Full Length Research Paper - IJSRPUB · Sample preparation PALM KERNEL SHELL ASH (PKSA) – This is...

International Journal of Scientific Research in Knowledge, 3(11), pp. 0288-296, 2015

Available online at http://www.ijsrpub.com/ijsrk

ISSN: 2322-4541; ©2015; Author(s) retain the copyright of this article

http://dx.doi.org/10.12983/ijsrk-2015-p0288-0296

288

Full Length Research Paper

Potentials of Non-Cementitious Additives for Stabilization of Oye Local Government

Area Soil, Ekiti State, Nigeria

Adeyemi Ezekiel Adetoro, Olubunmi Sunday Faluyi

Department of Civil Engineering, the Federal Polytechnic, Ado-Ekiti, Nigeria

*Corresponding Author: Phone No. - +234(0)8105586254; E-mail: [email protected]

Received 24 September 2015; Accepted 08 December 2015

Abstract. From time immemorial, Soil Stabilization has been in existence and is of different processes. Though its usage is

very usual in developed world. The use of Non – cementitous Stabilization in developing Countries such as Nigeria will help in

optimization of “Waste to Wealth Policy”. Thus improve foster proper watse disposal and management and raise of standard of

living. In this study, the study area soil samples A, B, C and D were treated with two non - cementitious additives (i.e. Sawdust

Ash and Palm Kernel Shell Ash) at 0%, 2%, 4%, 6% and 8% proportions (by the soil weight) for stabilization potentials

purpose. Laboratory tests such as Particle Size Analysis, Atterberg Limits and Compaction tests were conducted before and

after mixing (i.e. treated and untreated soils). The results showed that Liquid Limit, Plasticity Index and Maximum Dry

Density (except Sample B) values increased as the additives contents increased. The soil general rating for subgrade materials

remains the same as “excellent to good”, though the group classifications change from “A – 1 – b” (Samples C and D) and “A

– 2 – 4” (Samples A and B) to “A – 2 – 6” (which is inferior). The non – cementitious additives have negative effects on the

soil indices properties, thus make the soil less suitable for construction purpose after application.

Keywords: Atterberg Limits; Liquid Limit; Maximum Dry Density; Non-cementitious; Palm Kernel Shell Ash; Plasticity

Index; SawDust Ash

1. INTRODUCTION

Awkward difficulties always arise in Civil

Engineering works when the infrastructure foundation

is found to comprise of expansive or problematic soil.

These are soils with high clay mineral contents with

abilities to swell whenever there is presence of

moisture content in it. Most properties of these soils

could be improved through Soil Stabilization

processes. The cogent purpose of Soil Stabilization is

to have a suitable physical grading for the soil and / or

enhance some other physical properties of the soil e.g.

Strength, stability, water resistance etc (Abood, 2007;

Amu et al., 2008; Onyelowe, 2013).

Soil Stabilization is as old as time and not new in

the World of today. Soil Stabilization can be defined

as an approach whereby unusual soil, a bonding

material or other compound materials are added to

natural soil or an expertise use on a natural soil to

enhance one or more of its properties. Stabilization of

soil could be achieved mainly by mixing the natural

soil and the stabilizing agents/materials together or

through addition of the agents /materials to the soil,

thus allow it to penetrate the soil voids. Soil

Stabilization or Modification is also known as Soil

Reinforcement (Abood, 2007; Onyelowe, 2013).

According to Onyelowe (2013), there are many

Soil Stabilization methods that have been used over

years and the most frequently used ones are

Mechanical Soil Stabilization which comprises of

compaction, dewatering etc. Chemical Soil

Stabilization which comprises of use of lime, cement,

fly ash, bitumen, etc as stabilizing agents. They are

also called Cementitious additives and could enhance

moisture content, particle cohesion, cementing and

water proofing agents of the soil. Geosynthetic

Stabilization which comprises of using geotextiles,

geogrids, geonets, geomembranes, geopipes etc in

reinforcing the soil. And Non – Cementitious

Additives Soil Stabilization which comprises of using

Quarry dust, Egg-shell ash, Rice husk ash, Sugar cane

ash, Palm kernel ash, Saw dust ash etc. as stabilizing

agents. These additives have abilities of improving

the geophysical properties of soil at lower cost. They

are always used to improve the properties of less

desirable road soils (Abood, 2007; Amu et al., 2008;

Amin, 2012; Onyelowe, 2013).

Non-cementitious additives are usually derived

from waste materials especially agricultural ones.

mailto:[email protected]

Adetoro and Faluyi

Potentials of Non-Cementitious Additives for Stabilization of Oye Local Government Area Soil, Ekiti State, Nigeria

289

Practical and effective uses of these agricultural waste

materials in Soil Stabilization keep them from being

used for land or environmental degradation. Thereby

help in saving the already reduced land space. These

also help in proper disposal and management of the

agricultural waste products (Abood, 2007; Amu et al.,

2008; Amin, 2012; Onyelowe, 2013).

From the above explanation, there are reasons or

justification for using the cheaper additives (i.e. non –

cementitious additives) in altering or improving soil

properties. The past research works of Qasim et al,

2015; Orie and Omokhiboria, 2014; Vishwanath,

2014; Armin and Kalantari, 2013; Fauzi et al, 2013;

Ismaeil, 2013; Amin, 2012; Tastan et al, 2011; Amu et

al., 2008 among others investigated extensively into

the practical applications of the waste and recycled

materials as soil stabilizers in Civil Engineering

construction.

In this study, assessment of potentials of non -

cementitous available additives such as SawDust Ash

(SDA) and Palm Kernel Shell Ash (PKSA) on

Geotechnical properties of Ekiti State soil would be

carried out. These additives are in large quantities in

the study area and its environment. It will also help in

acquisition of technical information / data for Ekiti

State soil, which will help in establishing the

additives’ suitability for Soil Stabilization purpose (s).

Changes in the Geotechnical properties of Ekiti State

Soil especially the study area as a result of addition of

these additives were studied; conclusion and

recommendations on their construction application

were inferred.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1. Study Area

The study area is Oye Local Government Area (LGA)

situated around Lat. 7.86441ON and Long. 5.33679OE

as shown in Fig.1 and was created out of the defunct

Ekiti North LGA on 17th of May, 1989 to be one of

the sixteen LGAs in Ekiti state, South-western part of

Nigeria on its creation. Its Council Secretariat

Headquarter is within Oye town. The LGA is bounded

by Ilejemeje LGA to the North, Irepodun/Ifelodun

LGA to the South, Ikole LGA to the East and Ido/Osi

LGA to the West (EKSDICT, 2015).

According to Adetoro and Adam (2015), Ekiti

State, where the study area is situated, is on ancient

metamorphic rocks of the Precambrian basement

complex of Southwestern part of Nigeria. There are

large variations in grain size and mineral composition

of the basement complex rocks. The rocks consist of

quartz gneisses and schists essentially of quartz with

small amounts of white mizageous minerals, strongly

foliated and occur as outcrops. The rocks’ grain size

and structure vary from very coarse-grained pegmatite

to medium-grained gneisses. The weathering products

of the basement complex rock are soils in which

majority are well drained with medium to coarse

texture.

Fig. 1: Location of the Study area – Oye LGA (Source: Google, 2015)


290

2.2. Sample preparation

PALM KERNEL SHELL ASH (PKSA) – This is a

secondary product from the burning of palm kernel

shells under a controlled temperature. Palm kernel

shell is an economic waste, highly available in

considerable amount in the southwestern part of

Nigeria. PKSA consists of very low ash and sulphur -

approximately 3% and 0.09% by weight contents

respectively. The PKSA used for the study was sieved

with 75μmm sieve cell (Adetoro and Adam, 2015).

SAWDUST ASH (SDA) – This is an economic

waste produced from the burning of clean sawmill

dust (produced during wood processing into different

shapes and sizes) under a controlled temperature.

SDA is pozzolanic in configuration especially the one

produced from clean sawdust (i.e. without a large

amount of bark). The SDA used for the study was

sieved with 75μmm sieve cell (Adetoro and Adam,

2015).

Soil samples were taken from trial pits at depth of

about 2m in the study area using disturbed method of

sampling. The location of the samples with their

respective chainages and coordinates were shown in

table 1. The soil samples taken were stored in

polythene bags to prevent loss of moisture contents

and then taken to the laboratory where the dangerous

and unusable materials were removed. The samples

were then air dried, pulverized with mortar and pestle

and sieved in other to remove large particles.

The non – cementitious additives (i.e. PKSA and

SDA) were mixed with the soil samples in the

proportion of 0% to 8% and some laboratory tests

were conducted on the treated / mixed samples in

accordance with BS 1377 (1990) standard methods.

The tests conducted on the soil samples were

Atterberg limits, Compaction and Particle size

analysis. The tests results were analyzed and

correlations were established among them. Then the

results were compared and grouped in accordance

with FMWH (1997) and AASHTO (1986) standard

specified values.

Table 1: Details of the location of the Soil Samples taken

Table 2: Summary of Particle Size distribution Test Results for the Untreated Soil Samples

Adetoro and Faluyi


291

2.3. Laboratory determinations

ATTERBERG LIMITS TESTS - These tests are also

called Consistency tests and comprises of Liquid

Limit (LL), Plastic Limit (PL) and Plasticity Index

(PI). They usually help in evaluation of soil samples

natural response to moisture (i.e. water) (Adetoro and

Adam, 2015; BS 1377, 1990).

COMPACTION - The importance of this test is to

establish facts about Optimum Moisture Content

(OMC) and Maximum Dry Density (MDD) of the soil

samples. Standard Proctor type of Compaction test

was used in this study (Adetoro and Adam, 2015).

In this study, Atterberg Limits and Compaction

tests were conducted on the treated and untreated soil

samples.

PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS – The essence of

this test is to analyze and group the soil particles or

grain into various sizes - clay, gravel and sand

proportions. It also helps in ascertaining the relative

proportion by mass of the soil samples at untreated

state. The results of this test are usually used in

classifying soil samples in accordance with (Adetoro

and Adam, 2015; BS 1377, 1990).

Fig. 3: Graphs of the Particle Size Analysis Tests for the Untreated Soil Samples

Table 3: Properties of the Natural Soil before Stabilization

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Table 2 showed results of particle size distribution test

for the untreated soil samples. It showed that the

untreated soil samples have less percentages finer than

0.0075 fractions (i.e. <35%), which varied between

7.0% and 33.4%. The average percentages of sand and

gravel were 24.6% and 44.55% respectively. These

results implied that the soil has large content of

granular materials. From Table 2, graphs were plotted

for the Particle Size Distribution test results as shown

in Fig. 2. From the graph, it can be seen that soil

samples A and B values of fine sand (i.e. 0.075 -

0.475mm) were greater than the upper specified limit.


292

This implied that soil samples A and B have more fine

sands than required. Soil samples C and D values of

coarse sand (i.e. 2.36mm) were lower than the lower

specified limit. This implied that soil samples C and D

have lesser coarse sands than required. Soil sample C

value(s) of gravel (i.e. 4.75 – 9.50mm) is greater than

the upper specified limit. This implied that soil sample

C has more gravel / boulders than required.

Table 3: Summary of the Tests Results for the Treated Soil Samples

Fig. 3: Graphs of the Liquid Limits Tests for the Treated Soil Samples

Table 3 showed Geotechnical Indices properties of

the untreated soil samples before its stabilization

using the non-cementitious additives (i.e. addition of

PKSA and SDA additives). In accordance with [16]

using the available data from Table 3, the untreated

soil samples could be generally classified as granular

soils. Soil samples A and B fell under group

classification of A - 2 – 4 while soil samples C and D

fell under group classification of A – 1 - b. The

general rating of all the soil samples as sub-grade

materials is excellent to good. Though that of C and D

(i.e. A – 1 – b) were better than that of A and B (A – 2

– 4). Soil samples A and B have significant

constituent materials of Silty or Clayey gravel and

sand while soil samples C and D have significant

constituent materials of Stone fragments, gravel and

sand. These soil samples met the required

specifications for subgrade (i.e. LL ≤ 80%, PI ≤ 55%),

subbase and base (i.e. LL ≤ 35% and PI ≤ 12%)

course materials in their liquid limits (LL) and

Adetoro and Faluyi


293

plasticity indices (PI), but fail to meet up the

requirements for the maximum dry density (i.e. MDD

>1760Kg/m3 for Subgrade and MDD > 2000Kg/m3

for Subbase and Base) except soil sample C (Subgade

only).

It could also be observed from Table 3 that OMC

values varied between 11.59% and 18.00%. This

portrayed that the moisture content in the study area is

very high compared to specified values in accordance

with FMWH (1997) and AASHTO (1986). Table 4

showed results of Atterberg Limits and Compaction

tests for the treated soil samples (i.e. tests on variation

of soil samples with the non-cementitious additives

contents (PKSA and SDA contents).

From Table 4, graphs were plotted for LL values

against Non-cementitious additives contents (AC) for

all the treated soil samples as shown in Fig. 3. It can

be observed from the graphs that LL values increase

as the Non-cementitious additives contents increase.

Maximum LL value has increased from 15.42%

(untreated soil) to 35.07% (PKSA treated soil sample

D @ 6%) and 35.13% (SDA treated soil A @ 4%).

This showed that the percentages of finer particles

than 0.075mm of the soil samples have increased

which make the soil less better (or poor) as explained

by (Ugwu, 2014; Osula, 1999; Ola, 1975). From Table

4, graphs were plotted for PI values against Non-

cementitious additives contents (AC) for all the

treated soil samples as shown in Fig. 4. It can be

observed from the graphs that PI values increase as

the Non-cementitious additives contents increase.

Maximum PI value has increased from 5.72%

(untreated soil) to 24.57% (PKSA treated soil sample

D @ 6%) and 27.83% (SDA treated soil sample A @

4%). This showed that the cohesive qualities of the

binder resulting from the clay or fine contents have

increased as explained by (Ugwu, 2014; Osinubi and

Katte, 1997). It also portrayed the re-classification of

the soil samples in accordance with AASHTO (1986)

now fell under group classification ranges of A – 2

soils.

Fig. 4: Graphs of the Plasticity Index Tests for the Treated Soil Samples

Fig. 5: Graphs of the Maximum Dry Density Tests for the Treated Soil Samples


294

Generally from Table 4, Figs. 3 and 4; it can be

observed that at maximum values of LL and PI for all

the treated soil samples, all the soil samples now fell

under group classification of A – 2 – 6. Though their

general rating as subgrade materials is still excellent

to poor, but all of them were no longer suitable for

subbase and base course materials as they failed to

meet up the required specifications for LL and PI

values (i.e. LL ≤ 35% and PI ≤ 12%).

From Table 4, graphs were plotted for MDD

values against Non-cementitious additives contents

(AC) for all the treated soil samples as shown in Fig.

5. It can be observed from the graph that MDD values

increase as the Non-cementitious additives contents

increase for soil samples A, C and D. This is due to

coating of the soil particles by the additives. While

MDD values decrease as the Non-cementitious

additives contents increase for soil samples B. This is

due to replacements of the soil sample fine particles

by the additives fine particles which are of lower

Specific Gravities (Ugwu, 2014; Osinubi and Katte,

1997).

4. CONCLUSION

Generally from the above results analyses and

discussion, it could be observed that the soil general

rating for subgrade materials remain the same as

“excellent to good”, though the group classifications

change from “A – 1 – b” (Samples C and D) and “A –

2 – 4” (Samples A and B) to “A – 2 – 4” (which is

inferior). The non – cementitious additives have

negative effects on the soil indices properties, thus

make the soil less suitable for construction purpose.

This is buttressed by increase in LL and PI which

portrayed increase in fine particles (i.e. clay content)

of the soil. Though it appeared some portion of the

soil (i.e. A, C and D) in the study area improves when

it comes to compaction. Though the soil moisture

content of the study area still remains high.

REFERENCES

Abood TT, Kasa AB, Chik ZB (2007). Stabilization of

Silty Clay Soil using Chloride Compounds.

Journal of Engineering Science and

Technology, 2(1): 102-110.

Adetoro EA, Adam JO (2015). Analysis of Influences

of Locally Available Additives on Geotechnical

Properties OF Ekiti State Soil, Southwestern,

Nigeria. International Journal of Innovative

Research in Science, Engineering and

Technology (IJIRSET), 4(8): 7093-7099.

American Association of State Highway and

Transportation Officials (AASHTO) (1986).

Standard Specification for Transportation

Materials and Methods of Sampling and

Testing (14th ed.). USA: Washington DC,

AASHTO.

Amin ER (2012). A Review on the Soil Stabilization

using Low Cost Methods. Journal of Applied

Sciences Research, 8(4): 2193-2196.

Amu OO, Adeyeri JB, Haastrup AO, Eboru AA

(2008). Effects of Palm Kernel Shell in Lateritic

Soil for Asphalt Stabilization. Research Journal

of Environmental Science, 2(2): 132-138.

Armin R, Kalantari B (2013). Stabilization of Clayey

Soil with Lime and Waste Stone Powder.

International Journal of Scientific Research in

Knowledge (IJSRK), 1(12): 547-556.

British Standard 1377 (BS 1377) (1990). British

Standard Methods of Test for Soils for Civil

Engineering Purposes. UK: London, British

Standards Institution.

Ekiti State Directorate of ICT (EKSDICT) (2105).

The Official Website of the Government of

Ekiti State, Nigeria. Available:

https://ekitistate.gov.ng/administration/local-

govt/efon-lga/.

Europa Technologies (2015). Google Earth 2010.

Available: http://earth.google.com/.

Fauzi AA, Abdulrahman MN, Jauhari Z (2013).

Utilization Waste Material as Stabilizer on

Kuantan Clayey Soil Stabilization. Procedia

Engineering, 53: 42-47.

Federal Ministry of Works and Housing (FMWH)

(1997). General Specification (Roads and

Bridges) – Revised Edition (Volume II),

Nigeria. FCT, Abuja: Federal Ministry of

Works.

Ismaiel HAH (2013). Cement Kiln Dust Chemical

Stabilization of Expansive Soil at El-Kawther

Quarter, Sohag Region, Egypt. International

Journal of Geosciences, 4: 1416-1424.

Ola SA (1975). Stabilization of Nigeria Lateritic Soil

with cement, Bitumen and Lime, Proc. Sixth

Reg. Conf., Africa on soil Mechanic and

Foundation Engineering, Dueban, South Africa.

Onyelowe KC (2012). Soil Stabilization Techniques

and Procedures in the Developing Countries -

Nigeria. Global Journal of Engineering and

Technology, 5(1): 65-69.

Orie OU, Omokhiboria OJ (2014). Mechanical

Properties of Eggshell and Palm Oil Fuel Ashes

Cement Blended Concrete. Research Journal in

Engineering and Applied Sciences, 3(6): 401-

405.

Osinubi KJ, Katte VY (1997). Effect of Elapsed Time

after Mixing Gram Size and Plasticity

Characteristics, I: Solid- Line Mixes, NSE

Technical Transactions, 33, 4.

https://ekitistate.gov.ng/administration/local-govt/efon-lga/

https://ekitistate.gov.ng/administration/local-govt/efon-lga/

http://earth.google.com/

Adetoro and Faluyi


295

Osula DOA (1999). Lime Modification of Problem

Laterite. Engineering Geology, 30: 142- 149.

Qasim MB, Tanvir AM, Anees MM (2015). Effects of

Rice Husk on Soil Stabilization. Bulletin of

Energy Economics, 3(1): 10-17.

Tastan EO, Edil TB, Benson CH, Aydilek AH (2011).

Stabilization of Organic Soils with Fly Ash.

Journal of Geotechnical and Geo-environmental

Engineering, 137(9): 819-833.

Ugwu EI, Famuyibo DA (2014). Analysis of the

Effect of Blending Nigeria Pure Clay with Rice

Husk: A Case Study of Ekulu Clay in Enugu

State. American Journal of Materials

Engineering and Technology, 2(3): 34-37.

Vishwanath G, Pramod KR, Ramesh V (2014). Peat

Soil Stabilization with Rice Husk and Lime

Powder. International Journal of Innovation

and Scientific Research, 9(2): 225-227.


296

Engr. Adetoro Adeyemi Ezekiel obtained his first degree from the Federal Polytechnic, Bida, Nigeria

in Civil Engineering in 1998 and Postgraduate Diploma in Civil Engineering fron the Federal

University of Technology, Akure, Nigeria in 2005. He later bagged Master degree in Civil

Engineering from University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands in 2011. Presently, Engr Adetoro is a

lecturer in Civil Engineering Department of the Federal Polytechnic, Ado – Ekiti, Nigeria and has

published many refereed articles in professional journals and conference proceedings. Engr. Adetoro

specializes in Environmental, Geo and Transportation Engineering.

Engr. Faluyi Olubunmi Sunday obtained his first degree from University of Lagos, Lagos, Nigeria in

Civil Engineering in 1986. He later bagged Master degree in Civil Engineering from the Federal

University of Technology, Akure, Nigeria in 2000. Presently, Engr Faluyi is a Chief lecturer and

former Head of Department in Civil Engineering Department of the Federal Polytechnic, Ado – Ekiti,

Nigeria and has published many refereed articles in professional journals and conference proceedings.

Engr. Faluyi specializes in Transportation Engineering.

Full Length Research Paper - IJSRPUB · Sample preparation PALM KERNEL SHELL ASH (PKSA) – This is...

Documents

Transcript of Full Length Research Paper - IJSRPUB · Sample preparation PALM KERNEL SHELL ASH (PKSA) – This is...