Abstract

In this study, the effect of up to 4 % calcium sulfate contamination on the soil properties of a natural clay with low liquid limit (CL) soil with and without polymer treatment was investigated and compared to 6 % lime treated soil. X-ray diffraction (XRD) and thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) methods were used to identify and quantify the changes in the contaminated CL clay soil. XRD analyses showed the major constituents of the soil were calcium silicate (CaSiO3), aluminum silicate (Al2SiO5), magnesium silicate (MgSiO3), and quartz (SiO2). With 4 % calcium sulfate contamination, the liquid limit (LL) and plasticity index (PI) of the CL soil increased by 30 and 45 %, respectively. The addition of calcium sulfate resulted in the formation of calcium silicate sulfate (Ternesite Ca5(SiO4)2SO4) and aluminum silicate sulfate (Al5(SiO4)2SO4). TGA analyses showed a notable reduction in the weight of calcium sulfate contaminated soil between 600 and 800°C, possibly due to changes in soil mineralogy. In addition, the total weight loss at 800°C for 1.5 % polymer treated soil was about 40 % less than the 4 % calcium sulfate contaminated soil, and it was similar to the weight loss observed in the uncontaminated CL soil. The maximum dry density of compacted soil decreased and the optimum moisture content increased with 4 % of calcium sulfate. The addition of 4 % calcium sulfate increased the free swelling of compacted soil by 67 %. The addition of 6 % lime resulted in the formation of ettringite (Ca6Al2 (SO4)3(OH)12·26H2O). Polymer treatment decreased the LL, PI, swelling index, and optimum moisture content of the soil and increased the compacted maximum dry density. Behavior of sulfate contaminated CL soil with and without treatment was quantified using a unique model that represented both linear and nonlinear responses. Also the model predictions were compared with published data in the literature.

References

1.
Isenhower
,
W. M.
, “
Book Review: Expansive Soils—Problems and Practice in Foundation and Pavement Engineering
,”
Int. J. Numer. Anal. Methods Geomech.
, Vol.
17
, No.
10
,
1999
, pp.
745
746
.
2.
Mitchell
,
K.
, “
Practical Problems for Surprising Soil Behavior
,”
J. Geotech. Eng.
, Vol.
112
, No.
3
,
1986
, pp.
259
289
. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1986)112:3(255))
3.
Mohammed
,
A.
and
Vipulanandan
,
C.
, “
Compressive and Tensile Behavior of Polymer Treated Sulfate Contaminated CL Soil
,”
Geotech. Geol. Eng. J.
, Vol.
32
, No.
1
,
2014
, pp.
71
83
. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-013-9692-9
4.
Solanki
,
P.
and
Zaman
,
M.
, “
Laboratory Performance Evaluation of Subgrade Soils Stabilized With Sulfate – Bearing Cementitious Additives
,”
J. Test. Eval.
, Vol.
38
, No.
1
,
2009
, pp.
1
12
. https://doi.org/10.1520/JTE102378
5.
Arvind
,
K.
,
Walia
,
B.
, and
Bajaj
,
A.
, “
Influence Of Fly Ash, Lime and Polyester Fibers on Compaction and Strength Properties of Expansive Soil
,”
J. Mater. Civ. Eng.
, Vol.
19
, No.
3
,
2007
, pp.
242
248
. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2007)19:3(242)
6.
McCarthy
,
J.
,
Csetenyi
,
J.
,
Sachdeva
,
A.
, and
Dhir
,
K.
, “
Identifying the Role of Fly Ash Properties for Minimizing Sulfate-Heave in Lime-Stabilized Soils
,”
Fuel
, Vol.
92
, No.
1
,
2012
, pp.
27
36
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2011.07.009
7.
Michael
,
M.
,
Laszlo
,
C.
,
Jones
,
M.
, and
Sachdeva
,
A.
, “
Clay-Lime Stabilization: Characterizing Fly Ash Effects in Minimizing the Risk of Sulfate Heave
,”
World of Coal Ash (WOCA) Conference
, Denver, CO, May 9–12,
2011
,
WOCA
,
Lexington, KY
, pp.
1
15
.
8.
Cerato
,
A.
, and
Miller
,
G.
, “
Calcium-Based Stabilizer Induced Heave in Oklahoma Sulfate Bearing Soils
,”
Final Report No. FHWA-OK-11-03,
FHWA
,
Washington, D.C.
,
1999
.
9.
Mitchell
,
K.
and
Dermatas
,
D.
, “
Clay Soil Heave Caused by Lime-Sulfate Reactions
,”
Innovations in Uses for Lime, ASTM STP 1135
,
Walker
D. D.
,
Hardy
T. B.
,
Hoffman
D. C.
, and
Stanley
D. D.
,
ASTM International
,
West Conshohocken, PA
,
1992
, pp.
41
64
.
10.
Little
,
D.
,
Syam
,
N.
, and
Herbert
,
B.
, “
Addressing Sulfate-Induced Heave in Lime Treated Soils
,”
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.
, Vol.
136
, No.
1
,
2010
, pp.
110
118
. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000185
11.
Sivapullaiah
,
P.
,
Sridharan
,
A.
, and
Ramesh
,
H. N.
, “
Strength Behavior of Lime Treated Soils in the Presence of Sulphate
,”
Can. Geotech. J.
, Vol.
37
, No.
6
,
2002
, pp.
1358
1367
. https://doi.org/10.1139/t00-052
12.
Azam
,
S.
,
Abduljauwad
,
S.
,
Al-Shayea
,
N.
, and
Al-Amoudi
,
O.
, “
Effects of Calcium Sulfate on Swelling Potential of an Expansive Clay
,”
Geotech. Test. J.
, Vol.
23
, No.
4
,
2000
, pp.
389
403
. https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ11060J
13.
Rollings
,
R.
,
Burkes
,
J.
, and
Rollings
,
M.
, “
Sulfate Attack on Cement-Stabilized Sand
,”
Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.
, Vol.
125
, No.
5
,
1999
, pp.
364
372
. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(1999)125:5(364)
14.
Seed
,
B.
, Jr.
,
Woodward
,
J.
, and
Lundgren
,
R.
, “
Prediction of Swelling Potential for Compacted Clays
,”
J. Soil Mech. Found. Div.
, Vol.
88
, No.
3
,
1962
, pp.
53
87
.
15.
Puppala
,
A. J.
,
Wattanasanticharoen
,
E.
, and
Punthutaecha
,
K.
, “
Experimental Evaluations of Stabilization Methods for Sulphate-Rich Expansive Soils
,”
Ground Improve.
, Vol.
7
, No.
1
,
2003
, pp.
25
35
. https://doi.org/10.1680/grim.2003.7.1.25
16.
Hunter
,
D.
, “
Lime-Induced Heave in Sulfate-Bearing Clay Soils
,”
J. Geotech. Eng.
, Vol.
114
, No.
2
,
1988
, pp.
150
167
. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1988)114:2(150)
17.
Harris
,
P.
,
Scuillion
,
T.
, and
Stephen
,
S.
, “
Hydrated Lime Stabilization of Sulfate-Bearing Soils in Texas
,”
Report No. FHWA/TX-04/0-4240-2
,
Texas Department of Transportation
,
Austin, TX
,
2004
.
18.
Al-Mukhtar
,
M.
,
Khattab
,
S.
, and
Alcover
,
J.
, “
Microstructure and Geotechnical Properties of Lime-Treated Expansive Clayey Soil
,”
Eng. Geol.
, Vols.
139–140
,
2012
, pp.
17
27
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2012.04.004
19.
Harris
,
P.
,
Holdt
,
J.
,
Sebesta
,
S.
, and
Scullion
,
T.
, “
Recommendations for Stabilization of High Sulfate Soils in Texas
,”
Report No. FHWA/TX-06/0-4240-3
,
Texas Department of Transportation
,
Austin, TX
,
2005
.
20.
Gerald
,
A.
, “
Sulfate Induced Heave in Oklahoma Soils Due to Lime Stabilization
,”
Proceedings of GeoCongress: Characterization, Monitoring, and Modeling GeoSystems. GSP 179
, New Orleans, LA, March 9–12, 2000, ASCE, Reston, VA, pp.
444
451
.
21.
Rajasekharan
,
G.
and
Rao
,
S.
, “
Sulphate Attack in Lime—Treated Marine Clay, Marine
,”
Georesour. Geotechnol.
, Vol.
23
, Nos.
1–2
,
2005
, pp.
93
116
. https://doi.org/10.1080/10641190590944926
22.
ASTM D698-12e2
:
Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Standard Effort (12 400 ft-lbf/ft3 (600 kN-m/m3))
,
ASTM International
,
West Conshohocken, PA
,
2012
, www.astm.org.
23.
ASTM D2435/D2435M-11
:
Standard Test Methods for One-Dimensional Consolidation Properties of Soils Using Incremental Loading
,
ASTM International
,
West Conshohocken, PA
,
2011
, www.astm.org.
24.
ASTM D4546-14
:
Standard Test Methods for One-Dimensional Swell or Collapse of Soils
,
ASTM International
,
West Conshohocken, PA
,
2014
, www.astm.org.
25.
Usluogullari
,
O.
and
Vipulanandan
,
C.
, “
Stress-Strain Behavior and California Bearing Ratio of Artificially Cemented Sand
,”
J. Test. Eval.
, Vol.
39
, No.
4
,
2011
, pp.
1
9
. https://doi.org/10.1520/JTE103165
26.
Grim
,
R.
,
Clay Mineralogy
, 2nd ed.,
McGraw Hill
,
New York
,
1968
.
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.