.2.4 Specific Gravity PAGEREF _Toc515835818 h 474.2.5Proctor Compaction Test PAGEREF _Toc515835819 h 484.2.5 California Bearing Ratio (CBR) PAGEREF _Toc515835820 h 494.3 Test Result of Rice Husk Ash (RHA) PAGEREF _Toc515835821 h 534.3.1 Grain Size Distribution PAGEREF _Toc515835822 h 534.3.2 Liquid Limit PAGEREF _Toc515835823 h 544.3.3 Plastic Limit PAGEREF _Toc515835824 h 544.3.4 Specific Gravity PAGEREF _Toc515835825 h 544.3.5 Proctor Compaction Test PAGEREF _Toc515835826 h 554.3.6 California Bearing Ratio PAGEREF _Toc515835827 h 564.4 Tests Results of Natural ; Rice Husk Ash Samples (NR) PAGEREF _Toc515835828 h 604.4.1 Index Properties of NR Sample PAGEREF _Toc515835829 h 604.4.2 Proctor Compaction Test PAGEREF _Toc515835830 h 644.4.3 California Bearing Ratio PAGEREF _Toc515835831 h 664.5 Test Result of Natural Soil with Polypropylene ; Rice Husk Ash PAGEREF _Toc515835832 h 704.5.1 Proctor Compaction test PAGEREF _Toc515835833 h 704.5.2 California Bearing Ratio PAGEREF _Toc515835834 h 725.Conclusion PAGEREF _Toc515835835 h 75References PAGEREF _Toc515835836 h 77Plagiarism Report PAGEREF _Toc515835837 h 80
List of Table
TOC h z c “Table” Table 3.1: Typical values of Specific gravity PAGEREF _Toc515835839 h 34Table 3.2: Standard Loads for CBR Test. PAGEREF _Toc515835840 h 39Table 3.3:Details and Notation used for Prepared Samples PAGEREF _Toc515835841 h 40Table 4.1: Grain Size Distribution of N sample PAGEREF _Toc515835842 h 44Table 4.2: Liquid Limit of N sample PAGEREF _Toc515835843 h 46Table 4.3: Plastic Limit of N sample PAGEREF _Toc515835844 h 47Table 4.4: Specific Gravity of N sample PAGEREF _Toc515835845 h 47Table 4.5: Summary for Index Properties of N sample PAGEREF _Toc515835846 h 48Table 4.6: Proctor Compaction Test of N Sample PAGEREF _Toc515835847 h 49Table 4.7: Unsoaked CBR Test for N Sample PAGEREF _Toc515835848 h 49Table 4.8: Soaked CBR test for N Sample PAGEREF _Toc515835849 h 51Table 4.9: Grain Size Distribution of S sample PAGEREF _Toc515835850 h 53Table 4.10: Specific gravity of RHA Sample PAGEREF _Toc515835851 h 54Table 4.11: Summary for Index Properties of RHA sample PAGEREF _Toc515835852 h 55Table 4.12: Proctor Compaction Test of RHA Sample PAGEREF _Toc515835853 h 55Table 4.13: Unsoaked CBR Test for RHA Sample PAGEREF _Toc515835854 h 57Table 4.14: Soaked CBR Test for RHA Sample PAGEREF _Toc515835855 h 58Table 4.15: Summary of Test Results for Index Properties of NR Samples PAGEREF _Toc515835856 h 61Table 4.16: Summary of Test Results for Compaction Properties of Artificial NR Samples PAGEREF _Toc515835857 h 65Table 4.17: Summary of Test Results for Strength Properties of Artificial NR Samples PAGEREF _Toc515835858 h 68Table 4.18: Compaction Properties of NWP samples PAGEREF _Toc515835859 h 70Table 4.19: Strength Properties of NRP Samples PAGEREF _Toc515835860 h 73Table 4.20: Variation in CBR of NRP samples. PAGEREF _Toc515835861 h 74
List of Figure
TOC h z c “Figure” Figure 4.1: Plasticity chart as per Indian Standard Classification System PAGEREF _Toc515835892 h 43Figure 4.2 :AASHTO Soil Classification System PAGEREF _Toc515835893 h 44

List of Graphs
TOC h z c “Graph” Graph 4.1: Grain Size Distribution of N Sample PAGEREF _Toc515835977 h 45Graph 4.2 :Liquid Limit Curve of Natural soil PAGEREF _Toc515835978 h 46Graph 4.3: OMC/MDD of Natural Soil (N) Sample PAGEREF _Toc515835979 h 49Graph 4.4: Unsoakesd CBR of N Sample PAGEREF _Toc515835980 h 51Graph 4.5: Soaked CBR of N Sample PAGEREF _Toc515835981 h 53Graph 4.6: Grain Size Distribution of S Sample PAGEREF _Toc515835982 h 54Graph 4.7: OMC/MDD of S Sample PAGEREF _Toc515835983 h 56Graph 4.8: Unsoaked CBR of RHA Sample PAGEREF _Toc515835984 h 58Graph 4.9: Soaked CBR of RHA Sample PAGEREF _Toc515835985 h 60Graph 4.10: Grain Size Distribution Curve of Nr Sample PAGEREF _Toc515835986 h 61Graph 4.11: Variation in Liquid limit of NR samples PAGEREF _Toc515835987 h 62Graph 4.12: Variation in Plastic limit of NR samples PAGEREF _Toc515835988 h 62Graph 4.13: Variation in Plastic lndex of NR samples PAGEREF _Toc515835989 h 63Graph 4.14: Variation in Specific Gravity of NR samples PAGEREF _Toc515835990 h 63Graph 4.15: Compaction Curve of NR Sample PAGEREF _Toc515835991 h 65Graph 4.16: Variation in Optimum Moisture Content of NW samples PAGEREF _Toc515835992 h 65Graph 4.17: Variation in Maximum Dry Density of NR samples PAGEREF _Toc515835993 h 66Graph 4.18: Unsoakesd CBR of NW Sample PAGEREF _Toc515835994 h 67Graph 4.19: Soaked CBR of NR Sample PAGEREF _Toc515835995 h 68Graph 4.20: Variation in CBR of NW samples PAGEREF _Toc515835996 h 69Graph 4.21: OMC/MDD of NWP samples PAGEREF _Toc515835997 h 70Graph 4.22: : Optimum Moisture Content of NRP samples PAGEREF _Toc515835998 h 71Graph 4.23: Maximum Dry Density of NRP samples PAGEREF _Toc515835999 h 71Graph 4.24: Soaked CBR of NRP samples PAGEREF _Toc515836000 h 72Graph 4.25: UnSoaked CBR of NRP samples PAGEREF _Toc515836001 h 73

CHAPTER – 1
INTRODUCTION1.1 GeneralSoil is basic and important element in Civil Engineering field. Stability of every structure depends on the type and characteristics of foundation which in turn depends on the type of soil. Many problems irrupt if expansive soil, Natural soil is to be used in foundation, because of its shrinkage and swelling properties. There are many methods to make natural soil stable for various constructions. Natural soil is comfortable for road work, compared to other types of soil. There are two ways to enhance the quality of subgrade soil -“Replacement of soil” or “Soil stabilization”. Soil stabilization can be done chemically or mechanically. Chemical stabilization is carried out by adding different chemicals in suitable proportion, while Mechanical stabilization is achieved by addition of admixtures which helps to improve the properties of soil.

A sound knowledge of performance of the subgrade soil under prevailing in-situ condition is necessary prior to the construction of the pavement. The better the strength/stiffness quality of the materials the better would be the long-term performance of the pavement. Hence, the design of pavement should be focused on the efficient and effective use of existing subgrade materials by stabilizing it with some stabilizing agents to optimize their performance.
The present entire practice of major road construction over deep layer of natural soil subgrade appears to be conservative lacking technical and financial optimization. It is therefore, realized that for the major road construction in natural soil subgrade areas, an alternative approach needs to be made to evolve a pavement subgrade system, that will ensure its effectiveness with respect to both no traffic load condition and maximum traffic load condition along with its simple, easy, economic and durable construction.

Wheat is the most common and important human food grain and ranks second in total production as a cereal crop. Wheat grain is a staple food used to make flour for leavened, flat and steamed breads etc., Rice Husk Ash fiber is waste of crop of wheat, which is escaped out while getting grain from crop. Rice Husk Ash is a agricultural waste which obtained from burning wheat straw. When crops of wheat is cut then straw is remain in the ground it self, this straw is a complete waste. But now a days by burning these straw its ash can replace by cement. Much literature is not available on Rice Husk Ash but it completely shows that it posses pozzolanic properties.

The increase in the number of concrete types requires the use of new materials and technologies. Because of this fact, the types and quantities of cement production have been increased all over the world. To improve the properties and durability of concrete economically, the minerals having pozzolanic properties are also mixed with cement in concrete production. In addition to the natural pozzolanic materials, the industrial wastes (for example fly ash, slag blast furnace, and silica-fume) are also used as pozzolanic material. Some experimental studies are done to produce pozzolanic material from agricultural products. Pozzolanic materials are added to clinker during the production stage of cement or to cement for production of concrete. Pozzolanic materials are added to cement to fix the free lime released by clinker silicates during their hydration. This causes free lime to become insoluble in water, making the cement highly resistant to environmental effects. When a part of cement is replaced with pozzolanic material, the plasticity of concrete increases and the hydration heat of cement is reduced The amount of free lime combined by pozzolanic material is an indication of its pozzolanic property. This property depends greatly on the specific surface area of pozzolana. Other factors affecting the pozzolanic properties are amorphous SiO2 or Al2O3 and SiO2 content in the glassy or zeolitic Phase. Pozzolanic materials are acidic type, therefore they are not soluble in water and oxides, except HF. Pozzolanic materials are of two types: natural and artificial. Natural pozzolana consists of clays and sedimentary schists, opals and volcanic tuffs, and pumicite stones. They are found in certain places worldwide. Chemical composition and activity of pozzolana differ according to their locations. Specific gravity changes between 2000 and 2200 kg/m3. Natural pozzolana are calcined in order to decompose carbonates to oxides. Artificial pozzolana consists of calcined clay and some industrial wastes such as fly ash, slag, and silica fume. It contains SiO2, Al2O3, Fe2O3, CaO, MgO, and other oxides. The amount of SiO2 determines the activity of pozzolana. Industrial wastes are used to produce industrial pozzolana. Slag obtained from iron and steel industry, fly ash that is a by-product from coal-fired power stations, silica fume obtained from Si metal alloys, and ash obtained from other sources are such products. In addition to these, although not common, rice hull, wheat straw, and hazel nut shell are used as pozzolanic materials. The following information concerns wheat straw as a pozzolanic material. Production of pozzolana from agricultural wastes is, Plants obtain various minerals and silicates from earth in their bodies during growth process. Inorganic materials, especially silicates, are found in higher proportions in annually grown plants than in the long-lived trees. Rice, wheat, sunflower, and tobacco plants therefore contain higher amounts of silica in their cuticle parts. Inorganic materials are found in the forms of free salts and particles of cationic groups combined with the anionic groups of the fibers into such plants the burning of organic materials, production of new crystalline PPases, or crystallization of amorPPous material are exothermic processes that lead to ash production and loss in the total weight. The result of burning organic materials is called thermal decomposition. The ash produced in this way is ground to a fine size and mixed with lime in order to obtain a material with a binding characteristic. The quality of this material depends on burning time, temperature, cooling time, and grinding conditions.

Polypropylene (PP) also known as polypropene, is a thermoplastic polymer used in a wide variety of applications including packing, etc. Polypropylene (PP) is a lightweight fiber, it has density of 0.91 gm/cm³.It does not absorb water. It presents that it has good resistance towards water abosorb.Polypropylene has excellent chemical resistance. PP fibres are very resistant to most acids and alkalis.The thermal conductivity of this fiber is lower than that of other fibers. PP also has low melting temperature and has high creeping rate.

The use of Polypropylene and Rice Husk Ash as stabilizing material for natural soil can be checked under various tests such as grain size distribution, liquid limit, plastic limit, Plasticity index, Specific gravity, OMC, MDD, Swelling pressure and California bearing ratio (CBR) for soaked and unsoaked conditions.

In present study use of Polypropylene and Rice Husk Ash are used as admixtures for Mechanical stabilization of soil subgrade. Polypropylene(PP) and Rice Husk Ash(RHA) help to improve important properties like plasticity, swelling and CBR by addition of these admixtures upto 30%. Admixtures used in powder form, mixed with soil in various ratios to modify the properties and to study the change in soil properties.
1.2 Need of the studyToday, world faces a serious problem of disposal of large quantities of agricultural and industrial waste like Rice husk ash, Rice Husk Ash etc. The disposal of these wastes without proper attention creates hazardous impact on environmental health. So Polypropylene and Rice Husk Ash used in this project because these waste materials are also low cost.
1.3 Aim of the studyThe aim of the study is “An experimental study of natural soil subgrade stabilized with Polypropylene and Rice Husk Ash”.

1.4 Objectives of the studyThe work is undertaken with the following sub objectives are;
To determine the Geotechnical properties of Natural Soil, PP, RHA individually, for the construction of sub grade soil.

To study the suitability of stabilized soil for sub grade soil.

To use Agriculture waste and Industrial waste (Polypropylene and Rice Husk Ash) as a stabilized material.

To determine the Geotechnical properties of Natural soil (Black Cotton Soil), Stabilized with different percentages of (5, 10, 15, 20, 25 ; 30) of RHA and after getting optimum percentage of RHA, PP with percentage of 0.25%, 0.50%, 0.75%, 1.00%, is added along with RHA individually, for the construction of sub grade soil.

To find the optimum value of Polypropylene and Rice Husk Ash for use as a stabilized material.

To study the variation of Grain size distribution, Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, Plasticity Index, Specific Gravity, Optimum Moisture Content, Maximum Dry Density, Swelling Pressure and CBR for both conditions ofnatural soilwithandwithoutPP and RHA with above percentage.

To study and compare the increases percentages of CBR value of natural soil, PP and RHA with stabilized soil.

1.5 Scope of the studyThe scope of this study is that Polypropyleneand Rice Husk Ash is the waste by product of Rice mill industries and sugar industries.It’s safe disposal and utilization is necessary otherwise these create environment pollution problem. It can be use as an admixture to stabilize the natural soil for the construction of sub grade. PP and RHA increase the bearing capacity of soil and reduce its swelling. As well as disposal of PP and RHA is also sort out.

This study has been supported by different types of literatures and a series of laboratory experiments. However, the findings of the research are limited to one soil sample considered in this research which is expansive clay. The results are also specific to the type of additives used and test procedures that have been adopted in the experimental work. Therefore, findings should be considered indicative rather than definitive for filed applications.

1.6 Thesis Organization:This thesis includes five chapters. Chapter one is an introduction part that presents the background, pavement,causes of failures of pavement,methods of stabilization, aim, objective and scope of the research work. The reviews of previous studies performed by various researchers on stabilized soils that are relevant to the research are briefly summarized in chapter two as literature review. Chapter three deals with the properties of the materials used and methodology adopted to accomplish the objectives of the research. Chapter four comes out with the findings of all the tests performed in the laboratory and includes results and discussions on the laboratory tests. Finally, chapter five will present the conclusions derived through the research work and the recommendations based on my experiences during the study period.

CHAPTER – 2
LITERATURE REVIEW2.1 GeneralThe natural soil behaves like an Expansive soil or cracking soil because these have tendency of shrinking and cracking when moisture content decreases and also have tendency of swelling when moisture content increases. The moisture may come from water leakage or sewer lines, rain, flooding. Soil generally exhibits these properties, when it contains montmorillonite clay minerals.

The engineering properties of Natural soil includes plasticity characteristics, compaction properties, volume stability its strength may be enhanced by adding materials such as Rice husk ash, Rice Husk Ash, cement, sodium chloride etc. The changes in properties of these soils primarily depend upon the type and amount of binder, curing conditions, time, organic matter content and the percentage of clay.
This chapter includes a literature review of the structure of soils and their minerals, especially montmorillonite and kaolinite, they are the predominant clay minerals found in natural soil. In general the problems of expansive clay are also discussed together with natural soil stabilization. Special consideration is given to Rice Husk Ash stabilization, including the general soil-Rice Husk Ash reactions, effect of Rice Husk Ash on compaction characteristics, plasticity, volume stability and strength. The changes which occur in clay soil when Rice Husk Ash is added can be divided into two categories, modification and stabilization. During modification calcium ions are absorbed by clay particles in cation exchange reactions. This process starts immediately and it changes the plasticity of the clay without the formation of any new cementitious materials. In the stabilization process calcium ions attack the clay minerals due to chemical reactions between the clay minerals and calcium hydroxide, and new materials are formed, mainly calcium silicate hydrate, calcium aluminates hydrate and calcium aluminates silicate hydrate (Bell, 1996).The total Rice Husk Ash content required for modification (change in plasticity) is in the range 1-3% by dry weight of soil, while that required for both modification and stabilization is in the range 3-8% by dry weight depending primarily on the clay fraction of soil under investigation and also on the type of the clay minerals (Ingles and Metcalf, 1972; Bell, 1988; Diamond and Kinter, 1964). These aspects are considered in detail below. The structure of soils and clay minerals is critical in an understanding of the process of soil stabilization generally and clay-Rice Husk Ash reaction in particular and this is considered below.

2.2 PavementPavement is the flat part of the road on which people and traffic move. Generally, a pavement consists of few layers with different materials. A pavement is, therefore defined as a relatively stable crust constructed over the natural soil for the purpose of supporting and distributing the wheel loads and providing an adequate wearing surface.

2.2.1 Classification of pavementDepending upon the mode of supporting and distributing loads, pavement are classified as
Flexible pavement
Rigid pavement
2.2.1.1 Flexible pavement
Flexible pavement is the type of pavement in which deformation is reflected by top layer (surface layer), the stresses are transferred from grain to grain to the lower layers. A typical flexible pavement consists of four components:-
Soil sub grade
Sub- base course
Base course and
Surface course
2.2.1.2 Rigid pavement
The pavement in which deformations of sub grade are not reflected on the surface are called rigid pavement. A typical rigid pavement consists of three components: –
(1) Soil sub grade (ii) Base course (iii) Surface course
(i) Soil sub-grade:- The Sub-grade is the foundation layer, the structure which must eventually support all the loads which come on to the pavement. The performance of the pavement is affected by the characteristics of the sub-grade. Desirable properties which the sub-grade possesses are: strength, drainage, ease of compaction permanency of strength. The strength of the sub grade is increased by compaction or in some cases by stabilization.

(ii) Sub-base course:- A sub base is a layer of material between the base and sub-grade. However, a sub-base can be of a lower quality. Sub–base purposes same as base course but little.

(iii) Base Course:- A base course is a layer of granular material which lies immediately below the Wearing surface of the flexible pavement. The base course lies close to the surface course and hence it must possess high resistance to deformation in order to withstand the high pressure imposed upon it.

(iv) Surface course:-The surface course is the component of the pavement with which the wheels of vehicles are in actual contact. The purpose of the surface course, made of bituminous material/concrete is to provide a smooth riding surface that is resilient and will resist pressure exerted by tyres.

2.2.2 Causes of failures of pavementPoor sub grade soil & drainage condition.

Climate condition & Environment factors
Defects in the quality of materials used.

Defects in the construction method.

Defects in quality control during construction.

Increase in traffic volume
2.3 StabilizationGenerally good quality sub grade soils are preferable for durable roads but they are not always available for pavement of highway construction. We should use the different methods to overcome these problems. Firstly, import good quality sub grade soil from the nearest convenient source and replace the weak sub grade soil by excavation from the site. Secondly, improve the properties of the existing weak sub grade soil by adding some other materials; this process is known as “soil stabilization” (Ingles and Metcalf, 1972). It may be define as soil stabilization is the process of improving the engineering properties of soil and thus making it more stable. It can be done by the use of controlled compaction; proportioning and addition of suitable admixture or stabilizers. We can use low cost materials to reduce the cost of stabilization
2.3.1 Methods of StabilizationCurrently several methods of soil stabilization are available with their own advantages and disadvantages. The engineer in charge has to decide a method or a combination of methods by considering the soil type, the needed engineering properties to be improved, and the type structure, and economy. Stabilization methods can be broadly classified into two main groups. They are mechanical and chemical. Additionally thermal and electrical methods are also considered on occasions. Important stabilization methods and their suitability are discussed in the following paragraphs.
Mechanical Stabilization
It is the Process of improving the properties of soil by changing its gradation.
Two or more natural soils are mixed to obtain a composite material which is superior to any of its components..

Mechanical stability of soil depends upon plastic characteristics, gradation of mixed soil, degree of compaction attained in the field.

Chemical Stabilization
It is the Stabilization done by adding different chemicals such as calcium chloride, sodium chloride, sodium silicate etc.

Chemical Stabilization is more expansive than other types of stabilization.

Lime Stabilization
Lime is being used as a soil stabilizer since ancient times.

The hydrated lime Ca(OH)2 is the most commonly used lime for soil stabilization.
Lime is also used in combination with other stabilizers such as fly ash and cement.
Soil plasticity, density and strength are changed by adding lime to soil. Lime increases the plasticity index of low plastic soils and decreases the plasticity index of high plastic soils.
Almost all types of soils can be stabilized using lime.
Cement Stabilization
It is done by pulverized mixing soil and Portland cement with water and compacting the mix to attain a strong material.

In this stabilization, cement is mixed in a particular range about 5-14%by volume.

Fly ash Stabilization
Stabilization of soils by using fly ash and mixture of lime or cement and fly ash is gaining more importance in recent times since it has widespread availability.
This method is inexpensive and takes less time than other stabilization methods. Fly ash may be mixed with soil during excavation right in the field.
Rice husk ash Stabilization
Rice husk ash stabilization is done by adding Rice husk ash to soil. It is useful for stabilization of clayey soil.

Rice Husk Ash Stabilization
Rice Husk Ash stabilization is done by adding Rice Husk Ash (2%-10%) to soil. it is useful for stabilization of clayey soil.

Generally, the hydrated Rice Husk Ash is used. It is also known as slaked Rice Husk Ash.

Rice Husk Ash stabilization is not effective for sandy soil.

Bituminous Stabilization
Bituminous stabilization is generally done with asphalt as binder. Asphalt is material in which the primary components are natural or refines petroleum bitumen’s.

Bituminous stabilization provides water proofing and binding.

Amount of required bitumen generally varies between 4-7% by weight.

Any inorganic soil which can be mixed with asphalt is suitable for bituminous stabilization etc.

Laboratory tests have to be carried out to determine the swelling properties of natural soil before a structure can be designed for such sites, and stabilization methods must be investigated prior to construction to eliminate possible future problems. One of the most effective and economical methods to prevent volume natural soil is through the use of chemical additives. Fly ash ; cement have been used for this purpose for many years. Inthisresearchwork, natural soil was stabilized using the Rice husk ash is obtained from sawstik krishi farm Mandideep Bhopal and Rice Husk Ash is from Shakti Sugar (Mill) Pvt Ltd Kodia, Gadarwara, Narsinghpur (M.P) An extensive laboratory testing program was undertaken to provide information on the geotechnical properties, Natural soil treated with Rice husk ash and Rice Husk Ash.

RHA is a great environmental threat causing damage to the land and the surrounding area in which it is dumped, so it becomes necessary to find different methods of making commercial use of RHA.

2.4 Research BackgroundGeotechnical properties of natural soil such as soft fine grained and expansive soils are improved by various methods. The problematic soil is removed and replaced by a good quality material or treated using mechanical and/or chemical stabilization. Any of the above method can be used to improve and treat the geotechnical properties of the natural soil(such as strength and the stiffness) by treating it in situ. During the past few decades it has been reported that the use of cement or lime for the stabilization of pavement bases was investigated and developed into practical construction procedures. These practical procedures have been improved and covered periodically by the technical standards for road and traffic. These natural soil do not possess enough strength either in construction or during the service life of the pavement. One of the strategies to achieve this is soil stabilization. Generally, the role of the stabilizing (binding) agent in the treatment process is either reinforcing of the bounds between the particles or filling of the pore spaces. Soil stabilization technique is an open-field of research with the potential for its use in the near future.

Cement contains calcium required for the pozzolanic reactions to occur. Further cement already contains silica thus stabilization with cement is fairly independent of soil properties. The only thing required is water for hydration process to begin and attributes to the improvement of strength and compressibility characteristics of soil. It has a long history of use as an engineering material and has been successfully employed in geotechnical applications.

Strength gain in soils using cement stabilization occurs through the same type of pozzolanic reactions found using lime stabilization. Both lime and cement contain the calcium required for the pozzolanic reactions to occur; however, the origin of the silica required for the pozzolanic reactions to occur differs. With lime stabilization the silica is provided when the clay particle is broken down. With cement stabilization, the cement already contains the silica without needing to break down the clay mineral. Thus, unlike lime stabilization, cement stabilization is fairly independent of the soil properties; the only requirement is that the soil contains some water for the hydration process to begin.Many engineer and scientist work on stabilization of soil, some work on stabilization of the soil is given below:
Leonard and Bailey (1982): Effect of fine Rice husk ash and coarse Rice husk ash on natural soil was studied. The various test conducted for this project like Atterberg’s Limit, Compaction, Triaxial Compression test, Chemical Analysis, Consolidation. The Attempt was made to proposed use of Rice husk ash, from the compaction test results it was observed that the variation of dry density was irregular at higher moisture contents. Bleeding was initiated at moisture contents resulted in erratic 40% and the bleeding moisture content corresponded to optimum moisture content. From the findings it was proposed that finer ash samples exhibited higher strength as compared to the coarser samples.

Martin et al. (1990): The effect of Rice husk ash on expansive soil was studied, and different experimental programmers were carried out such as Particle size distribution, Compaction test, Permeability, Consolidation. They investigated that Rice husk ash in partially saturated state displayed an apparent cohesion due to tensile stresses of retained capillary water. Hence, the effective friction angle, ?’, was considered as the major factor for long term stability analysis. The results of the standard extraction procedure toxicity tests showed low metal leaching characteristics of Rice husk ash.

Raza; Chandra (1995): The effect of (Rice husk ash + geo-fabric) on soil was studied, They carried various test such as Compaction, Swelling, CBR ; UCS. These Studies carried out for use of Rice husk ashes to stabilized alluvial soils, so as to use them as sub grade and base course in airfield and road pavements. The tests conducted on Rice husk ash, soil and their mixtures having various Rice husk ashes: soil ratio. This study indicates that soil treated with Rice husk ash gives considerable improvement in CBR value of soil. With incorporation of geofabric CBR value further increased.

Boominathan and Ratnea (1996): The effect of (Rice husk ash + Rice Husk Ash) on soil was investigated, There were various tests conducted for this research work such as Atterberg’s Limit, Compaction and UCS. These studies have been carried out to proposed use of Rice husk ash for stabilization of soil with and without Rice Husk Ash incorporate. Addition of Sugarcane bagasse ash to Rice husk ash resulted in flocculation and particle aggregation. It was observed that WL and WP were reduced with the Sugarcane bagasse ash treatment whereas UCS increased by about 25 %. The compressibility of Rice husk ash reduced to almost one fourth of the original value due to Sugarcane bagasse ash treatment. It was concluded that Sugarcane bagasse ash treated Rice husk ash could be effectively used for embankment over soft clays.

Singh et al. (1996): studied the effect of Rice husk ash and Sugarcane bagasse ash on soil. There were various test programme conducted for this research work such as Atterberg’s Limits, Compaction, CBR, UCS. The Effects of different proportions mixes of Sugarcane bagasse ash and Rice husk ash on local soil of Varanasi evaluated to propose suitability of Rice husk ash-soil Sugarcane bagasse ash as a base and sub base material for the roads. From this study, it can be concluded that good results were obtained when soil was stabilized with 15 % of Sugarcane bagasse ash and Rice husk ash in the proportion of 1:3. Different proportions enabled an increase in the CBR value from 4.00 % to 20.70 % and the unconfined compressive strength from 134 KN/m2 to 680 KN/m2.

Pandian (2002): The effect of two types of Rice husk ashes Raichur Rice husk ash (Class F) and Neyveli Rice husk ash (Class C) on the CBR characteristics of the black cotton soil was studied. The Rice husk ash content was increased from 0 to 100%. Generally the CBR/strength is contributed by its cohesion and friction. The CBR of BC soil, which consists of predominantly of finer particles, is contributed by cohesion. The CBR of Rice husk ash consists of predominantly coarser particles which contributed its frictional components. The low CBR of Natural soilis attributed to the inherent low strength, which is due to the dominance of clay fraction. The addition of Rice husk ash to Natural soilincreases the CBR of the mix up to the first optimum level due to the frictional resistance from Rice husk ash in addition to the cohesion from BC soil. Further addition of Rice husk ash beyond the optimum level causes a decrease up to 60% and then these is an increase up to the second optimum level. Thus the variation of CBR of Rice husk ash-Natural soilmixes can be attributed to the relative contribution of frictional or cohesive resistance from Rice husk ash or BC soil, respectively. There is an increase of strength with the increase in the Rice husk ash content. Here there will be additional puzzolonic reaction forming cementitious compounds resulting in good binding between Natural soiland Rice husk ash particles.

Kanirajand and Gayathri (2003): Effect of Rice husk ash ; cement analysis was carried out, UCS test Experiments used to evaluate the factors influencing strength of cement Rice husk ash base courses. Stabilizer content was determined by conducting UCS test on stabilized Rice husk ash specimens cured at different curing conditions. It included Six different curing conditions and adopted controlled and ambient conditions in the study. It was reported that, UCS of stabilized Rice husk ash specimens depends on curing, unit weight, and water content in addition to cement content and curing period.

Phanikumar and Sharma (2004): A study of Rice husk ash on Engineering of soil was carried out through an experimental programme. The effect on parameters like free swell index (FSI), swell potential, swelling pressure, plasticity, compaction, strength and hydraulic conductivity of expansive soil were studied. The ash blended expansive soil with Rice husk ash contents of 0, 5, 10, 15 and 20% on a dry weight basis and they inferred that increase in Rice husk ash content .reduces plasticity characteristics and the FSI was reduced about 50% by the addition of 20% Rice husk ash. The hydraulic conductivity of expansive soils mixed with Rice husk ash decreases with an increase in Rice husk ash content. Due to the increase in Rice husk ash content increases in maximum dry unit weight. When the Rice husk ash content increases there is a decrease in the optimum moisture content and as a result the maximum dry unit weight increases. Hence the expansive soil is rendered more stable. The undrained shear strength of the expansive soil blended with Rice husk ash increases with the increase in the ash content.

S. Bhuveneshwari et. al (2005): The effect of Rice husk ash on soil was studied, The experimental programme was carried out by Atterberg’s Limits, Compaction, UCS, and Core Cutter. Reported improvements in properties of expansive soil treated with Rice husk ash at varying percentages. Both laboratory trials and field tests have been carried out. It was observed that field application is done through mixing of the two materials (expansive soil and Rice husk ash) in required proportion to form a homogenous mixture there. Trial embankment of 30 m length by 6m width by 0.6m thickness constructed and in-situ tests were carried out.

J.N. Jha (2006): Effect of (RHA +Sugarcane bagasse ash) on soil was studied, The tests like Compaction, CBR and UCS test were conducted .Evaluates the effectiveness of using rice husk ash as a puzzuolanae to enhance the Sugarcane bagasse ash treatment of soil. The Studies carried out to study the influence of different mixed proportions of Sugarcane bagasse ash and RHA on various properties of the soil. The result shows that addition of RHA enhances not only strength developments but also it increases durability of Sugarcane bagasse ash stabilized soils.

Edil et al (2006): The effect of Rice husk ash on soil was investigated, The tests were conducted like Atterberg’s Limits, CBR test. He was evaluated the effectiveness of self cementing Rice husk ashes from combustion of sub-bituminous coal at electric power plants for stabilization of soft fine grained soils. Tests were conducted on soil and soil-Rice husk ash mixtures prepared at different water contents. The results indicated that, addition of Rice husk ash appreciably increased CBR and resilient modulus of soils.

Purbi Sen. et al (2011): The Effects of various locally available stabilizing agents like OPC, Sugarcane bagasse ash and Rice husk ash have been studied for strength improvement. They have used Compaction, Atterberg’s limit, UCS tests for these purposes. Specimens were prepared by mixing varying proportions stabilizers with clayey soils separately. UCS and Atterberg limits of the soils were determined separately after curing specimens for 7 days. 7.5%-8% of Portland cement gives UCS strength is around 28 kg/cm2 which is satisfactory for road use under Indian climatic condition. 7 days peak strength of soil-Sugarcane bagasse ash specimen was found at 7.5% Sugarcane bagasse ash content.

Bahai Louafi and Ramdane Baharin (2013): experimental work have studied the effect on performance by addition of sand as stabilizer on swelling soil. Based on the study undertaken, they found that the addition of sand reduces consistency limits. They have also worked on introducing sand layer into two different configurations and found that these layers effectively reduce the swelling of soil.

Saad Ali Aiban (1994) has done an attempt to assess the strength properties of stabilized granular soils and to evaluate the behaviour of cement- treated soil. Two types of cementing agents were used: Portland cement and calcium carbonate. The effects of some of the variables encountered in the field such as curing type and time, confining pressure, cementing agent content, density, saturation and reconstitution on the behaviour of stabilized soils, were studied. Test results show that the addition of a cementing agent to a wind-blown sand (cohesion less material) with uniform size distribution produces a material with two strength components, that due to cementation or “true” cohesion and that due to friction. The angle of internal friction for the treated sands is not much different from that of the untreated sand. The results also show that the drying process is essential in the development of cementation, especially when calcium carbonate is used as the cementing agent. Peak strength as well as initial tangent modulus values, increase with an increase in curing period, confining pressure, cement content and density. Residual strength values seem to be independent of all parameters other than the confinement and density; behaviour commonly observed for un-cemented sands.

Kowalski et al. (2007) Portland cement is hydraulic cement made by heating limestone and clay mixture in a kiln and pulverizing the resulting material which can be used either to modify or to improve the quality of the soil or to transform the soil into a cemented mass with increased strength and durability. The amount of cement used will depend upon whether the soil is to be modified or stabilized.

Kent Newman and Jeb S.Tingle (2004) in their study of previous research efforts. Portland cement was used as the stabilizer control for comparison of properties to the polymers and was used at concentration of 2.75%, 6% and 9%. Previous research work have shown that the addition of inert material (sand) to swelling soil can be a method of stabilization of soil. Roads constructed on poor subgrade soil also require larger thickness of pavement which can be reduced by inclusion of geogrid. Which increases the bearing capacity of the subgrade, reduce the differential settlement of the pavement, increases the life of the pavement and also reduces the cost due to saving incurred in the reduction of the special fill material? Geogrid can be placed in one or more layers in subgrade soil. Geogrid reinforcement can be used to prevent or reduce rutting caused by bearing capacity failure of the base or subgrade and by the lateral movement of base course or subgrade material.

Sarika Dhule et.al (2011)according to her, weaker soils are generally clayey and expansive in nature which is having lesser strength characteristics. Technique of improving the soil with geogrid increase the stiffness and load carrying capacity of the soil through fractional interaction between the soil and geogrid material improving black cotton soil. In her experimental work she tries to modify the properties of weak subgrade soil by addition of geogrid in different percentage i.e 1%, 2%, 2.5% and 3% separately. Simillarly she also studied improvement in properties of soft murum by adding geogrid. Also geogrid was used in mix of soil and 2% cement in different proportions to study its effect. With all these attempts she finds, optimum mixes which are to be used for further construction to achieve desired stability and economy in construction. For this purpose different tests were performed i.e sieve analysis, liquid limit, Plastic limit, Standard proctor test to find its maximum water content and maximum dry density, specific gravity, Laboratory Unsoaked California Bearing Ratio (CBR) and Laboratory soaked CBR test to find it resistance to penetration. For different percentage of geogrid with soil, murum and cement economical cost analysis was carried out. Most economical mix with geogrid is suggested by her. She further found that the CBR value increases with addition of geogrid. Again with addition of this work she also found the effect on CBR value of murrum with 2% cement and different percentage of geogrid . According to the experimental work CBR value found by addition of 2.5% geogrid is more than any other.

A.K.Choudhary et.al (2011) placed multiple layers of reinforcement horizontally at specified vertical spacing within the subgrade and thereby determining their relative positions for two different types of reinforcement namely geogrid and jute geotextile. The number of reinforcing layers was varied from 1 to 4. He found that the expansion ratio decreases when the soil is reinforced with single layer and goes on decreasing with increase in number of reinforcing layer but this decrease is significant in case of jute geotextile and marginal in case of geogrid which means insertion of reinforcement controls swelling of soil. The CBR tests were conducted with both unreinforced as well as reinforced specimens with varying number of reinforcing layers and reinforcement types and found that the CBR value of the soil also increases with increase in number of reinforcing layers. Further it was found that geogrid offer better reinforcing efficiency than jute geotextile but it can be gainfully exploited in low cost road project.

S.A. Naeini & R. Ziaie Moayed(2009) in their study they prepared three types of soil samples with different percentage of bentonite on which CBR tests were carried with or without geogrid reinforcement in one or multilayer. Result shows that increase in plasticity index decreases the CBR value in both soaked and unsoaked condition. CBR can be considerably increased by using geogrid reinforcement in two layers when compared with unreinforced, but less value when compared with single layered reinforcement. By placing geogrid at layer 2 there is a considerable increase in CBR value compared with unreinforced soil in both soaked and unsoaked conditions. By using two layers of geogrid at layer 1 and 3, unsoaked CBR value increases compared with unreinforced soil. However this increment is much less when compared to the case when geogrid is placed at layer 2. Further, the soaked CBR value is higher than the value obtained for both single and no layer of geogrid.

Dr. P Senthil kumar & R. Rajkumar (2012)Successful use of geosynthetics is ensured in a given geotechnical application, as it is not only compatible but effective in improving the soil properties when appropriately placed. In his study the performance of woven and nonwoven geotextile, interfaced between soft subgrade and unbound gravel in an unpaved flexible pavement system, is carried out experimentally, utilising the California Bearing Ratio (CBR) testing arrangement. In order to evaluate the performance, the reinforcement ratio is obtained based on the CBR load – penetration relation of both soft subgrade-gravel and soft subgrade-geotextile-gravel, separately, for woven and nonwoven geotextile. The effect of introducing geotextile layer between subgrade soil and base course layer and found that the resistance to penetration increases with the introduction of geotextile layer. He used the equation given by (Koerner, 2005) for calculating the reinforcement ratio i.e. loads with geotextile to load without geotextile and found that the reinforcement ratio is more than one throughout the test. Hence concluded that the use of geotextile is most advantages in road with soft subgrade at higher penetration. But the author had performed the test essentially on soil of class CH having an MDD of 1.562 moreover he has mentioned the woven and non-woven geotextile but he has not mentioned the percentage of geotextile reinforcement neither its aperture size and its thickness. Hence the results are not validated.

Hossein Moayedi (2009) provides geogrid reinforcement into paved road to improve the performance of the transportation. He in his experimental work provide a series of two-dimensional finite element simulations are carried out to evaluate the benefits of integrating a high modulus geogrid for reinforcement at three different position (i.e. at a distance of 0.5m ,0.25m and at 0.05 from the bottom of the model . Analytical results for three different most possibilities of geogrid reinforcement in the paved road layers have been evaluated. He found that maximum shear stress and normal stress increases when the geogrid is placed at a distance of 0.5 m from the bottom. The optimum position was decided based upon the tension stress absorption value, deformation reduce rate and tension cut-off point location. Three types of reinforcing model and one type of unreinforced model of paved road were selected. He also observed that the vertical deflection under the centre of the load reduces with the use of geogrid just under the asphalt layer and hence concluded that the effectiveness of geogrid is more pronounced when it is placed at the bottom of the asphalt concrete improved if an effective bending is maintained between the asphalt concrete and geogrid.

Dr .D. S. V. Prasad (2010)in his study prepared a model of flexible pavement consisting of expansive soil subgrade of 0.5m at bottom compacted in 10 layer and gravel subbase laid in two layers each of 0.07m compacted thickness using a layer of different reinforcing material like geogrid, bitumen coated chicken mesh, bitumen coated bamboo mesh for reinforcement with waste plastic and waste tier rubber was mixed uniformly throughout. The subbase material on which two layers of WBM-II each of 0.075 m compacted thickness was laid. To find the best alternative reinforcement in flexible pavement, cyclic plate load test where carried out. It was found that the total and elastic deformation values of the flexible pavement system are decreased by the provision of providing different reinforcing material. The maximum load carrying capacity followed by less value of rebound deflection obtained for geogrid reinforcement is more than any other reinforcement provided.

Omid Azadegan and Gh. R. Pourebrahim (2010) studied the effect of geogrids on compressive strength and Elastic Modulus of Lime/ Cement treated soil in order to find out the effect of geogrid applications, on the geotechnical behavior of lime /cement treated soil used as base, sub-base or structural foundation materials. Study has been performed on compressive treated soil sample with or without geogrid layers and found that when there is an increment in modulus of elasticity and the cohesion, produced by pozzolanic reaction of lime and cement, side deformation of the cylinder decreases and therefore the tension produced in reinforcement and the confinement forces would decrease too. To have appropriate interaction the mix design should comprise enough ductility and side deformation for which, L/C ratio should be greater must be selected and total amount of applied cement must be lower than 5 percent. The author has used UCS using cylindrical sample and not correlate with CBR. Moreover the author fails to mention about specific mix design of pavement which is the governing factor for the interaction between used of geogrid and stabilized soil.

Dr Sujatha Evangelin Ramani (2012) provide geogrid reinforcement to improve the strength of subgrade and reduce the thickness of the pavement .The author conducted CBR tests on soil with geogrid introduced at different depths within the sample, in single , double and triple layer and found that the best performance in the single layer occurs when geogrid is placed at 2/3 distance from the base. And found that the CBR value of 3 layer of geogrid is lesser than 2 layer but higher than single layer and hence concluded that geogrid increases the strength of subgrade soil in both soaked and unsoaked condition and proved that geogrid reinforcement provided in a single or multilayer to the subgrade increases the strength of the soil and thus reduces the thickness of the pavement.

Pradeep Singh and K.S. Gill (2012) Reinforced soils are often treated as composite materials in with reinforcement resisting tensile stress and interacting with soil through friction. Although there is lot of information and experience with geo-synthetic reinforcement of sub-grade soils, many pavement failures still occur. These failures may be due to lack of understanding of how these materials influence the engineering properties of sub-grade soils and what is the optimum position of reinforcement. Therefore a compressive laboratory program is required to study strength characteristics of both reinforced and un-reinforced sub-grade soils also to investigate their behaviors under cycle leading. The author in his work describes the beneficial effects of reinforcing the sub-grade layer with a single layer of geo-grid at different positions and thereby determination of optimum position of reinforcement layer. The optimum position was determined based on California Bearing Ratio (CBR value) and unconfined compression tests were conducted to decide the optimum position of geo-grid. Through his experimental work he found that by providing geogrid reinforcement at 0.2H from top give considerable improvement in CBR value and stress strain behavior of subgrade soil.

Mihai Iliescu and Ioan Ratiu (2012) for subsoil with insufficient bearing capacity, stabilization and improvement of subsoil characteristics are necessary. The bearing capacity can be increased by excavation and replacement of the soft material, chemical stabilization by using chalk or by using geosynthetics. Placed between the subgrade and base course, or within the base course, the geosynthetic improves the performance of unpaved roads carrying channelized traffic and unpaved areas subjected to random traffic. They in their paper devised a new design methodology for stabilizing a road subgrade using geogrid reinforcement. In their experiments, they found out that geogrids can improve the performance of the Subgrade soil. They carried out extensive static and dynamic plate bearing tests on different conditions based on the results of trial and the membrane theory of Giroud & Noiray, they developed design graphs for multifunctional geogrids in unpaved and temporary road.

Rakesh Kumar and P.K. Jain (2013), Different ground improvement techniques have been proposed in the literature to work with this soil and are found to be successful to some degree. The construction of granular piles has been proved successful in improving soft marine clays, which are very poor from strength and compressibility criteria. The technique of granular pile may be applied in expansive soil too. The granular piles derive their load carrying capacity from the confinement offered by the surrounding soil. In very soft soils this lateral confinement may not be adequate and the formation of the granular pile itself may be doubtful. Wrapping the granular pile with suitable geogrid is one of the techniques to improve the performance of granular piles. The encasement by geogrid makes the granular piles stiffer and stronger. The behavior and the mechanism of the granular pile and geogrid encased granular piles are not investigated for expansive soil. The author made an attempt to investigate the improvement of load carrying capacity of granular pile with and without geogrid encasement through laboratory model tests conducted on single granular pile installed in expansive clay bed prepared in controlled condition in small testing tanks. The load tests were performed on single granular pile. Tests were performed with different diameter of granular piles with and without geogrid encasement. The results from the load tests indicated a clear improvement in the load carrying capacity of clay, with granular pile and with encased granular pile. The increase in the load carrying capacity also increases as the diameter of the granular pile increases.Thus concluded in their study of ground improvement techniques that the construction of granular piles in expansive soil improves the load carrying capacity of the soil.

Prof Mayura Yeole and Dr. J.R. Patil (2013), carried out a laboratory CBR test on granular soil with or without geotextile which was placed in one or two layer in the mould. The single layer of geotextile was placed at the depth of (25, 50, 100 mm) from the top of the mould, the maximum CBR obtained was at 25mm and when the geotextile was placed in two layers at {(25 &75 mm),(50 &75 mm), (50 &100 mm)} CBR was increased and it was maximum at 25 & 75mm geotextile layer by 38.21% when compared with the CBR of no geotextile.

Jesna Varghese, Remya.U. R (2009) , et al Indicated that reinforced soil with fiber has following properties- The relationship between optimum moisture content and maximum dry density of soil significantly affected by the addition of polypropylene fiber. During the study, MDD increases with decreasing OMC. From unconfined compressive test, it was observed that the unconfined compressive strength value of untreated soil was found to be 15.1 KN/m2 and the strength value increased with increase in addition of polypropylene fiber up to 0.05% and then decreases. There is an increase of strength of about 454.37%.That may be due to increase in interfacial shear strength at 0.05 %.For higher amount of polypropylene fibre it shows reverse trend. The strength is increased in low percentage of PPF addition, it ensures more economical in construction. So finally it was concluded that the polypropylene fiber can potentially stabilize the clayey soil.

N. Vijaya Kumar et al (2010), reported that Wear loss and coefficient of friction of slag composites decreases with the increase in normal loads. Wear loss and coefficient of friction increases with the increase in sliding velocities. The stick-on disc wear testing machine has been used to study the friction and wearbehavior of the polymer composites. The wear loss and coefficient of friction are plotted against the normal loads andsliding speeds. It is noted from the graphical representation of the result that with the increase in load weight lossdecreases and increase in sliding velocity weight loss also increases.

Andrzej K. Bledzki Reported that the feasibility of utilizing of grain by-products such as Rice Husk Ash and rye husk as alternative fillers for soft wood fibre as reinforcement in for composites material. Following conclusions are drawn from their study.

Rice Husk Ash thermally stable as low as 235 degree celcius.
Structural proportions (cellulose, starch) contained by Rice Husk Ash are 45% on the other hand 42% contained by soft wood.
More carbon rich surface was observed for Rice Husk Ash compared to soft wood fibre.

Rice Husk Ash contained more surface silicon than soft wood fibre.
Rice Husk Ash composites showed 15% better Charpy impact strength than soft wood composites.
Mona Malekzadeh and Huriye Bilsel: Reported that optimum water content is not influenced by polypropylene fiber inclusion, whereas maximum dry density has been reduced. This can be attributed to the reduction of average unit weight of solids in the soil-fiber mixture. Studying the influence of polypropylene fiber on swell characteristics, the overall conclusion is that one-dimensional swell decreases considerably with 1% fiber addition. Unconfined compressive strength increases with polypropylene fiber inclusions. Maximum value of cohesion can be observed with 1% fiber content which is approximately 1.5 times of the unreinforced soil. From the analysis of split tensile strength test, it is observed that the maximum value of the tensile strength obtained for 1% fiber inclusion is 2.7 times of the unreinforced soil. Increase in the ratio of tensile strength to compressive strength indicates that polypropylene fiber reinforcement is more effective in improving tensile than the compressive strength. Thus fiber enhances the ductile behavior of soils, reducing shrinkage settlements during desiccation, hence detrimental damages to structures, such as roads and pavements may be prevented.

Pramod S. Patil (2009), Disposal of plastic waste in an environment is considered to be a big problem due to its very low biodegradability and presence in large quantities, In recent time use of such, Industrial wastes from polypropylene (PP) and polyethylene terephthalate (PET) were studied as alternative replacements of a part of the conventional aggregates of concrete. Plastic recycling was taking position on a significant scale in an India, The test conducted on material like Cement, Sand, Conventional aggregate having all the results within permissible limit as per IS codes. The modified concrete mix, with addition of plastic aggregate replacing conventional aggregate up to certain 20% gives strength with in permissible limit. Modified concrete casted using plastic aggregate as a partial replacement to coarse aggregate shows 10 % it could be satisfy as per IS codes. Density of concrete is reducing after 20% replacement of coarse aggregates in a concrete.

A. S. Soganc (2010) The inclusion of fiber within unreinforced and reinforced soil caused an increase in the unconfined compressive strength of expansive soil. Increasing fiber content had increased the peak axial stress and decrease the loss of post-peak strength. For example, unconfined compression strength increased from 202 MPa to 285 MPa for samples reinforced with 1% fiber. The fiber reinforced soil exhibits more ductile behavior than unreinforced soil. Swell percent was reduced as the fiber increased. One dimensional swell decreased considerably with 1% fiber addition. For example it decreased from 11.60% for unreinforced samples to about 5.3% for reinforced samples with 1% fiber.

Mr. Santosh and Prof. Vishwanath C.S. (2012) , Reported that Addition of different % of Rice Husk Ash Ash (WHA) the water content decrease up to a limit afterwards again it increases. This is more effective for addition of 9% (optimum) WHA. Addition of different % of WHA the dry density increases up to a limit afterwards again it decreases. This is more effective for addition of 9% (optimum) WHA. The stress against different days for varying % WHA, for varying % of WHA, as number of day’s increases stress also increases. This is more effective for 7days.

Somanath shil (2015): Permeability and volume changes play a vital role in soil properties. Volume change in soil result in possible hazardous damage to the footings or to the building they support. Permeability affects the rate of settlement of a saturated soil under load. The settlement rate and pore water pressure dissipation rate are mainly controlled by the permeability of soil. It is known that consolidation process is accompanied by decrease in void ratio which leads to decrease in the coefficient of permeability. In such conditions, stabilization of soil is one good solution. Improvement of geotechnical properties such as coefficient of compressibility and permeability can be done by adding materials like flyash, lime, cement etc to soil. This work mainly investigates the permeability and volume change behaviours of soil stabilized with fly ash. With increase in fly ash content in NIT Agartala soil maximum dry density (MDD) is decreased and optimum moisture content (OMC) is increased. Positive result in consolidation and permeability characteristics are observed by using fly ash in soil.

Anu K. (2016): Soft clay soils exhibit high plasticity characteristics, low shear strength properties and high swell shrinkage characteristics. Soft Clay has particle sizes less than about 0.002mm, it is the finest of all and. even it can only be clearly monitored by using microscopic tools. Foundation settle-ments are the most emergence problems happened in building constructions on soft clay soil. Fly ash and Lime stone dust are both waste substances typically an industrial waste which is commonly used for stabilization of soils. The requirement of stabilization is to improve the adequate strength of soil by adding lime stone dust and fly ash. The objective of stabilizing the soil is to reduce the moisture holding capacity, plasticity to improve stability of soil. This paper investigates the complete analysis of the improvement of the soil properties and stabilisation using fly ash and lime stone dust. In this study laboratory experiments were conducted on soft clay soil with replacement by various percentage of fly ash and lime stone dust. The various laboratory experiments such as compaction test, UCC,Permeability, etc were conducted on both soft clay soil and clay soil mixed with various percentages of fly ash and lime stone dust. The study has shown that the addition of additives , lime stone dust and fly ash has shown the significant improvement in the strength and decreased moisture content and stiffness of the soil, more importantly it exhibits greater toughness, durability and stability as compared to soil alone.

Prasad P. Dahale (2012): Soil stabilization means alteration of the soils properties to meet the specified engineering requirements. Methods for the stabilization are compaction and use of admixtures. Lime, Cement was commonly used as stabilizer for altering the properties of soils. From the recent studies it is observed that, solid waste materials such as flyash, rice husk ash are used for this intended purpose with or without lime or cement. Disposal of these waste materials is essential as these are causing hazardous effects on the environment. With the same intention literature review was undertaken on utilization of solid waste materials for the stabilization of soils and same is presented here.

T Subramani (2017) : Natural fibres such as jute were the forerunners of the man-made fibres used for centuries for making ropes and for manufacturing burlaps, sacks, hessian and carpet backing. But the use of jute products in civil engineering is relatively widespread for such purposes as sand-bags for concrete curing ,soil enrichment and protection. . Reduction of carbon foot print in constructions is currently attracting global attention warranting innovations in construction technology with stress on ecocongruity. In this context increasing use of eco-concordant materials made of natural fibres to the extent feasible in constructions has assumed significance. The Earth Reinforcement Is An Ancient Technique And Is Demonstrated Abundantly By The Nature In The Action Of Tree Roots. This Concept Is Used For The Improvement Of Certain Desired Properties Of Soil Like Bearing Capacity, Shear Strength, California bearing ratio and Permeability Characteristics Etc. The Concept And Principle Of Soil Reinforcement Was First Developed By Vidal (1969), By Which He Demonstrated That The Introduction of Reinforcing Elements In A Soil Mass Increases The Shear Resistance Of The Mix. Our project is Investigates The Use Of Jute Fibre As Soil Reinforcement Material. Our project mainly comprising the comparison of properties of two different clayey soils is carried out with and without reinforcement. Jute is the natural fibre which is used in our project as soil reinforcement.

T.B.C.H. Dissanayake (2017): Expansive soil swell on absorbing water and shrink when that water gets evaporated. Because of this alternate swelling and shrinkage of expansive soil, the civil engineering structures built on them get severely damaged. Ground improvement using mechanical and chemical methods can be a mitigation measure. In this research, chemical stabilization was used as a ground improvement technique. The variation of the compaction characteristics, Atterberg limits, Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) and swell pressure were tested using separately ASTM Class F fly ash (low calcium) and bottom ash as chemical stabilizers at 8 %, 16 % and 24 % of the total weight of the expansive soil. A Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) test was also conducted to study the microstructural changes in the expansive soil treated with fly ash and bottom ash. The results indicate that the Maximum Dry Density (MDD) of the stabilized soil increases up to 16 % with fly ash and bottom ash additions and that it begins to decrease thereafter with further additions. The results of the Atterberg limits test reveal that the liquid limit and the plasticity index decrease with both fly ash and bottom ash additions while the plastic limit increases with those additions. The effect of fly ash and bottom ash on the variation of the UCS was observed for three different curing periods (7, 14 and 28 days) as well as for three different percentages of ash content (8 %, 16 % and 24 %). The findings reveal that the UCS increases up to 16 % of ash addition, and that it thereafter starts to decrease with any further addition of fly ash or bottom ash. Furthermore, an increase in the curing period will help to increase the UCS for a given percentage of additions. The microstructure of the stabilized soil becomes more uniform as the the optimum ash content is reached, and beyond this optimum value, the microstructure becomes nonuniform with an abundance of unreacted ash particles. A reduction of the swell pressure by 70% for fly ash and 48% for bottom ash is observed with the addition of admixtures. The main conclusion that can be drawn from this study is that the MDD, UCS and the plastic limit can be increased with the addition of fly ash and bottom ash while swelling, liquid limit and plastic index can be reduced through these additions. Fly ash is also found to be more effective than bottom ash in stabilizing expansive soil.

Kunal Anand (2013): With the use of Fly Ash and Lime in Alluvial soil ; Black Cotton Soil, there is a great change in Index properties. It further leads towards stabilization of soil. With the help of this stabilization of soil, pavements can be designed economically such that sub-base thickness can be reduced with varying percentage of Fly Ash and Lime. Fly Ash is one of the abundant forms of Solid Waste produced at thermal power plants. Its disposal is a big problem keeping both these concerns in mind it was tried to come out with a project which will integrate Road development and Fly ash disposal. Thus, in this project we intend to use Fly ash ; Lime in roads which will help us in following manner: High volumes of Fly ash will be used which will save the dumping sites to be used for better purposes. The use of fly ash will reduce the consumption of high volumes of fertile soil that can be used for cultivation purposes. Due to binding properties of lime ; Fly ash, the pavement designed will be of higher strength. Overall thickness of the pavement can be reduced.
Muske Srujan Teja (2017) Soil is a peculiar material. Some waste materials such Fly Ash, rice husk ash, pond ash may use to make the soil to be stable. Addition of such materials will increase the physical as well as chemical properties of the soil. Some expecting properties to be improved are liquidity index, plasticity index, unconfined compressive strength and bearing capacity etc. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of Fly Ash derived from combustion of sub-bituminous coal at electric power plants in stabilization of soft fine-grained. Many areas in Telangana region are located on high expensive soil. This paper describes about a study carried out to check the improvement in properties of soil by adding different percentages of fly ash.

P. Venkara Muthyalu (2012) Expansive soils, such as black cotton soils, are basically susceptible to detrimental volumetric changes, with changes in moisture. This behaviour of soil is attributed to the presence of mineral montmorillonite, which has an expanding lattice. Understanding the behaviour of expansive soil and adopting the appropriate control measures have been great task for the geotechnical engineers. Extensive research is going on to find the solutions to black cotton soils. There have been many methods available to controlling the expansive nature of the soils. Treating the expansive soil with electrolytes is one of the techniques to improve the behaviour of the expansive ground. Hence, in the present work, experimentation is carried-out to investigate the influence of electrolytes i.e., potassium chloride, calcium chloride and ferric chloride on the properties of expansive soil.

Gyanen. Takhelmayum (2013): Soil stabilization is one of most important for the construction which is widely used in connection with road pavement and foundation construction because it improves the engineering properties of soil such as strength, volume stability and durability. In the present investigation is to evaluate the compaction and unconfined compressive strength of stabilized black cotton soil using fine and coarse fly ash mixtures. The percentage of fine and coarse fly ash mixtures which is used in black cotton soil varied from 5 to 30. In the study concludes that with percentage addition of fine, coarse fly ash improves the strength of stabilized black cotton soil and exhibit relatively well-defined moisture-density relationship. It was found that the peak strength attained by fine fly ash mixture was 25% more when compared to coarse fly ash.

Karthik.S (2014): Soil is a peculiar material. Some waste materials such Fly Ash, rice husk ash, pond ash may use to make the soil to be stable. Addition of such materials will increase the physical as well as chemical properties of the soil. Some expecting properties to be improved are CBR value, shear strength, liquidity index, plasticity index, unconfined compressive strength and bearing capacity etc. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of Fly Ash derived from combustion of sub-bituminous coal at electric power plants in stabilization of soft fine-grained red soils. California bearing ratio (CBR) and other strength property tests were conducted on soil. The soil is in range of plasticity, with plasticity indices ranging between 25 and 30. Tests were conducted on soils and soil–Fly Ash mixtures prepared at optimum water content of 9% .Addition of Fly Ash resulted in appreciable increases in the CBR of the soil. For water contents 9% wet of optimum, CBRs of the soils are found in varying percentage such that 3,5,6and 9.We will found optimum CBR value of the soil is 6%.Increment of CBR value is used to reduce the thickness of the pavement. And increasing the bearing capacity of soil.

Sudipta Adhikary (2016) Rice Husk Ash is a pozzolanic material that could be potentially used in Soil stabilization ,though it is reasonably produced and freely available. When Rice-Husk is burnt under controlled temperature, ash is produced an about 17% -25% of Rice Husk?s weight. This paper presents the results of experimental study carried out by the virgin soil sample was taken alongside the pond of “Jadavpur University”(Jadavpur Campus), Classified as CI( clay of medium plastic) as per AASTHO soil classification system and was stabilized with 5%,10%,15% ; 20 % of Rice Husk Ash(RHA) by weight of the dry virgin soil. The improvement of the Geo- Technical properties of the fine grain soil with varying percentages of RHA was done with the facilitate of various standardize laboratory tests. The testing program conducted on the virgin soil samples by mixed with specified percentages of rice-husk materials, it is included Atterberg limits, “California Bearing Ratio(CBR)”, “Unconfined Compressive Strength(U.C.S)” , and “Standard Proactor test “.It was found that a general decrease in the maximum dry density(MDD) and increase in optimum moisture content(OMC) is shown with increase of the percentages (%) of RHA content and there was also a significant improvement shown in CBR and UCS values with the increase in percentages(%) of RHA.

Sunil Kumar Thakur (2017): Utilize the effectiveness of Rice Husk Ash (RHA) material to enhance the properties of natural soil used for subgrade soil. The standard of a pavement depends on the strength of its soil sub-grade. The soil sub-grade should be uniform in terms of properties like index, compaction and strength properties etc. Materials selection for the construction of soil sub-grade should be of adequate strength and at a similar time it should be economical to be used. If the natural soil is soft and weak, it desires some improvement to be used as soil sub-grade. It is therefore required to stabilize the weak soil to increase its strength and reduced softness. The laboratory work concerned index properties to classify the soil sample. The preliminary investigation of the soil shows that it belongs to SC class of soil in the USCS soil classification system. Whereas as per IS classification this class are generally of clay with low compressibility (CL). Atterberg limits, compaction, and CBR tests were used to evaluate properties of stabilized soil. The soil was stabilized with Rice Husk Ash (RHA) in stepped concentration of 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25% and 30% by dry weight of the soil individually. All stabilized soil samples were cured for 96 hours for CBR test in fully saturated condition.The test results indicate that the addition of RHA enhances the percentage of grain size distribution, but with addition of RHA till 10% the LL, PL and PI decreases, while these parameters further increases in this limit beyond i.e. 10% to 30% of RHA. Specific Gravity and Maximum Dry Density (MDD) decrease with addition of RHA for all percentage values, whereas OMC increases in each material. The CBR value increases with the addition of RHA till 10%, while it decreases beyond the limit 10% to 30% withaddition of RHA.

B Kanddulna (2016): Clay soil is highly typical soil because it undergoes differential settlement, poor shear strength and high compressibility. For this the most effective and economical methods to improve clayey soil is addition of stabilizing agents such as lime or rice husk ash (RHA). It is essential to improve load bearing capacity of clayey soil, for taking more load. In this study, highly plastic clay was stabilized by using lime and rice husk ash (RHA).The present investigation has been carried out with agricultural waste materials like Rice Husk Ash (RHA) and cheaply available lime is mixed with clayey soil improvement of weak sub grade in terms of compaction and strength characteristics. In this investigation lime and rice husk ash (RHA) is added 5%, 10% 15% and 20% by weight of soil. The main objective of this investigation is to access cheaply availability of lime and rice husk ash for improving engineering property of clayey soil for making capable of taking more load form structure to foundation. In this experimental investigation, the stabilizer reduces the MDD 1.382 to 1.325 g/cm3 with lime and rice husk ash reduces MDD 1.382 to 1.330 g/cm3. The investigations show optimum strength at 15 % of lime and 15% of rice husk ash (RHA). OMC of clayey soil increases from 22% to 25.8% with lime and 25.5.with RHA
Vikash Kumar Singh (2016): Utilize the effectiveness of Rice Husk Ash (RHA) material to enhance the properties of natural soil used for subgrade material in pavement. The quality of a flexible pavement depends on the strength of its sub-grade soil. In view of the above the present investigation has been carried out with rice husk ash mixed individually and also in combination with locally available natural soil in different proportions stepped concentration of 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25% and 30% by dry weight of the soil individually are used to stabilized of Natural Soil (CL) and to evaluate its properties like Grain Size Distribution, LL, PL, PI, OMC, MDD, CBR and Swelling Pressure. The test results indicate that the addition of RHA enhances the percentage of grain size distribution, but with addition of RHA till 10% the LL, PL, PI and swelling pressure decreases, while these parameters further increases in this limit beyond i.e. 10% to 30% of RHA while enhancement is observed above 20% to 30%, Specific Gravity and Maximum Dry Density (MDD) decrease with addition of RHA, for all percentage values, whereas OMC increases in each material. The CBR value increases with the addition of RHA till 10%, while it decreases beyond the limit 10% to 30% with addition of RHA.

Pravin Patel (2014): An experimental investigation is carried out to study the effect of Rice husk ash, Fly ash and Lime on index and engineering properties of Black cotton soils. The properties of stabilized soil such as compaction characteristics, unconfined compressive strength and california bearing ratio were evaluated. Various percentage of Rice husk ash (5,10,15;20), Fly ash(10,15,20;25),Lime(2.4.6 ; 8) have been used to improve the engineering properties of expansive black cotton soil. One ingredient at a time has been mixed with soil and index as well as engineering properties have been determined. The optimum content of each ingredient has been mixed together and the same properties have been evaluated. It has been concluded that liquid limit ; plastic limit of soil is reduced by adding of any ingredient individually. However the improvement in shrinkage limit is not substantial. The standard proctor perimeter are influenced negatively i.e. OMC varies from 15% to 18% using RHA and Fly ash. The maximum dry density (MDD) is reduced from 1.71 to 1.57 gm/cc. The ? value decreases from 19 to 10 and Cohesion value is increases from 0.5 to 1 kg/cm2 using RHA The ? value is decreases from 19 to 14 and Cohesion value increases from 0.5 to 1.1 kg/cm2 using fly ash. The CBR value increases from 1.52% to 3.64% using Lime, it increases from 1.52% to1.70% using Fly ash and 1.52% to 1.70% using RHA. The CBR value is 12.74% at combination of RHA, fly ash and lime. The UCS value increases with increase in percentage of RHA, Fly ash and Lime. Swelling pressure is decreases at different percentage of Lime and Fly ash. Coefficient of permeability is decreases at different percentage of Lime and fly ash. Plasticity index of soil is decreases with increase the percentage of RHA, Fly ash and Lime. The optimum percentage of RHA , fly ash and lime is 8%,20% and 20%. On treated soil reduction in sub-base layer by 60% and reduction in DBM layer by 40.7% in comparison to pavement design on Untreated Black Cotton soil. Pavement cost also decreases on treated soil. The objective of this work is to estimate the effect of RHA, Fly ash and Lime on some geotechnical properties of black cotton soil, in order to determine the suitability of RHA, Fly ash and Lime for use as a modifier or stabilizer in the treatment of black cotton soil for roadwork. The aim of this work is to find the optimum percentage of RHA, Fly ash and Lime.

CHAPTER – 3
METHODOLOGY ; EXPERIMENTAL WORK3.1 GeneralThe successful construction of highways requires the construction of a structure that is capable of carrying the imposed traffic loads. One of the most important layers of the road is the actual foundation, or subgrade. Subgrade soil form the integral part of the road pavement structure as it provides the support to the pavement from beneath. The main function of the subgrade is to give adequate support to the pavement and for this; the subgrade should possess sufficient stability under adverse climate and loading condition. If these structures are founded on soil with low bearing capacity, they are likely to fail either during or after construction, with or without application of wheel load on them. Where the pavement is founded in an inherently weak soil, this material will be typically then removed and replaced with a stronger granular material or improving the soil towards the desired property by addition of chemical (Christopher, H, 2010). This removal and replacement technique can be both costly and time consuming. Where aggregates are scarce, the use of these non-renewable resources is viewed as non-sustainable, particularly if haulage distances are significant.

The subgrade soil property can be improved by mainly its CBR value as strength to mix Rice husk ash and Rice Husk Ash, if easily available near the construction site and reduce pavement thickness. In this project, we stabilized the Natural soil by adding Rice husk ash and Rice Husk Ash in the different ratio with natural soil. Soil stabilization is the process of improving the engineering properties of the soil and thus making it more stable. It is required when available soil for construction is not suitable for the intended purpose. However, the main use of stabilization is improving the natural soils for the construction of highway and airfields. There are various methodology and experiments enumerated in this chapter. In this chapter the materials used in the investigation are illustrated with respect to their Sources and their physical and chemical properties. All laboratory investigations on soil and materials are carried out in soil Transportation laboratory of Lakshmi Narain College of Technology Bhopal (M.P).Rice husk ash and Rice Husk Ash was mixed in varying percentage of 5%,10%,15%,20%,25%, and 30% of natural soil on dry weight basis in the suitable required proportions.

3.2 Material Used in Research Work3.2.1 Natural SoilThe Natural soil sample is used in this project were taken from local area from depth of 2.5 m from ground level. It contains deleterious substances and of various sizes. The soil was air dried and pulverized manually. This natural soil is grey and black in color.

3.2.2 Rice Husk Ash(RHA)Rice Husk Ash is collected locally, these husk is burnt and collected ash is used in this project.

3.2.3 Polypropylene (PP)Polypropylene is collected locally, length of the fiber used in this project is 40mm and thickness is 2mm.

3.2.4 WaterThroughout the investigation tap water is used in this project, which is supplied by municipal co-operation.
3.3 Experimental ProgramThere are various test performed in laboratory as per IS code standards like test Grain size distribution, liquid limit, plastic limit, plasticity index, specific gravity, compaction, optimum moisture content (OMC), maximam dry density (MDD), swelling and California bearing ratio (CBR) test were.

3.3.1 Particle Size AnalysisThe Grain size analysis on natural soil and the soil-additive mixture were conducted according to I.S. 2720 (Part IV):1975.

Procedure
Take suitable quantity of oven dry soil sample.

Clean – all the sieve, bottom pan ; top cap cover.

Carefully pour the soil sample into the top sieve and place the cap over it.

Assemble them in the ascending order of sieve (10mm sieve at top and 75 micron meter sieve at bottom). Place the pan below the bottom sieve.

Sieve the sample through the set of IS sieve by the hand or sieve shaker for 15minutes.

Determine the mass of material retained on each sieve. Also determine % passing through each sieve.

3.3.2 Specific GravitySpecific gravity which is the measure of heaviness of the soil particles are determined by the method of pychnometer method using a soil sample passing No. 10 sieve and oven dried at 105 degree centigrade. The test includes the determination of the specific gravity for the natural soil and the soil bagasse ash mixture. The test is conducted in accordance with AASHTO T100-93 testing procedure.

Table STYLEREF 1 s 3. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 1: Typical values of Specific gravitySand 2.63-2.67
Silt 2.65 – 2.7
Clay and Silty clay 2.67 – 2.9
Organic soil ; 2.0
Apparatus Required
Pychnometer or Specific Gravity bottle of 200 ml capacity
Balance Capable of weighting accurately upto 0.1 gm
Procedure
Weigh a clean and dry specific gravity bottle eith its stopper (W1). Place a sample of material
upt half of the pychnometer (about 100 gm) and weight with its stopper (W2). Add water to material in flask till it is about half full. Mix thoroughly with glass rod to remove entrapped air continue stirring and add morewater till it is flush with the graduated mark. Dry the outside and weigh (W3). Entrapped air may be removed by vacuum pump, If available. Empty the pychnometer clean it and refills ir with water with the graduated mark, wipe dry outside and weigh (W4) and specific gravity is calculated by the formula given below
Specific gravity = (W2-W1)W2-W1-W3-W4×1W1 = Weight of empty pychnometer
W2 = Weight of pychnometer + Material
W3 = Weight of flask pychnometer + Material + Water
W4 = Weight of pychnometer + Water
3.3.3Atterberg’s limitsAtterberg in 1911 proposed a series of tests mostly empirical for the determination of the consistency and plastic properties of the fine soil.These are now known as Atterberg limits and indices tests on the liquid limit (LL), plastic limit (PL), and plasticity index (PI) of the soil-additive mixture were con- ducted according to I.S. 2720 (Part v )-1970 (10.).

3.3.3.1 Liquid limit (LL)Liquid limit is of fine grained soil is the water content at which soil behaves practically like liquid but has small shear strength. It is determined in laboratory by cassagrande apparatus.

Apparatus
(i) Cassagrande liquid limit device (ii) ASTM and BS grooving tool (iii) 425 micron IS Sieve (iv) Wash bottle (v) Spatula (vi) Balance,0.01gm(vii) Oven (viii) Distilled water (ix) Measuring cylinder (x) Desiccator
Procedure
First take about 120gm air dried soil sample which is passing by 425 micron IS sieve.

Mix it thoroughly with some distilled water and make uniform paste.

Place a portion of the paste in cup of the cassagrande apparatus.

Smooth the surface of paste with spatula to minimum depth of 1 cm.

Cut groove in soil paste with standard grooving tool along the symmetric axis of the cup.

Rotate cam at the rate of 2 revolution/ sec. and count number of (blows up to 25) whenever cup required to close groove by 1/2″ or 12mm.

Take 4 or 5 sample of these paste in air tight containers and weight
After that put these containers in the drying oven at temperature in (degree centigrade)105oC to110 oC for 24 hrs.

After 24 hrs again weight and Obtain water content.

Plot water content versus number of blows on semi-log paper
3.3.3.2 Plastic limit (PL)Plastic limit of a fine grained soil is the water content of the soil below which it ceases to be plastic. It begins to crumble when rolled in to threads of 3mm diameter. Or the minimum water content at which a soil will just begin to crumble when it is rolled into a thread of approximately 3 mm in diameter.

Apparatus
(i) Cassagrande liquid limit device (ii) ASTM and BS grooving tool (iii) Glass plate 20×15 cm (iv) 425 micron IS Sieve (v) 3mm Diameter rod (vi) Spatula (vii) Balance,0.01gm(vii) Oven (viii) Distilled water (ix) Measuring cylinder (x) Desiccator
Procedure
Take about 30gm of air dried sample passing 425 micron IS sieve.

Mix thoroughly with distilled water on the plate until it can be shaped into a small ball.

Then rolled it finger and glass plate and make a thread of 3mm dia.

If the diameter of thread becomes less than 3mm dia. Without cracks, it shows the water added in to soil is more than its plastic limit.

Repeat this rolling and remolding process until the thread starts just crumbling at a diameter of 3mm.

Collect the pieces of crumbled soil thread at 3mm dia. In air tight container.

Determine the moisture content.

3.3.4 Compaction test The compaction tests to obtain the moisture-density relationship of the soil-additive mixtures were conducted according to I.S. 2720 (Part viii)-1965 (11). Compaction is the process of densification of soil by reducing air voids. The degree of compaction of a given soil is measured in terms of its dry density. The dry density is maximum at the optimum water content.

Apparatus
Compaction mould, capacity 1000 C.C. (ii) Rammer, mass 2.6 kg,free drop 310 mm (iii) Detached base plat (iv) Collar, 60 mm high (v) IS Sieve 20mm,4.75 mm ( vi) oven (vii) Desiccator (viii) weighting balance, accuracy 1gm
Procedure
First take 5.5 kg soil sample which is passing by 4.75 IS sieve.

Add water to it to bring its moisture content to about 4% in coarse grained soil and 8%in fine grained soil.

Mix properly water and soil sample and make five equal part of soil sample.

Clean, dry and oil lightly the mould with the base plate.

Fit the collar and place the mould on solid base.

Each 5 equal layer compacted by 4.89 kg hammer in cylindrical mould.

Remove the collar and trim-off the soil flush with top of the mould.

Clean the outside of the mould and base plate then weigh the mould with soil and base plate.

Remove the soil sample from mould and obtain a representative soil sample from bottom, middle and top for water content determination.

Weigh the drying crucible with samples and put in the oven drying oven at temperature 105oC to 110oC for 24 hours.

Next day, first weigh the crucibles with dry soil samples and then the empty crucibles.

3.3.5 Swelling PressureThe Swelling Pressure of the soil is measured by placing the tripod with the dial indicator on the top of the soaked CBR mold. The initial dial reading of the dial indicator on the soaked CBR mold is taken just after soaking the sample. At the end of 96 hours the final dial reading of the dial indicator is taken hence the swell percentage of the initial sample length is given by:
Swelling Pressure= (Change in Length in mm during Soaking/116.3mm)*100 %
3.3.6 California Bearing Ratio (CBR)In 1928, California division of highways in U.S.A. Developed CBR method for pavement design. The majority of curves developed later are based on the original curves proposed by O. J. porter. At the beginning of the Second World War, the Corps Engineer of U.S.A. Made survey of the existing method of pavement design and adopted CBR method for designing military airport pavements. One of the chief advantages of C.B.R method is the simplicity of the test procedure.The CBR tests were conducted according to I.S. 2720 (Part xi) 1977. A standard CBR mold with a detachable collar was used.

Apparatus
(i) CBR mould, inside diameter =150mm, total height 175 mm with detached extension collar,50mm high and detached base plate, 10 mm thick (ii) spacer disc, 148mm diameter, 4.47 mm high. (iii) Rammer, heavy compaction 4.89 kg, free drop 450 mm.(iv) IS sieve, 4.75 mm and 20mm size.(v) Slotted masses,annular,2.5 kg each, 147 mm diameter , with a hole of 53 mm diameter in the centre.

Definition of CBR
California bearing ratio is the ratio of force per unit area required to penetrate in to a soil mass with a circular plunger of 50mm diameter at the rate of 1.25mm / min.

The California bearing ratio (CBR) is a penetration test for evaluation of the mechanical strength of road sub grades and base courses. It was developed by the California Department of Transportation.

The test is performed by measuring the pressure required to penetrate a soil sample with a plunger of standard area. The measured pressure is then divided by the pressure required to achieve an equal penetration on a standard crushed rock material
The CBR value is determined corresponding to 2.5mm or 5mm penetration. The greater of these values used for the design of the pavement.

Table STYLEREF 1 s 3. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 2: Standard Loads for CBR Test.Penetration depth
(mm) Standard load
(Kg)
2.5 1370
5 2055
7.5 2630
10 3180
12.5 3600
Procedure
Take about 6.5 kg soil sample which passing through 20mm IS sieve.

Then mixed soil with optimum water content which is calculated by compaction test.

Make equal 5 layers of mixed soil. And compacted each layer 56 times by heavy hammer.

Samples are collected for optimum water content.

Put the mould in water for 4 days. Attached dial gauge for checking its expansion.

After 4 days allow the specimen to drain off for 10 – 15 minute.

Then set up the mould in CBR test machine. Apply load on the plunger (or 50 mm diameter).

Keep the rate of penetration as 1.25 mm/ minute.

3.4 Mix Preparation of Samples used in the Research WorkThe samples used in the research work are Natural Soil, Rice Husk Ash(RHA) and Polypropylene (PP). Natural Soil stabilized with varying percentages i.e. (5, 10, 15, 20, 25 & 30%) of RHA and after getting the optimum percentage of RHA, PP is added in that mix polypropylene is added upto 1.00% at an interval of 0.25%. These parents samples i.e. Natural soil, Rice Husk Ash and Polypropylene are named as N, W and P notation respectively in further research work. The artificial Mix Samples i.e. NW which are mix of Natural Soil with Rice Husk Ash and NWP which is mix of Natural Soil with Rice Husk Ash and polypropylene. The details of the prepared samples and their notation are discussed below in table.

Table STYLEREF 1 s 3. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 3:Details and Notation used for Prepared SamplesS. No Details of Prepared Samples Notation used for samples
1 Natural Soil (NS) N
2 Rice Husk Ash(RHA) R
3 Polypropylene (PP) P
4 Natural Soil (NS) + 05% Rice Husk Ash(RHA) NR5
5 Natural Soil (NS) + 10% Rice Husk Ash(RHA) NR10
6 Natural Soil (NS) + 15% Rice Husk Ash(RHA) NR15
7 Natural Soil (NS) + 20% Rice Husk Ash(RHA) NR20
8 Natural Soil (NS) + 25% Rice Husk Ash(RHA) NR25
9 Natural Soil (NS) + 30% Rice Husk Ash(RHA) NR30
10 Natural Soil (NS) + 10% Rice Husk Ash(RHA) + 0.25% Polypropylene (PP) NRP-1
11 Natural Soil (NS) + 10% Rice Husk Ash(RHA) + 0.50% Polypropylene (PP) NRP-2
12 Natural Soil (NS) + 10% Rice Husk Ash(RHA) + 0.75% Polypropylene (PP) NRP-3
13 Natural Soil (NS) + 10% Rice Husk Ash(RHA) + 1.00% Polypropylene (PP) NRP-4
CHAPTER – 4
RESULT & DISCUSSION4.1 GeneralIn the previous chapter the materials utilized for stabilizing the Natural soil and its proportions have been discussed. Also the laboratory procedures to be followed to perform various tests viz, Grain Size Distribution, Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, Plasticity Index, Specific Gravity, California Bearing Ratio (CBR) and Swelling Pressure test have been elaborated. In this chapter the test results obtained are presented with the detailed discussion on the effects of stabilizers on various engineering properties. In the present study, Rice Husk Ash(RHA) and Polypropylene (PP) have been used as a stabilizing material of the soil. For better understanding of the experiment the results are presented in the graphical form and where possible in tabular forms.

4.2 Tests Results of Natural soil4.2.1 Grain Size DistributionGravel is the material smaller than 80mm but retained on 4.75mm sieve
Coarse sand is the material passing through 4.75 mm but retained on 2.00mm sieve
Medium sand is the material passing through 2.00 mm but retained on 0.425mm sieve
Fine sand is the material passing through 0.425 but retained on 0.075mm sieve
1000 gms of Natural Soil Sample (N) taken for Grain Size Distribution which is shown in Table No.4.1 and their graphical representation shown by Figure No.4.1 below.

Indian Standard Soil Classification System (ISSCS)

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 1: Plasticity chart as per Indian Standard Classification SystemAASHTO Classification Chart:
By American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Classification Chart, this is widely used in the field of highway. The system classifies the soil into seven main groups A1- A7.

Figure STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Figure * ARABIC s 1 2 :AASHTO Soil Classification SystemTable STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 1: Grain Size Distribution of N sampleS.N. Sieve No. Wt Retained in (gm) % age Wt Retained Cumulative retained (%) ( V) % of finer (100-V)
1 10 mm 92.00 9.20 9.20 90.80
2 6.8 mm 56.00 5.60 14.80 85.20
3 4.75 mm 36.00 3.60 18.40 81.60
4 2.36 mm 72.00 7.20 25.60 74.40
5 0.85 mm 176.00 17.60 43.20 56.80
6 0.425 mm 350.00 35.00 78.20 21.80
7 0.150 mm 187.00 18.70 96.90 3.10
8 0.075 mm 16.00 1.60 98.50 1.50
9 pan 15.00 1.50 100.00 0.00

Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 1: Grain Size Distribution of N SampleObservation of grain size distribution of N sample
Gravel (%)=18.40
Coarse sand (%)=7.20
Medium sand(%)=52.60
Fine sand(%)=20.30
Silt and Clay (%)=1.50
IS Soil Classification=CL
AASHTO Classification=A-6
Since the liquid limit of Natural soil is less than 35% i.e. 26% (Ref. Table No. 4.2) and Plasticity Index is 8.60%, it lies above A-line in the plasticity chart as per Indian Standard Soil Classification System and thus the soil is classified as CL (Clay with Low Compressibility) Material passing through 0.075mm sieve is silt-clay and is classified based on Atterberg limits.According to this classification system the soil under experimentation lies in the range of A-6 group.
4.2.2 Liquid LimitTable STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 2: Liquid Limit of N sampleSL No. Particular Trial-1 Trial-2 Trial-3 Trial-4 Trial-5
1 No of Blows 17 22 27 30 34
2 Container No. 12 13 14 15 16
3 Wt of container + Wet Soil (gm) 67.55 56.42 34.72 38.72 45.54
4 Wt of container + dry Soil (gm) 56.84 48.34 31.31 34.51 40.15
5 Loss of Moisture (gm) 10.71 8.08 3.41 4.21 5.3
6 Wt of container (gm) 28.28 17.48 18.25 18.17 18.25
7 Wt of dry Soil (gm) 38.56 30.86 13.06 16.34 21.9
8 Moisture Content (%age) 27.77 26.18 26.11 25.76 24.2

Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 2 :Liquid Limit Curve of Natural soilFrom the result shown in Table 4.2 the values of Liquid Limit are 26%.

4.2.3 Plastic LimitTable STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 3: Plastic Limit of N sampleS. N. Particular Trial-1 Trial-2 Trial-3
1 Container No. 22 23 24
2 Wt of container + Wet Soil (gm) 33.57 57.75 51.67
3 Wt of container + dry Soil (gm) 30.52 54.53 45.16
4 Loss of Moisture (gm) 3.05 3.22 6.51
5 Wt of container (gm) 15.12 38.36 18.34
6 Wt of dry Soil (gm) 15.54 16.17 26.82
7 Moisture Content (%age) 19.8 19.91 24.27
8 Average Plastic limit (% age) 17.4
From the result shown in Table 4.3 the values of Plastic Limit are 17.4%.

Plasticity Index = Liquid Limit – Plastic Limit
= 26 – 17.4
= 8.6 %
4.2.4 Specific GravityTable STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 4: Specific Gravity of N sampleObservation Sample
Empty wt. of bottle(W1) 644
Bottle wt.+ Dry Soil wt.(W2) 844
Bottle wt.+ Soil wt.+ Water wt.(W3) 1626
Bottle wt.+ Water wt.(M4) 1502
Specific gravity(G) 2.63
From the result shown in Table No.4.4 the values of Specific Gravity are 2.63.

The results obtained by laboratory test performed to determine various engineering properties are presented and detailed discussion regarding the results is elaborated which is shown by Table No.4.5:
Table STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 5: Summary for Index Properties of N sampleS.N. Parameters Value
1 Grain Size Distribution
Gravel (%) 18.40 
Coarse Sand (%) 7.20 
Medium Sand (%)  52.60
Fine Sand (%) 20.30
Silt and Clay (%) 1.50
2 IS Soil Classification CL
3 AASHTO Classification A-6 
4 Liquid Limit (%) 26.00
5 Plastic Limit (%) 17.40
6 Plasticity Index (%) 8.60
7 Specific Gravity 2.63
Proctor Compaction TestS.N. Wt of mould + compacted N Sample (W2) (gms) Wt of Compacted N Sample (W2-W1)
(gms) Wet
Density
(gm/cc) Moisture Content Determination
Wt of container+Wet N Sample (gms) Wt of container +
Wt of dry N Sample (gms) Wt of water (Ww)
(gms) Wt of Dry N Sample (Ws)
(gms) Moisture content (%)
(W) Dry Density
(gm/cc)
1 3804 1784 1.78 47.98 46.15 1.83 27.92 6.55 1.67
2 3880 1860 1.86 52.09 49.26 2.83 30.36 9.28 1.70
3 4116 2096 2.10 51.17 47.65 3.52 29.46 11.94 1.87
4 4078 2058 2.06 57.45 52.60 4.86 35.91 13.52 1.81
5 4068 2048 2.05 76.60 69.31 7.29 52.52 13.90 1.80
Table STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 6: Proctor Compaction Test of N Sample
Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 3: OMC/MDD of Natural Soil (N) SampleCompaction factor parameters are MDD=1.88 KN/m3 and OMC =12.18%.

4.2.5 California Bearing Ratio (CBR)(A) California Bearing Ratio for Unsoaked N Sample
CBR test conduct on N (Natural Soil Sample) and optimum percentage of CBR value is found out which is shown by Table 4.7 and Its graphical representation are shown by Graph 4.4.

Table STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 7: Unsoaked CBR Test for N SampleS.N. Plunger Penetration Dial Reading Applied Load (Kg/ cm2) CBR (%)
1 0.0 0 0.00  
2 0.5 11 27.21  
3 1.0 20 49.47  
4 1.5 26 64.31  
5 2.0 33 81.63  
6 2.5 39 96.47 7.04
7 3.0 43 106.36  
8 3.5 48 118.73  
9 4.0 52 128.63  
10 4.5 55 136.05  
11 5.0 58 143.47 6.98
12 5.5 62 153.36  
13 6.0 65 160.78  
14 6.5 68 168.20  
15 7.0 71 175.63  
16 7.5 74 183.05  
17 8.0 77 190.47  
18 8.5 80 197.89  
19 9.0 82 202.84  
20 9.5 84 207.78  
21 10.0 86 212.73  
22 10.5 88 217.68  
23 11.0 90 222.62  
24 11.5 92 227.57  
25 12.0 94 232.52  
26 12.5 95 234.99  
Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 4: Unsoakesd CBR of N SampleUnsoaked CBR Value for N Sample= 7.04 % (B) California Bearing Ratio for Soaked N Sample
CBR test conduct on N (Natural Soil Sample) for 96 Hours and optimum percentage of CBR value is found out which is shown by Table 4.8 and Its graphical representation are shown by Graph 4.5
Table STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 8: Soaked CBR test for N SampleS.N. Plunger Penetration Dial Reading Applied Load (Kg/ cm2) CBR (%)
1 0.0 0 0.00 2 0.5 6 14.84 3 1.0 10 24.74 4 1.5 14 34.63 5 2.0 18 44.52 6 2.5 21 51.95 3.79
7 3.0 25 61.84 8 3.5 28 69.26 9 4.0 31 76.68 10 4.5 33 81.63 11 5.0 35 86.58 4.21
12 5.5 38 94.00 13 6.0 40 98.94 14 6.5 42 103.89 15 7.0 44 108.84 16 7.5 45 111.31 17 8.0 47 116.26 18 8.5 49 121.21 19 9.0 50 123.68 20 9.5 52 128.63 21 10.0 53 131.10 22 10.5 55 136.05 23 11.0 57 141.00 24 11.5 58 143.47 25 12.0 60 148.42 26 12.5 61 150.89
Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 5: Soaked CBR of N SampleSoaked CBR Value for N Sample= 3.79 %
4.3 Test Result of Rice Husk Ash(RHA)4.3.1 Grain Size Distribution1000 gms of RHA Sample taken for grain size distribution.

Table STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 9: Grain Size Distributionof S sampleS. No. Sieve No. Wt Retained In (gm) % Age Wt Retained Cumulative Retained (%) ( V) % of Finer (100-V)
1 10 mm 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
2 6.8 mm 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00
3 4.75 mm 8.36 0.84 0.84 99.16
4 2.36 mm 42.00 4.20 5.04 94.96
5 0.85 mm 91.00 9.10 14.14 85.86
6 0.425 mm 288.64 28.86 43.00 57.00
7 0.150 mm 344.00 34.40 77.40 22.60
8 0.075 mm 128.00 12.80 90.20 9.80
9 pan 98.00 9.80 100.00 0.00

Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 6: Grain Size Distribution of S Sample4.3.2 Liquid LimitIn the test it is found to be non-plastic material.

4.3.3 Plastic LimitIn the test it is found to be non-plastic material.

4.3.4 Specific GravityTable STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 10: Specific gravity of RHA SampleObservation Sample
Empty wt. of bottle(W1) 644
Bottle wt.+ Dry RHA wt.(W2) 844
Bottle wt.+ RHA wt.+ Water wt.(W3) 1595
Bottle wt.+ Water wt.(M4) 1502
Specific Gravity (G) 1.87
The results obtained by laboratory test performed to determine various engineering properties are presented and detailed discussion regarding the results is elaborated which is shown by Table 4.11.

Table STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 11: Summary for Index Properties of RHA sampleS.N. Parameters Value
1 Grain Size Distribution
Gravel (%) 0.84
Coarse Sand (%) 4.20
Medium Sand (%) 37.96
Fine Sand (%) 47.20
Silt and Clay (%) 9.80
2 IS Soil Classification CL
3 AASHTO Classification A-6
4 Liquid Limit (%) NP
5 Plastic Limit (%) NP
6 Plasticity Index (%) —
7 Specific Gravity 1.87
4.3.5 Proctor Compaction TestTable STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 12: Proctor Compaction Test of RHA SampleS.N. Wt of mould + compacted S Sample (W2) (gms) Wt of Compacted S Sample (W2-W1)
(gms) Wet
Density
(gm/cc) Moisture Content Determination
Wt of container+Wet S Sample (gms) Wt of container +
Wt of dry S Sample (gms) Wt of water (Ww)
(gms) Wt of Dry S Sample (Ws)
(gms) Moisture content (%)
(W) Dry Density
(gm/cc)
1 3286 1266 1.27 77.69 69.80 7.80 18.60 41.95 0.89
2 3356 1336 1.34 81.63 71.53 10.30 23.53 43.67 0.93
3 3432 1412 1.41 86.85 74.50 11.95 26.45 44.93 0.97
4 3398 1378 1.38 91.33 77.83 13.50 28.58 47.23 0.94
5 3342 1322 1.32 95.75 80.10 15.65 31.40 49.84 0.88
Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 7: OMC/MDD of S SampleCompaction factor parameters are MDD=0.99 KN/m3 and OMC = 47.22%.

4.3.6 California Bearing Ratio (A) California Bearing Ratio for Unsoaked RHA Sample
CBR test conduct on RHA and optimum percentage of CBR value is found out which is shown by Table No.4.19 and Its graphical representation are shown by Figure No.4.14.

Table STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 13: Unsoaked CBR Test for RHA SampleS.N. Plunger Penetration Dial Reading Applied Load (Kg/ cm2) CBR (%)
1 0 0 0.00  
2 1 6 14.84  
3 1 12 29.68  
4 2 22 54.42  
5 2 33 81.63  
6 3 44 108.84 7.94
7 3 56 138.52  
8 4 70 173.15  
9 4 83 205.31  
10 5 98 242.41  
11 5 113 279.52 13.60
12 6 127 314.15  
13 6 140 346.30  
14 7 152 375.99  
15 7 165 408.14  
16 8 178 440.30  
17 8 190 469.98  
18 9 200 494.72  
19 9 210 519.46  
20 10 220 544.19  
21 10 230 568.93  
22 11 240 593.66  
23 11 250 618.40  
24 12 255 630.77  
25 12 260 643.14  
26 13 265 655.50  

Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 8: Unsoaked CBR of RHA SampleUnsoaked CBR Value for RHA Sample= 7.94 %
(B) California Bearing Ratio for SoakedRHA Sample
CBR test conduct on S Sample (Rice Husk Ash) for 96 Hours and optimum percentage of CBR value is found out which is shown by Table No.4.20 and Its graphical representation are shown by Figure No.4.1
Table STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 14: Soaked CBR Test for RHA SampleS.N. Plunger Penetration Dial Reading Applied Load (Kg/ cm2) CBR (%)
1 0.0 0 0.00  
2 0.5 4 9.89  
3 1.0 9 22.26  
4 1.5 15 37.10  
5 2.0 22 54.42  
6 2.5 30 74.21 5.42
7 3.0 42 103.89  
8 3.5 55 136.05  
9 4.0 67 165.73  
10 4.5 80 197.89  
11 5.0 92 227.57 11.07
12 5.5 110 272.10  
13 6.0 121 299.31  
14 6.5 135 333.94  
15 7.0 146 361.15  
16 7.5 158 390.83  
17 8.0 169 418.04  
18 8.5 179 442.77  
19 9.0 190 469.98  
20 9.5 202 499.67  
21 10.0 212 524.40  
22 10.5 220 544.19  
23 11.0 229 566.45  
24 11.5 237 586.24  
25 12.0 249 615.93  
26 12.5 256 633.24  

Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 9: Soaked CBR of RHA SampleSoaked CBR Value for RHA Sample= 5.42 %
4.4 Tests Results of Natural &Rice Husk Ash Samples (NR)4.4.1 Index Properties of NR SampleThe tests are conducted on Artificial Mix Samples (NR) type samples i.e. when Rice Husk Ash is added in the soil upto 30%. and Grain Size Distribution, Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, Plasticity Index, Specific Gravity have performed.

Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 10: Grain Size Distribution Curve of Nr SampleTable STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 15: Summary of Test Results for Index Properties of NR SamplesS.N. Index Properties of NR Sample Name of Artificial Mix NW Samples
NR5 NR10 NR15 NR20 NR25 NR30
1 Grain Size Distribution
Gravel (%) 13.04 13.53 13.40 16.00 15.00 15.70
Coarse Sand (%) 16.30 15.80 16.60 45.00 14.80 15.20
Medium Sand (%) 47.70 47.50 46.70 45.00 43.90 42.80
Fine Sand (%) 20.80 20.70 20.40 21.10 22.40 21.90
Silt And Clay (%) 2.16 2.47 2.90 3.40 3.90 4.40
2 IS Soil Classification CL CL CL CL CL CL
3 AASHTO Classification A-6 A-6 A-6 A-6 A-6 A-6
4 Liquid Limit (%) 23.00 21.00 18.00 16.00 19.00 22.00
5 Plastic Limit (%) 14.80 13.40 11.50 10.70 12.20 14.30
6 Plasticity Index (%) 8.20 7.60 6.50 5.30 6.80 7.70
7 Specific Gravity 2.61 2.57 2.54 2.49 2.45 2.39

Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 11: Variation in Liquid limit of NR samples
Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 12: Variation in Plastic limit of NR samples
Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 13: Variation in Plastic lndex of NR samples
Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 14: Variation in Specific Gravity of NR samplesThe results of Liquid Limit tests Clay with Low Compressibility (CL) treated with different percentage of Rice Husk Ash (RHA)can be seen that with increase in percentage of ash the Liquid Limit of CL soil goes on decreasing from 26 to 16%, when RHA waste is increased from 0 to 20% is effective beyond also there is a increase in liquid limit from 16% to 22% when RHA waste is increased from 20 to 30% and further the value for 100% RHA, the sample shows non plastic behavior.

The results of Plastic Limit tests CL soil treated with different percentage of RHA can be seen that with increase in percentage of ash the Plastic Limit of CL soil goes on decreasing from 17.40% to 10.70%, when RHA waste is increased from 0 to 20% is effective beyond also there is a increase in Plastic Limit from 10.70 to 14.30% when RHA waste is increased from 20% to 30%.

The results of Plasticity Index tests CL soil treated with different percentage of RHA can be seen that with increase in percentage of ash the Plasticity Index of CL soil goes on decreasing from 8.60% to 5.30%, when RHA waste is increased from 0 to 20 % is effective beyond also there is a increase in Plasticity Index from 5.30 to 7.70% when RHA waste is increased from 20% to 30%.

The results of Specific Gravity tests on CL soil treated with different percentage of RHA i.e. NR Sample shows that there is a decrease in specific gravity from 2.63 to 2.39 with increase in percentage of ash from 0 to 30% and 1.87 for 100% RHA.

4.4.2 Proctor Compaction TestThe tests on these Artificial Mix Samples were conducted as on N samples and curve for OMC and MDD were plotted for NR Samples. This curve showing variation of Compaction Curve (OMD and OMC) of Sample NR-5 to NR-30 and the desired NR Samples.

Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 15: Compaction Curve of NR SampleTable STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 16: Summary of Test Results for Compaction Properties of Artificial NR SamplesS.N. Compaction Properties of NR Sample Name of Artificial NS Samples 
NR5 NR10 NR15 NR20 NR25 NR30
1 Optimum Moisture Content (%) 14.42 15.80 17.85 18.05 21.00 23.80
2 Maximum Dry Density (gm/cm3) 1.74 1.67 1.64 1.58 1.50 1.44

Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 16: Variation in Optimum Moisture Content of NW samples
Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 17: Variation in Maximum Dry Density of NR samplesNatural Soil is mixed with varying percentages of Rice Husk Ash (RHA) waste material by weight. From the test results Moisture Content continuously increases 12.18 to 23.80% and for 100% RHA value of water content is 47.22%.However The Maximum Dry Density decreases from 1.88 g/cc to 1.44 g/cc from 0 to 30% of RHA and the value are 0.98 g/cc for 100% RHA.
4.4.3 California Bearing RatioThe tests on these Artificial Mix Samples were conducted as on NW Samples. CBR test were conduct on Samples containing Rice Husk Ash and evaluate these values and load presentation curve was plotted. NW Samples are showing Compaction Curve shown in graph below and also for Unsoaked and Soaked CBR Curve.

Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 18: Unsoakesd CBR of NW Sample
Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 19: Soaked CBR of NR SampleTable STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 17: Summary of Test Results for Strength Properties of Artificial NR SamplesS.N. Strength Properties of NR Sample Name of Artificial NS Samples 
NR5 NR10 NR15 NR20 NR25 NR30
1 CBR (%) Unsoaked 14.08 14.98 16.24 17.33 14.08 11.91
Soaked 6.86 7.22 8.84 9.21 7.58 5.78

Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 20: Variation in CBR of NW samplesThe results of Unsoaked CBR tests on CL Soil treated with different percentage of RHA and from the results it can be seen that with increase in percentage of ash waste, the Unsoaked CBR of soil goes on increasing from 7.04 to 17.33% when RHA is increased from 0 to 20% is effective beyond also there is a decrease in CBR of soil from 17.33 to 11.91% when RHA waste is increased from 20% to 30% and further the value for 100% RHA is 7.95%.

The results of Soaked CBR tests on CL Soil treated with different percentage of RHA and from the results it can be seen that with increase in percentage of ash waste, the soaked CBR of soil goes on increasing from 4.21 to 9.21% when RHA is increased from 0 to 20% is effective beyond also there is a decrease in CBR of soil from 9.21 to 5.78% when RHA waste is increased from 20% to 30% and further the value for 100% RHA is 5.41%.

The results of Swelling Pressure tests on CL Soil treated with different percentage of RHA and from the results it can be seen that with increase in percentage of ash waste, the Swelling Pressure of soil goes on decreasing from 2.15 to 0.67 when RHA is increased from 0 to 20% is effective beyond also there is a increase in Swelling Pressure of soil from 0.67 to 1.42 when RHA waste is increased from 20% to 30% and further the value for 100% RHA is 1.95.

4.5 Test Result of Natural Soil with Polypropylene &Rice Husk AshNatural soil with 20% of Rice Husk Ash i.e. NR20 mix give optimum value of CBR in both soaked and unsoaked condition, now polypropylene is added upto 1% with an interval of 0.25%.
4.5.1 Proctor Compaction test
Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 21: OMC/MDD of NWP samplesTable STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 18: Compaction Properties of NWP samplesS.N. Compaction Properties of NWP Sample Name of Artificial NWP Samples 
NWP1 NWP2 NWP3 NWP4
1 Optimum Moisture Content (%) 17 16 13 14
2 Maximum Dry Density (gm/cm3) 1.61 1.74 1.92 1.81

Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 22: : Optimum Moisture Content of NRP samples
Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 23: Maximum Dry Density of NRP samples4.5.2 California Bearing Ratio
Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 24: Soaked CBR of NRP samples
Graph STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Graph * ARABIC s 1 25: UnSoaked CBR of NRP samplesTable STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 19: Strength Properties of NRP SamplesS.N. Strength Properties of NRP Sample Name of Artificial NRP Samples 
NRP1 NRP2 NRP3 NRP4
1 CBR (%) Unsoaked 18.25 18.85 20.56 19.41
Soaked 9.90 10.18 12.27 11.67

Table STYLEREF 1 s 4. SEQ Table * ARABIC s 1 20: Variation in CBR of NRP samples.Above result shows that the, 0.75% of polypropylene fiber with 20% Rice Husk Ash is give maximum value of CBR in both soaked and unsoaked condition, when natural soil of low compressibility is stabilized by Rice Husk Ash after obtaining the optimum percentage of Rice Husk Ash i.e. 20% then polypropylene fiber is added in the in the mix and it has been foun that 0.75% of polypropylene gives best result with 20% Rice Husk Ash, by the help of CBR test result. CHAPTER – 5
ConclusionReferencesAndrzej K. Bledzki , Abdullah A. Mamun and Jürgen Volk “Physical, chemical and surface properties of wheat husk, rye husk and soft wood and their polypropylene composites” online available at science direct.com
A. S. Soganc “The Effect of Polypropylene Fiber in the Stabilization of Expansive Soils” World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology International Journal of Environmental, Chemical, Ecological, Geological and Geophysical Engineering Vol:9, No:8, 2015
Chaosheng Tang, Bin Shi, Wei Gao, Fengjun Chen, Yi Cai, “Strength and mechanical behaviour of short polypropylene fibre reinforced and cement stabilized clayey soil” Geotextiles and Geomembranes, pp 194 – 202, 2006.

Jesna Varghese, Remya.U. R , et al., “The Effect of Polypropylene Fibre on the Behaviour of Soil Mass with Reference to the Strength Parameters” Vol. 5 Issue 03, March-2016 International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT), ISSN: 2278-0181
Mona Malekzadeh and Huriye Bilsel, Effect of Polypropylene Fiber of Mechanical Behaviour of Expansive Soils, EJGE,Vol. 17 2012, Bund. A
Mr. Santosh and Prof. Vishwanath C.S. “Stabilization of Expansive Soil by using Wheat Husk Ash and Granulated Blast Furnace Slag” IJSRD – International Journal for Scientific Research & Development| Vol. 3, Issue 04, 2015 | ISSN (online): 2321-0613
N. Vijaya Kumar, M.M.M.Sarcar, K. Ramji and, V.Geetha “Evaluation of wear properties of industrial waste (Slag) reinforced polypropylene composites” International Journal on Theoretical and Applied Research in Mechanical Engineering (IJTARME), ISSN (Print): 2319-3182, Volume -3, Issue-1, January, 2014
Pramod S. Patil, J.R. Mali, Ganesh V. Tapkire, H. R. Kumavat,”Innovative techniques of waste plastic used in concrete mixture” International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology,volume-3, issue-9 e-ISSN: 2319-1163, p-ISSN: 2321-7308.

Somnath Shil et. al.; “Permeability and Volume Change Behaviour of Soil Stabilized with Fly ash”; International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT); ISSN: 2278-0181;IJERTV4IS020659 www.ijert.org; Vol. 4 Issue 02, February-2015
Anu.K et. al. “Stabilization of soft clay soil using Fly ash and Lime stone dust”; International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 7, Issue 5, May-2016 18 ISSN 2229-5518
Prasad P. Dahale et. al. “Utilization of Solid Waste for Soil Stabilization: A Review”; EJGE; Vol. 17; 2012.
T.Subramani et. al.; “Natural Fibre As Soil Stabilizer For Construction”; International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM); www.ijaiem.org;Volume 6, Issue 5, May 2017 ISSN 2319 – 4847
T.B.C.H. Dissanayake et. al. “Comparison of the Stabilization Behavior of Fly Ash and Bottom Ash Treated Expansive Soil”; ENGINEER – Vol. L, No. 01, pp. page range, 2017.

Kunal Anand et. al.; “A Comparative Study B/W Black Cotton Soil and Alluvial Soil for Economical Pavement Design by Lime & Fly-Ash Stabilization”; Journal of Engineering Research and Applications www.ijera.com ISSN : 2248-9622, Vol. 3, Issue 5, Sep-Oct 2013, pp.1609-1620
Muske Srujan Teja et. al.; “SOIL STABILIZATION BY USING FLY ASH”; 12th international conference on recent trends in engineering, science and management; IETE Hyderabad, November 2017.

P. Venkara Muthyalu et. al.; “STUDY ON PERFORMANCE OF CHEMICALLY STABILIZED EXPANSIVE SOIL”; International Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, Jan 2012.

Gyanen. Takhelmayum et. al. “Laboratory Study on Soil Stabilization Using Fly ash Mixtures”; International Journal of Engineering Science and Innovative Technology (IJESIT) Volume 2, Issue 1, January 2013.

Karthik.S et. al.; “Soil Stabilization By Using Fly Ash”; IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering (IOSR-JMCE) e-ISSN: 2278-1684,p-ISSN: 2320-334X, Volume 10, Issue 6 (Jan. 2014), PP 20-26
Sudipta Adhikary et. al.; “POTENTIALS OF RICE-HUSK ASH AS A SOIL STABILIZER”; International Journal of Latest Research in Engineering and Technology (IJLRET); ISSN: 2454-5031 www.ijlret.com;Volume 2, Issue 2, February 2016, PP 40-48.

Sunil Kumar Thakur et.al.; “A Comparative Study of Stabilization on Sub-Grade Soil by Using Rice Husk Ash in Different Combinations A Comparative Study of Stabilization on Sub-Grade Soil by Using Rice Husk Ash in Different Combinations”; 2017 IJEDR, Volume 5, Issue 4, ISSN: 2321-9939.
B Kanddulna et. al. “Experimental Study of Clayey Soil with Lime and Rice Husk Ash”; Inte rnational Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) – Volume 38 Number 7- August 2016.

Vikash Kumar Singh et. al. “Experimental Study of Stabilization on Natural Soil Subgrade using Rice Husk Ash”; IJSRD – International Journal for Scientific Research & Development; Vol. 3, Issue 11, 2016; ISSN (online): 2321-0613.

Pravin Patel et. al. “A Experimental Study of Black Cotton Soil, Stabilized with Rice Husk Ash, Fly Ash and Lime”; International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT); ISSN: 2278-0181; Vol. 3 Issue 11, November-2014.

Plagiarism ReportS.No. Chapter Matched Percentage Unique Percentage
1 Abstract 00 100
2 I – Introduction 10 90
3 II – Literature Review 14 86
4 III – Material and Methods 05 95
5 IV – Result and Discussion 05 95
6 VI – Conclusion 00 100
Total Average Unique Percentage 94.33

Post Author: admin