Performance Evaluation of Biopolymer-treated Black cotton soil

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4932440/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Performance Evaluation of Biopolymer-treated Black cotton soil

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4932440/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

You are reading this latest preprint version

This paper investigates the effect of biopolymers i.e xanthan gum (XG) and gaur gum (GG) for stabilizing black cotton soil. In recent years, it was observed that the usage of biopolymers has significantly reduced environmental effects due to traditional stabilization process. Biopolymers are synthesized products of microorganisms and plants emerging as a suitable alternative to ground improvement. In the current experimental work individual and collective performance of xanthan gum and gaur gum has been observed. The variation of xanthan gum and gaur gum was kept as 2%, 3% and 5% of dry soil weight. The results showed a significant improvement in strength properties of soil. The OMC-MDD relation was assessed through both light and heavy compaction. Maximum dry density showed a noteworthy increment where as the optimum moisture content was found to decrease in case of heavy compaction. The trend was exactly opposite for OMC and MDD in case of light compaction. An increasing trend was observed in consistency limit values with increase in additive percentage. Overall it was observed that xanthan gum showed comparatively better performance than Gaur Gum.

Black cotton soil

biopolymers

unconfined compression test

California bearing ratio test

soil stabilization

ground improvement

The developing world is increasingly concerned about the difficulty of finding adequate land for infrastructure development due to rapid industrialization and population growth. Inadequate land availability and their exorbitant cost for building infrastructure have dramatically increased the demand for working on problematic soil (Rashid et al. 2018). Several methods including chemical stabilization, surface compaction, drainage methods, vibration methods, pre-compression and consolidation, soil confinement, grouting and injection, soil reinforcement, thermal methods, addition or removal of soils have evolved over the past few years for improving the geotechnical properties of soil. One of the most popular methods for improving the quality of the ground is to add different admixtures and additives to the soil to enhance its properties. Cement (Khan et al 2018; Basha et al.2005; Shooshpasha and Shirvani 2015; Pongsivasathit et al. 2019; Kulanthaivel et al.2021; Sukmak et al. 2023; Niu et al. 2024), lime (Manzoor and Yousuf 2020; Kumar and Thyagaraj 2021; Al-Gharbawi et al. 2022; Banu and Attom 2023), bituminous materials (Lindh and Lemenkova 2023; Andavan and Kumar 2020), fly ash (Yilmaz et al. 2019; Andavan and Pagadala 2020; Kumar and Harika 2021; Santhikala et al. 2022; Sengul et al. 2023), calcium carbide residue (Li et al. 2023; Julphunthong et al. 2024) and granulated blast furnace slag (Balogun et al. 2023; Susahab et al. 2024) are among chemical soil stabilizing agents used effectively soil strength but also permanently change the soil environment. Mostly these chemical stabilizers are discovered to release green-house gases in their manufacturing phase which emphasizes the need for a sustainable and effective soil stabilization technique. In this context biological methods provide a suitable alternative to minimize these concerns. Biological method consists of some nontraditional additives which are in form of enzymes, polymers, resins, acids, silicates, ions, and lignin derivatives (Blanck et al. 2014). Biopolymers, one of the important categories of biological method is grabbing popularity in the recent years. Biopolymers of microbial origin, such as xanthan gum (XG), guar gum (GG), sodium alginate, chitosan, etc., have gained popularity in past few years because of their potential cost-saving benefit, low environmental impact, non-toxicity and non-secondary pollution (Aminpour and O’Kelly 2015). Khatami and O’Kelly (2013) determined the properties of sand by using biopolymer in different proportions. The results showed an increment in unconfined compressive strength from 158 kPa to 487 kPa after addition of agar and starch biopolymer on sandy soil. Lekha et al. (2015) conducted numerous experimental programs, including soil CBR, differential free swell index, consistency limit and compaction test to examine the effects of flyash and electrolyte lignin combination on north Karnataka soil. The study found a decrease in plastic limit where as the liquid limit, MDD and UCS value showed a gradual increment with increase in amount of electrolyte lignin and fly ash in the soil. Peter (2016) examined the behaviour of soil stabilized with various ratios of coir fibre (from 0–1%) and coir pith (from 0–3%). The Standard Proctor and CBR tests were administered as part of the study. The test results showed that adding 2% coir pith and 0.6% short coir fibre increased the CBR value significantly by 192% and 335%, respectively. Furthermore, the CBR value increased by 4.6 times with the combination treatment. Latifi et al. (2017) conducted a number of experimental programme on xanthan gum added soil including UCS, direct shear testing, one-dimensional consolidation tests. According to the test results, the strength of the soil increased with increase in curing times. Phanikumar et al. (2018) concluded the benificial impact of fly ash and RHA on the engineering properties of an clayey soil. Sujatha and Saisree (2019) investigated the effect of gaur gum added in various percentage range of 0.5–2% to verify the change in strength behaviour of soil. According to findings, addition of gaur gum increased the consistency limit values of the treated soil. The strength of the treated soil was also increased by 131% after 90 days of curing period. Chen et al. (2020) studied the utilization of xanthan gum on sandy soil in different proportion. Various laboratory tests were conducted and revealed that the uniaxial compression strength and tensile strength of soil reported a noteworthy improvement with increment in the percentage of xanthan gum. Vydehi and Moghal (2021) investigated and observed that the well graded soil gives better results as compared to the poorly graded soil with mixed with biopolymers. Kumar et al. (2021) showed that utilization of gaur gum added to poorly graded sand- clay mixture in various percentages. Results revealed that consistency limits and UCS values were increased whereas the permeability was reduced with the mixing of gaur gum in the soil. Hamza et al. (2022) examined the application of xanthan gum to improve the characteristics of weak subgrade soil. Banne et al. (2023) series of test have been conducted to find out the impact of xanthan gum on laterite soil. The results indicates that the addition of xanthan gum on laterite soil the OMC value slightly increased from 13.02 to 14.29% and MDD value also increased from 1.40g/cc to 1.68g/cc. The angle of friction, cohesion and both un-soaked soaked CBR values were increased after the addition of xanthan gum in the soil. Perusal of above literatures shows that in most of the studies the effect of gaur gum and xanthan gum on soil has been studied individually. The addition of gaur gum and xanthan gum was also kept to a limited range of variation. In the current experimental work both individual and combined effects of gaur gum and xanthan gum on soil with a wide range of variation in percentage have been verified.

2.1 Black cotton soil

For the present experimental work black cotton soil used to conduct laboratory tests was collected from Gamei, Khordha district, Odisha. The sample was extracted from a depth of 1 to 1.5 m below the ground surface to avoid organic component. The sample was kept in the oven for 24 h at 105°c to 110°c to remove moisture. Figure 1 shows the grain size distribution curve for the soil sample. Physical properties of the black cotton soil are given in Table 1

Table 1

Physical properties of the black cotton soil
Soil properties	Values
Free swell index (%)	65.5
Specific gravity	2.6
D₁₀	0.49
D₃₀	1.03
D₆₀	1.94
Liquid limit (%)	59.93
Plastic limit (%)	27.49
Shrinkage limit (%)	16.7
Optimum moisture content Standard proctor test (%)	20.51
Maximum dry density Standard proctor test (g/cc)	1.65
Optimum moisture content Modified proctor test (%)	16.79
Maximum dry density Modified proctor test (g/cc)	1.71
UCS ( kN/m²)	95.23
CBR (un soaked) (%)	7.24
CBR (soaked) (%)	5.31

2.2 Biopolymers

In the current study two types of biopolymers (Xanthan gum and gaur gum) are used to improve the ground condition. Both Xanthan gum and gaur gum were collected from Sarda biopolymers Pvt Ltd. India. XG is an anionic polymer produced by Xanthomonas campestris bacterium during glucose/sucrose fermentation where as Gaur gum is a polysaccharides derived from plants and agricultural waste. Gaur gum is extracted from guar bean splits Cyamopsis tetragonoloba seeds. Xanthan gum and Gaur gum are used as gelling, thickening and suspending agent in different sectors. At low pH levels and high temperatures, xanthan gum can consistently create gels of exceptional quality which helps in stabilizing soil more efficiently. Guar gum contains a large number of hydroxyl groups, which combine with soil particles and hydrogen ions to form a network of hydrogels by hydrogen bonding. This network has strong unconfined compression strength, hydraulic conductivity as well as shear strength. The physical presentation of XG and GG is given in Fig. 2 (a) and (b) respectively.

2.3 Test Details

A series (Series A, B, C, D) of laboratory tests consisting consistency limit tests, differential free swelling index tests, compaction test, unconfined compression test, California Bearing ratio tests were conducted to assess the strength properties of soil with biopolymers. In Series A all the mentioned tests were carried out on virgin soil. In series B soil with xanthan gum, In series C soil with gaur gum, In series D soil with both xanthan gum and gaur gum was used for study.

3.1 Effect of biopolymers on differential free swelling index

The variation in differential free swelling index of black cotton soil treated with gaur gum, xanthan gum and combination of gaur gum and xanthan gum content is presented in Fig. 3 (a), 3 (b), 3 (c) respectively. It can be observed from the figures that free swell index of virgin soil was 65.5%, found to increase with increase in gaur gum content from 2%, 3%, 5% whereas the FSI value started decreasing gradually with the same increment in xanthan gum percentage. Figure 3 (c) shows a noteworthy decrement in FSI value for addition of both Xanthan gum and gaur gum with the black cotton soil. The maximum decrement in free swell index value reported for Soil + 5% GG + 5% XG composition and the value was observed to be 56.24%.

3.2 Effect of biopolymer on consistency limits

Atterberg limit tests were carried out to identify the consistency limits of gaur gum and xanthan gum mixed black cotton soil. Variation in consistency limits for Soil + GG, Soil + XG, Soil + GG + XG combination is presented in Fig. 4(a), 4(b), 4(c) respectively. Figure 4 shows that the liquid limit, plastic limit and shrinkage limit for virgin soil were 59.93%, 27.49% and 16.79% respectively. It can be observed from the Fig. 4(a) that after adding gaur gum of 2%, 3% and 5% the liquid limit increased by 99.64%, 115.26% and 139.68% while simultaneously increased the plastic limit by 34.76%, 38.11% and 41.61% respectively. Shrinkage limit and plasticity values were also found to increase with increment in GG content. Similar behavior in consistency limits was also observed for soil + XG and Soil + GG + XG combination. The reason may be attributed to the hydrophilic nature of biopolymers. The viscosity of diffuse double layer increases with increase in biopolymer content thus the affinity of soil towards water increases and more amount of water is needed to fulfill the double layer. Hence the consistency limits were found to increase with increase in XG and GG content. On the other hand increase in plastic limit may be considered due to occurrence of flocculated structure due to increased density of diffused double layer which entraps water between void space and results in increasing plastic limit. A slight increment in plasticity index was observed for Soil + XG combination as compared to Soil + GG and Soil + GG + XG combination as xanthan gum improved adhesion in the Soil-XG matrix due to increase viscosity of pore fluid.

3.3 Compaction characteristics

The compaction characteristics of gaur gum and xanthan gum treated soil is evaluated by following light compaction test and heavy compaction test procedure. Typical optimum moisture content (OMC) – Maximum dry density (MDD) curves corresponding to light and heavy energy level is presented in Fig. 5, 6, 7. It can be observed from the figures that the maximum dry density value decreases with increase in water content for both Soil + GG, Soil + XG and Soil + GG + XG combination in case of light compaction, while a significant increase in maximum dry density with decrease in moisture content was observed in heavy compaction tests. In light compaction the maximum dry density for virgin soil under light compaction was 1.65 g/cc began to decrease with increase in GG and XG content from 2%, 3% and 5% and the optimum decrement was noticed at 5% biopolymer addition. Further analysis shows that a very marginal decrement in dry density is observed in Soil + GG + XG combination as compared to their individual addition. In heavy compaction the increment in maximum dry density at 2%, 3% and 5% GG content was found to be 1.76, 1.83, 1.89 g/cc and 1.79, 1.85, 1.93 respectively for soil with XG content. The maximum dry density for virgin soil under heavy compaction was 1.71 g/cc found to increase with increase in both GG and XG content and reported the optimum value of 1.96 g/cc for Soil + 5%GG + 5%XG combination. The result shows the optimum improvement observed is more predominantly due to addition of XG which works exceptionally well under heavy compaction. The reason is attributed as follows: Xanthan monomer functions as a lubricant between soil particles in heavy compaction because of the higher energy level involved. This facilitates easy soil particle sliding over one another and compacts the soil into a more orientated, denser matrix than in light compaction.

3.4 Effect of biopolymers on unconfined compression strength

A series of unconfined compression strength tests were conducted on both untreated and biopolymer treated soil. Table 2 illustrates the UCS results of treated soil sample stabilized with biopolymers. The stress-strain curves obtained for different composition of Gaur gum xanthan gum and both gaur gum and xanthan gum is presented in Fig. 8 (a), 8 (b), 8 (c) respectively. Table reveals that the UCS value of the virgin soil was 95.23 kN/m² found to increase with increment in percentage of gaur gum as 2%, 3% and 5% to 118.96kN/m², 146.99kN/m² and 173.61kN/m² respectively. The optimum increment was observed at 5% gaur gum content. Further it can be observed from the Table that the UCS value found to increase with increment in percentage of xanthan gum as 2%, 3% and 5% to 129.68 kN/m², 169.33 kN/m² and 198.63 kN/m² respectively. Figure 8 (b) represents the stress-strain curves obtained for different composition of soil + xanthan gum shows a noteworthy improvement in unconfined compressive strength of black cotton soil attributed to the strength and density of optimum xanthan-soil linkage. A thorough analysis of Table shows that even though the strength behavior of soil improved with GG and comparatively more with XG a significant improvement in UCS value was observed with addition of both GG and XG and the optimum value was reported as 222.63 kN/m² at Soil + 5% XG + 5% GG composition.

Table 2

UCS results of biopolymer treated soil sample
Sample composition	UCS value (kN/m²)
Virgin Soil	95.23
Soil + 2% GG	118.96
Soil + 3% GG	146.99
Soil + 5% GG	173.61
Soil + 2% XG	129.68
Soil + 3% XG	169.33
Soil + 5% XG	198.63
Soil + 2% XG + 2% GG	136.71
Soil + 3% XG + 3% GG	189.41
Soil + 5% XG + 2% GG	222.63

3.5 Effect of biopolymers on CBR value

The California bearing ratio value is an important geotechnical property required to be characterized properly for assessing the suitability of soil for various requirement. The CBR values of Soil + GG, Soil + XG and Soil + GG + XG composition for soaked and un-soaked conditions are presented in Fig. 9. From the figures it can be observed that addition of biopolymer improved the CBR value. From figures it can be observed that CBR value increased slightly with 2% GG gradually showed an appreciable improvement with 3% and 5% GG. A significant improvement was observed with soil treated with xanthan gum and the maximum was reported at Soil + 5% XG as 15.01% (un-soaked) and 13.15% (soaked) respectively. Xanthan gum reacts with cold water added during the test and forms a viscous solution. Electrokinetic charges spread over the large surface area of xanthan gum allows for a strong interaction between XG and soil particles and converts to a firm entity under application of compactive energy thus improves the CBR value. Further it can be noticed from the figures that the improvement in CBR value for Soil + GG + XG composition is found to be almost same with a mild increment compared to Soil + XG composition. From the figures it is clear that soaked CBR values are always found lesser in magnitude than un-soaked CBR value for all composition of biopolymer treated soil.

Several laboratory tests were carried out in the current study to determine the geotechnical characteristics of black cotton soil treated with gaur gum and xanthan gum. The effects of both biopolymers have been verified individually and collectively. The findings of experiment lead to the following deductions.

The outcomes of the experiment revealed that the FSI of soil increases with the addition of gaur gum content, whereas the FSI value started decreasing with the same increment in the percentage of xanthan gum and also a decrement in the FSI was noted after addition of both xanthan and gaur gum. The maximum decrease in FSI value was observed for soil with 5% GG and 5% XG composition.

With increment in the percentage of gaur gum and xanthan gum the liquid limit, plastic limit, shrinkage limit and plasticity index of expansive soil were increased. The results revealed that when soil treated with gaur gum the consistency limits gave higher value compared to the xanthan gum.

The OMC value was found to increase with gradual decrement in MDD value with xanthan gum and gaur gum in light compaction. Where as in heavy compaction test the MDD value increased appreciably with decrease in OMC value. The results reported same trend of variation in OMC-MDD with addition of both xanthan and gaur gum to the soil. The biopolymers showed better performance in heavy compaction test as higher compaction energy is involved compared to the light compaction test. The findings of the heavy compaction test showed that adding 5% XG and 5% GG to black cotton soil produced the highest MDD value.

A notable rise in the unconfined compressive strength values of soil was observed with increase the various percentages of xanthan gum and gaur gum. It can be verified from the results that the increase in UCS value of xanthan gum treated expansive soil is higher in magnitude compared to gaur gum used soil. The maximum increment in UCS value reported for Soil + 5% GG + 5% XG composition as compared to the individual addition of xanthan gum and gaur gum.

Both soaked and un-soaked CBR value of the black cotton soil increased by the addition of xanthan gum and gaur gum. The results showed that the maximum un-soaked and soaked CBR value for Soil + 5% XG + 5% GG was higher than the value obtained for xanthan gum and gaur gum added separately.

The present work indicates that xanthan gum has a comparatively better effect in enhancing geo-engineering properties of soil compared to gaur gum. Significant enhancement in strength properties of soil was noted when both xanthan gum and gaur gum added together. Therefore, xanthan gum may be considered as one of the effective economical biopolymer for soil stabilization to obtain overall benefit.

Author Contribution

Dr. B.kirtimayee - Design of work, preparation of work plan, Supervision of experimental work, Data analysis and interpretation, preparation of the manuscript [ First author]Mrs. Sabita dash- Supervision of experimental work, Equipment access, guidance [ Second author]Manasmita Rout- support during experimental work [ Third author]

Al-Gharbawi ASA, Najemalden AM, Fattah MY (2022) Expansive Soil Stabilization with Lime, Cement, and Silica Fume. Appl Sci 13(1). pp. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13010436
Aminpour M, O’Kelly BC (2015) Applications of biopolymers in dam construction and operation activities, In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Dam World Conference, Lisbon, Portugal, 1, pp. 937–946
Andavan S, Kumar BM (2020) Case study on soil stabilization by using bitumen emulsions – A review. Mater Today Proc 22:1200–1202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.12.121
Andavan S, Pagadala VK (2020) A study on soil stabilization by addition of fly ash and lime. Mater Today Proc 22:1125–1129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.323
Balogun FO, Abzal A, Kissambinova A, Shon CS, Kim JR (2023) Stabilization of High Sulfate-Saline Soil with Lime, Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag (GGBFS) and Basic Oxygen Furnace Slag (BOFS). Key Eng Mater 951:125–131. https://doi.org/10.4028/p-6jocpx
Banu S, Attom M (2023) Internal erosion stabilization of cohesionless soil using lime. Water 15(11):1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15111992
Basha E, Hashim R, Mahmud H, Muntohar A (2005) Stabilization of residual soil with rice husk ash and cement. Constr Build Mater 19(6):448–453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2004.08.001
Blanck G, Cuisinier O, Masrouri F (2013) Soil treatment with organic non-traditional additives for the improvement of earthworks. Acta Geotech 9(6):1111–1122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-013-0251-6
Banne S, Dhawale A, Kulkarni S, Muthekar V, Onyelowe K (2023) Enhancement of properties of laterite soil used as subgrade using xanthan gum biopolymer. Multiscale Multidiscip Model Exp Des 6(3):333–345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41939-023-00149-w
Chen C, Wu L, Harbottle M (2020) Exploring the effect of biopolymers in near-surface soils using xanthan gum–modified sand under shear. Can Geotech J 57(8):1109–1118. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2019-0284
Julphunthong P, Joyklad P, Manprom P, Chompoorat T, Palou M, Suriwong T (2024) Evaluation of calcium carbide residue and fly ash as sustainable binders for environmentally friendly loess soil stabilization. Sci Rep 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-51326-x
Hamza M, Nie Z, Aziz M, Ijaz N, Ameer MF, Ijaz Z (2022) Geotechnical properties of problematic expansive subgrade stabilized with xanthan gum biopolymer. Road Mater Pavement Des 24(7):1869–1883. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680629.2022.2092027
Khan A, Adil M, Ahmad A, Hussain R, Zaman H (2018) Stabilization of soil using cement and bale straw. Development 5(9):44–49
Khatami HR, O’Kelly BC (2013) Improving mechanical properties of sand using biopolymers. J Geotech Geoenviron 139(8):1402–1406. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000861
Kulanthaivel P, Soundara B, Velmurugan S, Naveenraj V (2021) Experimental investigation on stabilization of clay soil using nano-materials and white cement. Mater Today Proc 45:507–511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.02.107
Kumar KSR, Thyagaraj T (2021) Comparison of lime treatment techniques for deep stabilization of expansive soils. Int J Geotech Eng 15(8):1021–1039. https://doi.org/10.1080/19386362.2020.1775359
Kumar PG, Harika S (2021) Stabilization of expansive subgrade soil by using fly ash. Mater Today Proc 45:6558–6562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.11.469
Kumar SA, Sujatha ER, Pugazhendi A, Jamal MT (2021) Guar gum-stabilized soil: a clean, sustainable and economic alternative liner material for landfills. Clean Technol Environ Policy 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-021-02032-z
Latifi N, Horpibulsuk S, Meehan CL, Majid MZA, Tahir MM, Mohamad ET (2017) Improvement of Problematic Soils with Biopolymer—An Environmentally Friendly Soil Stabilizer. J Mater Civ Eng 29(2):04016204. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)mt.1943-5533.0001706
Lekha BM, Sarang G, Shankar AUR (2015) Effect of electrolyte lignin and fly ash in stabilizing black cotton soil. Transp Infrastruct G 2(2):87–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40515-015-0020-0
Li J, Shan Y, Ni P, Li Y, Cui J, Zhou J (2023) Multi scale experimental analysis of marine clay stabilized with coal gangue–calcium carbide residue geopolymer. Acta Geotech 18(11):5921–5939. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-023-02055-4
Lindh P, Lemenkova P (2023) Geotechnical Properties of Soil Stabilized with Blended Binders for Sustainable Road Base Applications. Constr Mater 3(1):110–126. https://doi.org/10.3390/constrmater3010008
Manzoor SO, Yousuf A (2020) Stabilisation of soils with lime: A review. J Mater Envir Sci 11(10):1538–1551. http://www.jmaterenvironsci.com
Niu W, Guo B, Li K, Ren Z, Zheng Y, Liu J, Lin H, Men X (2024) Cementitous material based stabilization of soft soils by stabilizer: Feasibility and durabiliy assessment. Constr Build Mater 425:136046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.136046
Peter L, Jayasree P, Balan K, Raj SA (2016) Laboratory Investigation in the Improvement of Subgrade Characteristics of Expansive Soil Stabilised with Coir Waste. Trans Res Proc 17:558–566. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2016.11.110
Phanikumar BR, Nagaraju TV (2018) Effect of fly ash and rice husk ash on index and engineering properties of expansive clays. Geotech Geol Eng 36(6):3425–3436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-018-0544-5
Pongsivasathit S, Horpibulsuk S, Piyaphipat S (2019) Assessment of mechanical properties of cement stabilized soils. Constr Mater 11:e00301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2019.e00301
Sujatha ER, Saisree S (2019) Geotechnical behaviour of guar gum-treated soil. Soils Found 59(6):2155–2166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2019.11.012
Rashid ASA, Kueh ABH, Mohamad H (2018) Behaviour of soft soil improved by floating soil–cement columns. Int J Phys Model Geo 18(2):95–116. https://doi.org/10.1680/jphmg.15.00041
Sukmak G, Sukmak P, Horpibulsuk S, Arulrajah A, Horpibulsuk J (2023) Generalized strength prediction equation for cement stabilized clayey soils. Appl Clay Sci 231:106761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2022.106761
Santhikala R, Chandramouli K, Pannirselvam N (2022) Stabilization of expansive soil using flyash based geopolymer. Mater Today Proc 68:110–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.07.006
Sengul T, Akray N, Vitosoglu Y (2023) Investigating the effects of stabilization carried out using fly ash and polypropylene fiber on the properties of highway clay soils. Constr Build Mater 400:132590. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.132590
Shooshpasha I, Shirvani RA (2015) Effect of cement stabilization on geotechnical properties of sandy soils. Geomech Eng 8(1):17–31
Susahab JS, Ardakani A, Hassanlourad M (2024) Strength improvement of clay subgrade soil stabilised with recycled concrete aggregate and granulated blast furnace slag. Road Mater Pavement Des 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680629.2024.2335191
Vydehi KV, Moghal AB (2022) Effect of biopolymeric stabilization on the strength and compressibility characteristics of cohesive soil. J Mater Civ Eng 34(2). https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)mt.1943-5533.0004068
Yilmaz Y, Coban HS, Cetin B, Edil TB (2019) Use of standard and Off-Spec fly ashes for soil stabilization. J Mater Civ Eng 31(2). https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)mt.1943-5533.0002599

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Editor assigned by journal
19 Aug, 2024
Submission checks completed at journal
19 Aug, 2024
First submitted to journal
18 Aug, 2024

You are reading this latest preprint version

Performance Evaluation of Biopolymer-treated Black cotton soil

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

1 Introduction

2 Materials

2.1 Black cotton soil

2.2 Biopolymers

2.3 Test Details

3 Results and Discussion

3.1 Effect of biopolymers on differential free swelling index

3.2 Effect of biopolymer on consistency limits

3.3 Compaction characteristics

3.4 Effect of biopolymers on unconfined compression strength

3.5 Effect of biopolymers on CBR value

4 CONCLUSIONS

Declarations

Author Contribution

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Version 1