Effect of Curing Time on Lime-Stabilized Sandy Soil against Internal Erosion
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Research Significance
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Material Properties
3.2. Soil Specimen Preparation
3.3. Experimental Testing Process of the Soil Specimens
3.4. Data Analysis Procedure
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. Effect of Curing Time on Diameter of Water Flow Path (Hole)
4.2. Effect of Curing Time on Critical Erosion Stress
4.3. Effect of Curing Time on Erosion Rate Index (IHET)
4.4. Erosion Parameters and Type of Internal Erosion of Soil #1 and Soil #2
5. Conclusions
- Lime was found to be an effective stabilizing agent for sandy soil against internal erosion.
- A higher amount of lime reduces the final diameter of the water flow path (φf) for both poorly graded and well-graded sandy soil.
- A higher percentage of lime increases the critical erosion stress (τc) and erosion rate index (IHET) values for poorly graded and well-graded sandy soils.
- An increase in curing time led to a substantial reduction in the final diameter of the water flow path (φf) for both types of sandy soil. For poorly graded sandy soil, about a 53.3% reduction in the final diameter of the water flow path (φf) was noticed at 5.0% lime with an increase in curing time from 1 to 2 days. While for well-graded sandy soil, about a 10.0% reduction in the final diameter of the water flow path (φf) was found at 3.0% lime with an increase in curing time from 1 to 2 days.
- A higher curing time resulted in higher critical erosion stress (τc) and erosion rate index (IHET) values for both types of sandy soil. Therefore, a higher curing time resulted in better stabilization of sandy soil until the optimum level of stabilization of sandy soil was reached.
- Poorly graded sandy soil (Soil #1) was determined to be stabilized against internal erosion with about 5.0% of lime (based on the dry weight of the soil) and with a curing time of 2 days. Well-graded sandy soil (Soil #2) required about 3.0% of lime (based on the dry weight of the soil) with a curing time of 2 days.
- At the optimum lime content of 5.0% for poorly and 3.0% for well-graded sandy soil, a curing time beyond 2 days had a negligible effect on the soil stabilization against internal erosion.
- Critical erosion stress for stabilized poorly graded and well-graded sandy soil were 115 N/m2 and 150 N/m2, respectively.
- The erosion rate indices for stabilized poorly graded and well-graded sandy soil were 4.69 (which is a moderately slow type of erosion) and 5.70 (which is a very slow type of erosion), respectively.
- With the increase in lime percentage and curing time, internal erosion of poorly graded sandy soil (Soil #1) improved from a moderately rapid type to a moderately slow type of erosion. On the other hand, internal erosion of well-graded sandy soil (Soil #2) changed from a moderately rapid to a very slow type of erosion with the increase in lime percentage and curing time.
6. Future Work
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Chen, S.H. Introduction. In Hydraulic Structures; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; pp. 1–39. [Google Scholar]
- Attom, M.F.; El-Emam, M.M.; Khan, Z.H.; Vandanapu, R. Reducing the collapsibility of clay using a cement–polymeric fibre admixture. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Ground Improv. 2018, 171, 38–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vandanapu, R.; Omer, J.R.; Attom, M.F. Laboratory simulation of the influence of groundwater rise and drip irrigation on the settlement of a sample of collapsible desert soil. Int. J. Geotech. Eng. 2021, 15, 760–766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vandanapu, R.; Omer, J.R.; Attom, M.F. Three dimensional finite element analyses of ground settlement and structural damage caused by irrigation of desert landscapes overlying collapsible soil strata. Int. J. Geotech. Eng. 2022, 16, 90–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Luthi, M. A Modified Hole Erosion Test (HET-P) to Study Erosion Characteristics of Soil. Master’s Thesis, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Robbins, B.; Griffiths, D. Internal Erosion of Embankments: A review and Appraisal. In Proceedings of the Rocky Mountain Geo-Conference 2018, Golden, CO, USA, 2 November 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Foster, M.; Fell, R.; Spannagle, M. A method for assessing the relative likelihood of failure of embankment dams by piping. Can. Geotech. J. 2000, 37, 1025–1038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hanneman, D. Recent examples of backward erosion piping, internal erosion along a conduit, and embankment cracking at Bureau of Reclamation dams. In Internal Erosion in Embankment Dams and Their Foundations; Routledge: Brno, Czech Republic, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Hodák, J.; Žatecký, S.; Švarc, O. Failures on small dams due to internal erosion. In Internal Erosion in Embankment Dams and Their Foundations; Routledge: Brno, Czech Republic, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Wan, C.F.; Fell, R. Investigation of Rate of Erosion of Soils in Embankment Dams. J. Geotech. Geoenvironmental. Eng. 2004, 130, 373–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Negi, A.S.; Faizan, M.; Siddharth, D.P.; Singh, R. Soil stabilization using lime. Int. J. Innov. Res. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2013, 2, 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Khemissa, M.; Mahamedi, A. Cement and lime mixture stabilization of an expansive overconsolidated clay. Appl. Clay Sci. 2014, 95, 104–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lemaire, K.; Deneele, D.; Bonnet, S.; Legret, M. Effects of lime and cement treatment on the physicochemical, microstructural and mechanical characteristics of a plastic silt. Eng. Geol. 2013, 166, 255–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bessaim, M.M.; Bessaim, A.; Missoum, H.; Bendani, K. Effect of quick lime on physicochemical properties of clay soil. In Proceedings of the MATEC Web of Conferences CMSS-2017, Rabat, Morocco, 22–25 November 2017; EDP Sciences: Paris, France, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Mohamed, S.W.A. Stabilization of Desert Sand Using Water-Borne Polymers; United Arab Emirates University: Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Bogas, J.A.; Silva, M.; Gomes, M.D.G. Unstabilized and stabilized compressed earth blocks with partial incorporation of recycled aggregates. Int. J. Arch. Herit. 2019, 13, 569–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malkanthi, S.; Balthazaar, N.; Perera, A. Lime stabilization for compressed stabilized earth blocks with reduced clay and silt. Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 2020, 12, e00326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Attom, M.; Shatnawi, M.Y. Stabilization of clayey soils using hay material. J. Solid Waste Technol. Manag. 2005, 31, 84–92. [Google Scholar]
- Vakili, A.H.; Ghasemi, J.; bin Selamat, M.R.; Salimi, M.; Farhadi, M.S. Internal erosional behaviour of dispersive clay stabilized with lignosulfonate and reinforced with polypropylene fiber. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 193, 405–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vinod, J.S.; Indraratna, B.; Al Mahamud, M.A. Stabilisation of an erodible soil using a chemical admixture. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Ground Improv. 2010, 163, 43–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Herrier, G.; Chevalier, C.; Froumentin, M.; Cuisinier, O.; Bonelli, S.; Fry, J. Lime treated soil as an erosion-resistant material for hydraulic earthen structures. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Scour and Erosion, Paris, France, 27–31 August 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Baldovino, J.D.J.A.; Izzo, R.L.D.S.; Moreira, E.B.; Rose, J.L. Optimizing the evolution of strength for lime-stabilized rammed soil. J. Rock Mech. Geotech. Eng. 2019, 11, 882–891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Indraratna, B.; Mahamud, M.; Vinod, J.S.; Wijeyakulasuriya, V. Stabilization of an erodible soil using a chemical admixtures. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Geotechnical Engineering, Tunis, Tunisia, 25–27 October 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Nagaraj, H.; Sravan, M.; Arun, T.; Jagadish, K. Role of lime with cement in long-term strength of Compressed Stabilized Earth Blocks. Int. J. Sustain. Built Environ. 2014, 3, 54–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Consoli, N.C.; Lopes, L.D.S., Jr.; Heineck, K.S. Key Parameters for the Strength Control of Lime Stabilized Soils. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2009, 21, 210–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Consoli, N.C.; Da Silva, L., Jr.; Prietto, P.D.M.; Festugato, L.; Cruz, R.C. Variables Controlling Stiffness and Strength of Lime-Stabilized Soils. J. Geotech. Geoenvironmental. Eng. 2011, 137, 628–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Consoli, N.C.; Bittar Marin, E.J.; Quiñónez Samaniego, R.A.; Heineck, K.S.; Johann, A.D.R. Use of Sustainable Binders in Soil Stabilization. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2019, 31, 06018023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karimi, M.; Ghorbani, A.; Daghigh, Y.; Kia, S. Stabilization of Silty Sand Soils with lime and Microsilica Admixture in presence of Sulfates. In Proceedings of the 2011 Pan-Ame CGS Geotechnical Conference—14th Pan-American Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Toronto, ON, Canada, 2–6 October 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Mohamedzein, Y.E.A.; Taha, R.; Aghbari, M.A. Stabilisation of desert sands using cement and cement dust. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Ground Improv. 2009, 162, 145–151. [Google Scholar]
- Rahman, M.; Rashiduzzaman, M.; Akhand, F.Z.; Kabir, K.B. Compressed Stabilized Earth Block: A Green Alternative for Non-load Bearing Building Block in Developing Countries like Bangladesh. Am. Chem. Sci. J. 2016, 12, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maubec, N.; Deneele, D.; Ouvrard, G. Influence of the clay type on the strength evolution of lime treated material. Appl. Clay Sci. 2017, 137, 107–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- SETRA. Traitement Des Sols À La Chaux Et/ou Aux Liants Hydrauliques—Application À La Réalisation Des Assises De Chausses; Guide Technique: Bagneux, France, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Rosone, M.; Megna, B.; Celauro, C. Analysis of the chemical and microstructural modifications effects on the hydro-mechanical behaviour of a lime-treated clay. Int. J. Geotech. Eng. 2019, 15, 447–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Parameters | Soil #1 | Soil #2 |
---|---|---|
Clay (%) | 0 | 4.0 |
Silt (%) | 0.6 | 8.0 |
Sand (%) | 99.4 | 88.0 |
Coefficient of uniformity, Cu | 1.6 | 11.05 |
Coefficient of curvature, Cc | 0.9 | 2.26 |
Specific gravity, Gs | 2.60 | 2.67 |
Maximum dry density, γd,max (kg/m3) | 1690 | 1908 |
Optimum moisture content, ωop (%) | 11.95 | 13.0 |
Classification | Poorly graded sandy soil | Well-graded sandy soil |
Compositions | Specifications (% Weight) |
---|---|
Available lime (as calcium oxide) | Min: 90.00 |
Total calcium oxide (CaO) | Min: 92.20 |
Carbon dioxide (CO2) | Max: 1.80 |
Unburnt calcium carbonate (CaCO3) | Max: 4.10 |
Magnesium oxide (MgO) | Max: 2.00 |
R2O3 (Aluminum oxide (Al2O3) + Iron (III) Oxide (Fe2O3)) | Max: 0.60 |
Silicon dioxide (SiO2) | Max: 1.75 |
Acid insoluble residue | Max: 0.35 |
Loss on ignition (L.O.I) | Max: 3.50 |
Sulphur as SO3 | Max: 0.35 |
Initial temperature rise (degrees Celsius) at 30 s (with lime to water ratio 1:4) | Max: 32 |
Total temperature rise (degrees Celsius) | Max: 50 |
Total active slaking time (minutes) | Max: 3.50 |
Group Number | Erosion Rate | Description |
---|---|---|
1 | <2 | Extremely rapid |
2 | 2–3 | Very rapid |
3 | 3–4 | Moderately rapid |
4 | 4–5 | Moderately slow |
5 | 5–6 | Very slow |
6 | >6 | Extremely slow |
Lime Percent | Erosion Parameters | Curing Time | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
24 h (1 Day) | 48 h (2 Days) | 7 Days | ||
1% | φf (mm) | 33 | 20 | 18.8 |
τc (N/m2) | 85 | 101 | 104 | |
IHET | 3.69 | 4 | 4.301 | |
Description of soil erosion | Moderately rapid | Moderately slow | Moderately slow | |
2% | φf (mm) | 21.5 | 19 | 10 |
τc (N/m2) | 85 | 106.66 | 110 | |
IHET | 4 | 4.22 | 4.522 | |
Description of soil erosion | Moderately slow | Moderately slow | Moderately slow | |
3% | φf (mm) | 19 | 19 | 10 |
τc (N/m2) | 97 | 106.66 | 110 | |
IHET | 4 | 4.22 | 4.522 | |
Description of soil erosion | Moderately slow | Moderately slow | Moderately slow | |
4% | φf (mm) | 12.5 | 11 | 10 |
τc (N/m2) | 100 | 106.66 | 110 | |
IHET | 4.22 | 4.522 | 4.522 | |
Description of soil erosion | Moderately slow | Moderately slow | Moderately slow | |
5% | φf (mm) | 10.5 | 8.1 | 8.1 |
τc (N/m2) | 115 | 115 | 115 | |
IHET | 4.69 | 4.69 | 4.69 | |
Description of soil erosion | Moderately slow | Moderately slow | Moderately slow | |
6% | φf (mm) | 10.3 | 8.1 | 8.1 |
τc (N/m2) | 115 | 115 | 115 | |
IHET | 4.69 | 4.69 | 4.69 | |
Description of soil erosion | Moderately slow | Moderately slow | Moderately slow |
Lime Percent | Erosion Parameters | Curing Time | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
24 h (1 Day) | 48 h (2 Days) | 7 Days | ||
0% | φf (mm) | 15 | 15 | 15 |
τc (N/m2) | 100.5 | 100.5 | 100.5 | |
IHET | 3.69 | 3.69 | 3.69 | |
Description of soil erosion | Moderately rapid | Moderately rapid | Moderately rapid | |
1% | φf (mm) | 8.2 | 8.2 | 8.2 |
τc (N/m2) | 105 | 110 | 110 | |
IHET | 4.69 | 5 | 5 | |
Description of soil erosion | Moderately slow | Very slow | Very slow | |
2% | φf (mm) | 8 | 7.8 | 7.8 |
τc (N/m2) | 133.33 | 140 | 140 | |
IHET | 5.22 | 5.301 | 5.301 | |
Description of soil erosion | Very slow | Very slow | Very slow | |
3% | φf (mm) | 8 | 7.8 | 7.8 |
τc (N/m2) | 140 | 150 | 150 | |
IHET | 5.301 | 5.7 | 5.7 | |
Description of soil erosion | Very slow | Very slow | Very slow |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Banu, S.A.; Attom, M.F. Effect of Curing Time on Lime-Stabilized Sandy Soil against Internal Erosion. Geosciences 2023, 13, 102. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences13040102
Banu SA, Attom MF. Effect of Curing Time on Lime-Stabilized Sandy Soil against Internal Erosion. Geosciences. 2023; 13(4):102. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences13040102
Chicago/Turabian StyleBanu, Shaziya Ahmed, and Mousa Fayiz Attom. 2023. "Effect of Curing Time on Lime-Stabilized Sandy Soil against Internal Erosion" Geosciences 13, no. 4: 102. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences13040102
APA StyleBanu, S. A., & Attom, M. F. (2023). Effect of Curing Time on Lime-Stabilized Sandy Soil against Internal Erosion. Geosciences, 13(4), 102. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences13040102