Upload
dinhhuong
View
215
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
CEMENT-BOUND ROAD BASE MATERIALS
Report 7-11-218-1
Prepared by
Pengpeng Wu, MSc
Delft University of Technology
Supervised by
Prof.dr.ir. A.A.A. Molenaar and Ir. L.J.M. Houben
Delft University of Technology
In cooperation with
PowerCem Technologies, Netherlands
July 2011
I
TERM DEFINATION
In this literature study the technical terms are defined as listed below.
Additive A chemical or material applied atop or mixed into a
material to alter or improve the general quality or to
counteract undesirable properties.
Atterberg limits Soil properties that help to identify a given soil in
terms of its water retentively and plasticity and these
consistency limits are Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit and
Plasticity Index.
Bitumen
Black, viscous liquid to solid obtained as residue from
petroleum coke by preparation or naturally derived.
Bitumen is a binder for asphalt mixtures.
California Bearing Ratio A penetration test for evaluation of the load-carrying
capacity (mechanical strength) of soils, expressed as a
percentage of a standard.
Characterisation In materials science, it refers to the use of external
techniques to probe into the internal structure and
properties of a material in form of actual materials
testing, or analysis, for instance in some form of
microscope.
Clay A general term for colloid sized (<0.002 mm in
equivalent diameter) fine particles of inorganic
(mineral) origin in soil that has a high Plasticity Index
in relation to the Liquid Limit.
Crystalline Having a definite form, that is the atoms in a solid
matter are arranged in a regular pattern, and there is as
smallest volume element that by repetition in three
dimensions describes the crystal.
Capillary
Ability of a material to water-sucking and holding it
above the phreatic surface.
II
Illite It is a non-expanding, clay-sized, micaceous mineral.
A hydrous alluminosilicate clay mineral with
structurally mixed mica and smectite or vermiculite,
similar to montmorillonite but containing potassium
between the crystal layers. Also referred to as hydrous
mica or mica. It has a cation exchange capacity (20-40
me/100 g).
Kaolinite It is a layered clay with silicate mineral, with one
tetrahedral sheet inked through oxygen atoms to one
octahedral sheet of alumina octahedral. It has a low
shrink-swell capacity and a low cation exchange
capacity (1-15 me/100 g). Rocks that are rich in
kaolinite are known as china clay or kaolin.
Maximum dry density The highest dry density obtainable when using a
specified amount of compaction effort (Standard or
Modified Proctor) on a soil with various moisture
contents.
Moisture content That portion of the total dry mass of material that
exists as water, expressed in percentage.
Montmorillonite It is a very soft phyllosilicate mineral that typically
forms in microscopic crystals, forming clay. A member
of the smectite family that is a 2:1 clay, meaning that it
has 2 tetrahedral sheets sandwiching a central
octahedral sheet. Its water content is variable and it
increases greatly in volume when it absorbs water. It
has a high cation exchange capacity (60-100 me/100
g).
Modulus of elasticity
Relationship between a load and the resulting elastic
deformation of the material.
Optimum moisture content The percentage of water (by mass) in material that
allows it to be compacted to the greatest density.
Permeability (Soil) Measure of the ability of a soil to transmit water and
air from upper to lower soil layers.
Petroleum An oily flammable bituminous liquid that may vary
from almost colorless to black, and that is a complex
III
mixture of hydrocarbons with small amounts of other
substances.
Porosity The volume of all the open spaces (pores) between the
solid grains of a soil/material.
Proctor test Standard Proctor compaction effort using a 2,49 kg
hammer, falling through 305 mm with 3 layers each
compacted by 55 blows yielding a total energy of 0,15
kWh/m3.
Soil Naturally occurring material that is used for
construction of pavement layers
Soil stabilizer A chemical or material mixed into a material to
permanently increase or improve density, compaction,
shear strength, and/or changes in plasticity
characteristics. In addition, a chemical or mechanical
treatment designed to increase or maintain the stability
of a mass of soil/material or to otherwise improve its
engineering properties.
Strength (Soil) The capacity of a soil to withstand forces without
experiencing failure, whether by rupture,
fragmentation, or shear.
Unconfined compressive test In this test, a soil sample is compressed to measure its
strength. It is a measure of the shearing resistance of
cohesive soils, which may be undisturbed or
remoulded samples, using strain-controlled application
of the axial load. It is also a measure of the
compressive strength of soils, stabilized with bitumen,
lime or cement or a combination.
IV
V
LIST OF SYMBOLS
cf Unconfined compressive strength
tf Flexural tensile strength
itf Indirect tensile strength
sE Static modulus of elasticity
dE Dynamic modulus of elasticity
V
Pulse velocity
N
Number of load repetitions
ε
Applied strain level
tε Flexural strain at break
σ Applied stress
tσ Ultimate flexural stress (flexural strength)
SN Ratio of applied stress and ultimate stress
η Porosity of specimen
uC Coefficient of uniformity of grain size distribution curve
cC Curvature index of soil distribution curve
Ac Activity of clay
fE Stiffness modulus in flexure
eqN Number of equivalent load repetitions
VI
VII
LIST OF ACRONYMS
OMC Optimum Moisture Content
PI Plasticity Index
PL Plasticity Limit
LL Liquid Limit
SL Shrinkage Limit
UCS Unconfined Compressive Strength
USCS Unified Soil Classification System
AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
CBR California Bearing Ratio
NEN European Norms
PCT PowerCem Technologies
MPD Maximum Proctor Density
VIII
IX
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig. 2.1 Liquid limit for stabilized marl samples at different curing time .............. 8
Fig. 2.2 Dry and wet CBR values for natural and stabilized marl soil ................... 9
Fig. 2.3 Initial strength development of a lime and cement stabilization ............... 9
Fig. 2.4 UCS of cement stabilized soil as a function of lime and cement content . 9
Fig. 2.5 The compressive strength of cement stabilized and lime stabilized soil . 10
Fig. 2.6 UCS at optimum water content for cement stabilized fly ash ................. 11
Fig. 2.7 Uniaxial compressive strength of fly ash stabilized clay ........................ 11
Fig. 2.8 The compressive strength of soil stabilized with multiple soils .............. 12
Fig. 3.1 Typical soil particle size distribution curves ........................................... 16
Fig. 3.2 Particle size distribution curves for various soils .................................... 17
Fig. 3.3 Particle size gradation coefficient ............................................................ 17
Fig. 3.4 Relationship between clay content and plasticity index .......................... 19
Fig. 3.5 Volume change of a soil specimen during drying .................................... 20
Fig. 3.6 Phases of soil and Atterberg limits .......................................................... 20
Fig. 3.7 AASHTO plasticity chart ......................................................................... 22
Fig. 3. 8 USCS classification chart ....................................................................... 22
Fig. 3.9 USCS plasticity chart ............................................................................... 23
Fig. 3.10 Effect of addition of cement on the swell .............................................. 25
Fig. 3.11 Reduction of silt-clay content due to cement modification ................... 25
Fig. 3.12 Comparison of CBR with RoadCem ..................................................... 30
Fig. 4.1 Particle size analysis of coarse grained soils using sieves ....................... 34
Fig. 4.2 Wet sieving for particle size distribution of fine grained materials ......... 34
Fig. 4.3 Cone equipment ....................................................................................... 35
Fig. 4.4 Example of relationship between water content and cone penetration ... 35
Fig. 4.5 Soil pat after groove closed ..................................................................... 36
Fig. 4.6 Test for Plastic Limit ............................................................................... 36
Fig. 4.7 Moisture-density curves of a cohesive soil for different compaction...... 39
Fig. 4.8 Effect of compaction methods on the density.......................................... 39
Fig. 4.9 Effect of compaction methods on the compressive strength ................. 40
Fig.4.10 Dry density-moisture curves for sandy clay soil .................................... 40
Fig. 4.11 Dry Density-Moisture curves for a sand stabilized ............................... 40
Fig. 4.12 Dry density-moisture curves for a range of soil types ........................... 41
Fig. 4.13 Effect of a time lapse on the dry density and UCS ................................ 42
Fig. 4.14 Soil gradings for cement-bound mixture ............................................... 43
Fig. 4.15 Coded test conditions for the central composite rotatable design ......... 44
Fig. 4.16 Variation of strength at 1, 7 and 28 curing days of samples .................. 46
Fig. 4.17 Relationship between UCS and curing temperature .............................. 46
Fig. 5.1 SEM photos of cement stabilized sand specimens after testing .............. 50
Fig. 5.2 Relationship between UCS and curing period ......................................... 51
Fig. 5.3 Relationship between moisture content and UCS ................................... 52
X
Fig. 5.4 Relationship between water to cement ratio and UCS ............................ 52
Fig. 5.5 28-day strength of cement treated clay .................................................... 53
Fig. 5.6 Effect of curing age on the unconfined compressive strength ................. 54
Fig. 5.7 Compressive strength for dry and wet specimens at 28 days .................. 54
Fig. 5. 8 28-day strength variation with number of wetting ................................. 55
Fig. 5.9 Compressive strength of samples at different dry density ....................... 55
Fig. 5. 10 Variation in the 1, 7 and 28 curing days strength of samples ............... 56
Fig. 5.11 Effect of curing age on compressive strength ........................................ 56
Fig. 5.12 SEM images of RoadCem and Cement treated soil/material ................ 57
Fig. 5.13 Indirect tensile test ................................................................................. 58
Fig. 5. 14 Effect of cement content on the indirect tensile strength at 28 days .... 58
Fig. 5.15 Variation of the indirect tensile strength of cement ............................... 58
Fig. 5.16 Variations of the indirect tensile strength with cement content ............. 59
Fig. 5.17 Relationship between UCS and indirect tensile strength ....................... 59
Fig. 5.18 Flexural tensile strength plotted against compressive strength ............. 60
Fig. 5.19 Typical stress-strain curve for cement stabilized materials ................... 61
Fig. 5.20 Typical unconfined compressive stress-strain relationships .................. 61
Fig. 5.21 Stress-strain curve for samples under compression ............................... 62
Fig. 5.22 Influence of clay content on the modulus of elasticity .......................... 62
Fig. 5.23 Cement-bound granular mixtures of tensile strength ............................ 63
Fig. 5.24 Dynamic modulus and pulse velocity .................................................... 64
Fig. 5.25 28-day compressive strength and dynamic modulus of elasticity ......... 64
Fig. 5.26 Relationship between dynamic modulus and flexural strength ............. 64
Fig. 5. 27 Dynamic modulus and modulus of rupture .......................................... 65
Fig. 5.28 Measurement of dynamic modulus of elasticity .................................... 65
Fig. 5.29 Comparison of damped harmonic vibration with RoadCem ................. 66
Fig. 5.30 Dynamic flexure tests for 28-day curing time ....................................... 66
Fig. 5.31 Stress ratios versus number of cycles to failure..................................... 67
Fig. 5.32 General fatigue curves for cement-treated bases ................................... 68
Fig. 5.33 Effect of loading frequency on stress/life relationship for concrete ...... 68
Fig. 5.34 Fatigue behavior of cement bound materials ......................................... 69
Fig. 5.35 Weight loss in wet-dry testing of soil stabilized cement and lime ....... 70
Fig. 5.36 Change in weight loss with exposure period in the samples tested for . 71
Fig. 5.37 Effect of cement content on the water permeability .............................. 71
Fig. 5.38 Water absorption versus binder quality for specimens at 28 days ......... 72
Fig. 5.39 Capillary rise with time for 28-days cured specimens .......................... 72
Fig. 6.1 Reflection cracks ..................................................................................... 75
Fig. 6.2 Cracking as a result of t shrinkage stress, strength and time ................... 76
Fig. 6.3 Effect of cement content on shrinkage .................................................... 77
Fig. 6.4 Effect of sand and cement content on the shrinkage ............................... 78
Fig. 6.5 Development of shrinkage during first 28 days ....................................... 78
Fig. 6.6 Variation of final shrinkage at 28 days with mixing water content ......... 79
Fig. 6.7 Effect of density and moisture on shrinkage ........................................... 79
Fig. 6.8 7-day UCS vs. beam shrinkage ................................................................ 80
XI
Fig. 6.9 Addition of fly ash to reduce drying shrinkage ....................................... 81
Fig. 6.10 Stabilization with RoadCem showing no cracks after 4 years ............ 82
Fig. 6.11 Picture from an electron microscope of the crystalline structure .......... 82
Fig. 7.1 Comparison of calculation for traditional and RoadCem constructions .. 85
Fig. 7.2 Strains of the bounded layer over the width of the road .......................... 87
Fig. 7.3 Strains in the bounded layers in the length (X) of the road with ............. 87
Fig. 7.4 Stresses in the bottom of the bounded layers in the width of the road .... 88
Fig. 7.5 Stresses in the bottom of the bounded layers in the length of the road ... 88
Fig. 7.6 Deflections in the traditional structure .................................................... 90
Fig. 7.7 Deflections in the RoadCem structure ..................................................... 90
XII
XIII
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Application of traditional stabilization methods ..................................... 6
Table 2.2 Stabilization methods most suitable for specific applications ................ 6
Table 3.1 Particle size ranges in different countries ............................................. 16
Table 3.2 Indication of uC and cC ...................................................................... 18
Table 3.3 Three physical states of the soil-aggregate mixtures ............................ 18
Table 3.4 Plasticity and dry strength related to Plasticity Index PI ...................... 19
Table 3.5 Soil classification according to AASHTO ............................................ 21
Table 3.6 Symbols used in USCS ......................................................................... 22
Table 3.7 Examples of the effect of cement-modification .................................... 23
Table 3.8 Cement requirement for different soil types ......................................... 24
Table 3. 9 Relationship between shrinkage limit, PI and swell potential ............. 25
Table 3.10 Average change in properties for clay soils ......................................... 27
Table 3.11 Cement requirement of different soils ................................................. 28
Table 3.12 DCP-CBR strength for stabilized panels with different stabilizers .. 30
Table 4.1 Cone penetration requirement ............................................................... 35
Table 4.2 Summary of sample preparation methods ............................................. 38
Table 4.3 Dimensions of the new cylindrical test mould ...................................... 38
Table 4.4 Summary of the Proctor test and modified Proctor test ........................ 38
Table 4.5 Maximum dry density and moisture contents of soil-cement ............... 41
Table 4.6 Cement content requirement for soils ................................................... 43
Table 4.7 Minimum cement content according to the grain sizes ......................... 44
Table 4.8 Variables for central composite design.................................................. 44
Table 6. 1 Effect of fines content on soil-cement crack pattern ............................ 80
Table 7.1 Stresses and strains at the bottom of the bounded layers ...................... 87
Table 7.2 The results of lifetime for traditional and RoadCem construction ........ 89
XIV
XV
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 1
1.1 BACKGROUND .............................................................................................. 1
1.2 PROBLEMS ..................................................................................................... 2
1.3 OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................... 2
1.4 CONTENT OF LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................ 2
2 STABILIZATION AGENT ......................................................................................... 5
2.1 BITUMEN ........................................................................................................ 7
2.2 LIME ................................................................................................................. 7
2.3 FLY ASH ......................................................................................................... 10
2.4 CEMENT ........................................................................................................ 12
2.5 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................. 12
3 MATERIALS FOR CEMENT STABILIZATION ................................................... 15
3.1 SOIL ................................................................................................................ 15
3.1.1 Particle size and soil structure ............................................................... 15
3.1.2 Atterberg limits ..................................................................................... 19
3.1.3 Soil classification .................................................................................. 21
3.1.4 Shrinkage and swell .............................................................................. 24
3.1.5 Organic content ..................................................................................... 26
3.2 CEMENT ........................................................................................................ 27
3.3 WATER ........................................................................................................... 28
3.4 ADDITIVE ...................................................................................................... 29
3.4.1 Traditional additives .............................................................................. 29
3.4.2 RoadCem ............................................................................................... 30
3.5 CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................................... 31
4 PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS ...................................................................... 33
4.1 SOIL TESTS ................................................................................................... 33
4.1.1 Particle size distribution ........................................................................ 33
4.1.2 Liquid Limit and Plastic Limit .............................................................. 34
4.1.3 Chemical analysis ................................................................................. 36
4.2 COMPACTION OF MIXTURE ..................................................................... 37
4.2.1 Compaction test .................................................................................... 37
4.2.2 Factors influencing compaction ............................................................ 39
4.3 MIX COMPOSITION .................................................................................... 42
4.3.1 Requirements for materials ................................................................... 42
4.3.2 Mix design method ............................................................................... 44
4.4 CURING CONDITIONS ................................................................................ 45
4.5 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................. 46
5 MAIN MECHANICAL PROPERTIES .................................................................... 49
5.1. COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ...................................................................... 49
5.2 TENSILE STRENGTH................................................................................... 57
5.2.1 Indirect tensile strength ......................................................................... 57
5.2.2 Flexural tensile strength ........................................................................ 60
XVI
5.3 ELASTIC MODULUS ................................................................................... 61
5.3.1 Static modulus ....................................................................................... 61
5.3.2 Dynamic modulus ................................................................................. 63
5.4 FATIGUE PROPERTIY .................................................................................. 66
5.5 DURABILITY ................................................................................................ 69
5.6 WATER PERMEABILITY AND ABSORPTION .......................................... 71
5.7 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................. 73
6 CRACKING BEHAVIOR......................................................................................... 75
6.1 SHRINKAGE ................................................................................................. 76
6.2 FACTORES INFLUNCING SHRINKAGE ................................................... 77
6.3 METHODS OF CONTROLLING .................................................................. 81
6.4 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................. 82
7 EFFECTS OF A FLEXURAL STABILIZATION .................................................... 83
7.1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 83
7.2 ASSUMPTIONS ............................................................................................. 83
7.3 DESIGNS ........................................................................................................ 84
7.4 CALCULATION METHOD .......................................................................... 85
7.5 DEFLECTIONS .............................................................................................. 89
7.6 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................ 90
8 CONCULSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................... 93
8.1 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................. 93
8.2 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................ 94
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 95
Appendix A ................................................................................................................ 101
Appendix B ................................................................................................................ 102
Appendix C ................................................................................................................ 107
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
High quality road infrastructure is of utmost importance for economic development
and growth of any country in the world. As a consequence of economic growth, road
traffic is increasing in vehicle numbers and in truck axle loads. This requires
extension of the road network. Especially for the main road network availability for
traffic should be as high as possible (Molenaar, 2010). Both asphalt and concrete
pavement structures can be designed and constructed. However, both types of
pavement require a base with good structural performance and a long service life
below the asphalt or concrete. Also for the demand of less construction time and
resistance to natural disasters, new road materials with environmental friendly
technology are increasingly required.
For road bases, there is a variety of soils or granular materials available for
construction, but they may exhibit insufficient properties (e.g. low bearing capacity,
susceptibility for frost action), which then results in substantial pavement distress and
reduction of the pavement life. However, the properties of soil can be improved by
addition of a stabilizing agent such as cement, bitumen and lime. Among these
different stabilized materials, cement-bound materials develop a quite high stiffness
and strength, and exhibit good performance for pavement serviceability and high
durability.
The soil or granular materials to be stabilized can be almost any combination of sand,
silt, clay, gravel, or crushed stone. When there are not many suitable soils available
for construction, the stabilization of less suitable soil with cement becomes a
beneficial option. Also there exists a large amount of waste materials and recycled
aggregates which could be widely available near the work sites, which can not only
lower the construction and transportation cost but also save natural resources and
2
offer much environmental benefit.
1.2 PROBLEMS
In practice, when the granular material is stabilized, the stabilization of soil improves
the soil gradation, reduces the plasticity index or swelling potential of soil, and
increases the stiffness, strength and durability, which consequently reduces the
required thickness of the pavement structure. However, the hardening cement-bound
materials exhibit shrinkage cracks and susceptibility to overloading. Cracks due to the
shrinkage or overloading result in stress concentration and even base failure and
reflective cracking through the overlying layer, which definitely increases
maintenance and repair costs. Also not all types of soil can be bounded well with
cement, like high organic soils and some type of clayey soils. Additives are available
that can be added to a normal type of cement to reduce or eliminate the disadvantages
of a cement-bound road base (shrinkage, cracks, brittle behavior) (Molenaar, 2010).
1.3 OBJECTIVES
The objectives of this research are to evaluate the properties of cement-bound
materials in order to design appropriate cement stabilized materials for structural
design of pavements. An innovative product RoadCem together with cement has been
proven to be well in all types of granular materials. In this research, the mechanical
properties to be investigated are not only the stiffness and the strength (compressive
strength and/or indirect tensile strength and/or (fatigue) flexural tensile strength) but
also the thermal cracking, frost thaw behavior and erosion.
RoadCem from PowerCem Technologies is used as additive to improve the
performance of the cement stabilized materials. In this literature review information
was used from PowerCem Technologies for related soils. However it has to be kept
in mind that small differences in soils and test conditions can have a big influence on
the mechanical properties of the stabilized material. The comparison of the test results
for soils stabilized with cement and RoadCem and (nearly) the same soil stabilized
with only cement or another stabilizer therefore is indicative rather than absolute.
1.4 CONTENT OF LITERATURE REVIEW
In this literature review, the properties of cement-bound materials from a number of
research studies are summarized. In Chapter 2, various stabilization methods are
reviewed, as well as the comparison of the applications of different stabilizing agents.
The materials for cement stabilization are described in Chapter 3, including soil,
cement, water and additives. The soil properties play a significant role in stabilization.
3
Preliminary tests to indicate the soil properties and mix composition are illustrated in
Chapter 4. Compaction and curing methods in the laboratory, which significantly
contribute to the strength of samples are also described. Chapter 5 focuses on the
mechanical properties of cement bound materials, which are summarized from
previous research results. The cracking behavior, mainly due to the hydraulic reaction,
is addressed in Chapter 6. In Chapter 7 the effects of a more flexural stabilization is
presented. Finally in Chapter 8 the conclusions and recommendations are presented
based on this literature study.
In this review, the units that are used are SI units. During the literature study, some
results were originally mentioned in the British/American units. To prevent the errors
in the interpretation of the results due to the differences in SI and British/American
units, everything is converted into the SI system. Due to this conversion the numbers
can vary a bit of the original figures. The conversion tables are included in Appendix
B. Appendix C gives the translation of general terms mentioned in this review.
4
5
CHAPTER 2
STABILIZATION AGENT
Stabilization of soil is an effective method to improve the soil properties and enhance
the pavement performance. The aims of stabilization are to
(a) Increase stiffness and strength and thus stability and bearing capacity
(b) Increase volume stability to control the swell-shrink characteristics caused by
moisture changes
(c) Increase durability, resistance to erosion and frost attack
(d) Reduce permeability and avoid the intrusion of water
Basically there are five types of traditional stabilization, which are
1) Mechanical stabilization
2) Bitumen stabilization
3) Lime stabilization
4) Fly ash stabilization
5) Cement stabilization
Mechanical stabilization means improvement of the grain size distribution by mixing
the soil or gravel with another type of soil, and optimum compaction of materials.
The choice between these types of stabilization is dependent on the nature of the basic
material to be stabilized and the desired function of the stabilized layer in the
pavement structure (e.g. construction platform or structural layer). The overall costs
should also be taken into account.
There may be more than one candidate stabilizer applicable for one type of soil, which
is indicated in table 2.1. Cement is particularly effective in stabilizing coarse granular
material like sands and is not suited to treat fine-grained soil like clay owing to the
high cement content required. Lime is more efficient to stabilize clay. Table 2.2 lists
stabilization methods which are most suitable for specific applications of a particular
soil.
6
Table 2.1 Application of traditional stabilization methods (Ingles, 1972)
Designation Fine
clay
Coarse
clay
Fine
silt
Coarse
silt
Fine
sand
Course
sand Aggregate
Particle size
(mm) <0.006 0.006-0.02 0.02-0.01 0.01-0.06 0.06-0.4 0.2-2 >2.0
Volume
stability
Very
poor Fair Fair Good Very good
Lime
Cement
Bitumen
Range of maximum efficiency Effective, difficult quality control
Table 2.2 Stabilization methods most suitable for specific applications (FM 5-410)
Purpose Soil Type Methods
Sub-grade Stabilization
Improves load-carrying and
stress-distribution
characteristics
Fine-grained SA, SC, MB, C
Coarse-grained SA, SC, MB, C
Clays of low PI C, SC, CMS, LMS, SL
Clays of high PI SL, LMS
Reduces frost susceptibility Fine grained CMS, SA, SC, LF
Clays of low PI CMS, SC, SL, LMS
Improves waterproofing and
runoff Clays of low PI CMS, SA, LMS, SL
Control shrinkage and swell Clays of low PI CMS, SC, C, LMS, SL
Clays of high PI SL
Reduces resiliency Clays of high PI SL, LMS
Elastic silts or clays SC, CMS
Base-course Stabilization
Improves substandard materials
Fine-grained SC, SA, LF, MB
Clays of low PI SC, SL
Improves load-carrying and
stress-distribution
characteristics
Coarse-grained SA, SC, MB, LF
Fine-grained SC, SA, LF, MB
Reduces pumping Fine-grained SC, SA, LF, MB
7
The methods of treatment are
C = Compaction MB = Mechanical Blending
LMS = Lime-Modified soil SA = Soil-Cement
LF = Lime-Fly ash SL = Soil-Lime
CMS = Cement-Modified Soil
2.1 BITUMEN
Bitumen is obtained through distillation of crude oil in an oil refinery. It is sensitive to
temperature changes. At high temperature it is liquid and deformations (especially
rutting) can occur. When it becomes hard when temperature lowers, cracks may occur.
A bitumen-bound material is a mixture of mineral aggregates (sand, gravel or crushed
stone) glued together by the bitumen to form a stable base or wearing course. Bitumen
increases the cohesion and load-bearing capacity of the soil and renders it resistant to
the action of water. There are three types of bituminous stabilized soil:
• Sand bitumen. Sand particles are cemented by bitumen to provide a material with
increased stability.
• Gravel or crushed aggregate bitumen. A mixture of bitumen and a well-graded
gravel or crushed aggregate that, after compaction, provides a highly stable
waterproof mass of sub-base or base course quality.
• Bitumen lime. A mixture of soil, lime and bitumen that, after compaction, may
exhibit the characteristics of any of the bitumen-treated materials indicated above.
The stabilization of soils with bitumen differs greatly from cement and lime
stabilization. Unlike cement and lime which act chemically with the material being
stabilized, bitumen acts as a binding agent and simply sticks the particles together and
prevents the ingress of water (Sherwood, 1993). Freeze-thaw and wet-dry durability
tests are not applicable for bitumen stabilized mixtures.
2.2 LIME
Lime is most effective in stabilizing soil with a sufficient amount of clay. Lime reacts
with medium, moderately fine and fine-grained soil to result in decreased plasticity,
improved workability, reduced volume change characteristics and higher resistance to
the damaging effects of moisture. The most substantial improvements in these
properties are seen in moderately to highly plastic soils, such as heavy clays. The
most commonly used lime products are hydrated lime and quick lime. Dry hydrated
lime is effective in drying out soils, but produces a dust problem that makes it
undesirable for use in urban areas, and the fast drying action of lime requires an
excess amount of water during hot, dry weather. The quicklime is more economical
8
than hydrated lime as it contains approximately 25 percent more available lime, but it
requires more water for stabilization (Sherwood, 1993). The physical properties and
chemical composition of quick lime and hydrated lime for soil stabilization shall
conform to ASTM C977-89.
The treatment of pavement subgrades with lime can significantly improve the
engineering properties of a wide rang of soils. There are many recommendations for
soils to be treated with lime. For example, soils that should be considered for lime
treatment include soils with a Plasticity Index (PI) that exceeds 10 and have more than
25 percent particles passing the #200 sieve (0.075 mm) (Little, 1995). Lime is used in
case the material to be stabilized has a high PI, i.e. above 10 (UFC, 2004).
In stabilizing the clay, lime performs two basic functions: flocculation and
cementation. Flocculation reduces the PI of soil, thereby improving the workability
and reducing the swell potential of the soil. The cementation process is a slow
reaction after compaction, which increases the strength and durability of the soil.
Cementation also creates a working platform during construction. Lime has also been
used as an admixture to highly plastic materials to facilitate pulverization and mixing,
and to increase the compressive strength (Kersten, 1961).
Lime increases the soil strength by pozzolanic action, which results in the formation
of cementitious silicates and aluminates. Fly ash is generally high in silicate and
alumina, so fly ash can be added to lime stabilized soil to accelerate the pozzolanic
action (Molenaar, 1998). So the lime and fly ash are often used in combination in
stabilizing cohesive materials successfully. However the material is brittle and has not
much flexibility especially in clay soils.
Factors influencing the strength of lime-treated soils are similar to those affecting the
strength of cement-treated soils, i.e. the soil type, the amount of lime and the
compacted density (TRH 14, 1985). Yong and Ouhadi (2007) investigated the effect
of lime on the properties of marl soil (see Appendix A), which is indicated in Fig. 2.1
and Fig. 2.2. I
Fig. 2.1 Liquid limit for stabilized marl samples at different curing time
9
Fig. 2.2 Dry and wet CBR values for natural and stabilized marl for lime
Compared with the cement hydration process, the initial stage of lime reaction seems
quite rapid. Fig. 2.3 shows the rapid initial strength development of lime stabilization.
lime has a beneficial effect in the form of early hardening of the mixture. Due to this
advantage, lime can be used for cement stabilized soil to improve the strength
development.
Fig. 2.3 Initial strength development of a lime stabilization
and cement stabilization (Ingles, 1972)
British studies (Maclean, 1952) have shown that the addition of 2 percent of lime to
cement treated soil increased the compressive strength and limited the reduction in
strength due to immersion in water. The relationships between lime content and the
compressive strength for cement treated soil with 30% and 15% cement content are
shown in Fig. 2.4.
Fig. 2.4 Compressive strength of lime stabilized soil with different cement content
10
As can be seen above, the addition of 2 percent of lime can effectively increase the
strength of cement stabilized materials. Based on a study of PowerCem Technologies,
the 7-day compressive strength with a mixture of clay1 with 15% cement and 0,15%
of RoadCem was 6.4 MPa.
Bnattacharja and Bhatry (2003) investigated the compressive strength of some lime
or cement stabilized clay as a function of time, as shown in Fig. 2.5.
(a) Cal soil (sandy clay: A-7-6)
(b)
(c) Texas 1 soil (clay: A-7-6)
Fig. 2.5 The compressive strength of cement stabilized and lime stabilized soil
As it can be seen in figure 2.5, the strength at all ages of the cement-stabilized soil is
generally higher than lime-stabilized soil of the same age. Lime-stabilized soil starts
weaker but gains strength with time in comparison with this type of soil. So the
increase in strength of lime-stabilized soil is more dependent on the time rather than
on the lime content.
2.3 FLY ASH
Fly ash is the by-product produced by coal-burning electricity generating power plants
that contains silica, alumina, and calcium-based minerals. Depending upon the source
and makeup of the coal being burned, the components of fly ash vary considerably,
but all fly ash includes substantial amounts of SiO2 and CaO. Research (Kalinski and
1 Clay type of soil was tested in the project RC. 20110607. NL. 0495. PowerCem Technologies,
Moerdijk
11
Hippley, 2005) evaluated the cement stabilized fly ash. The results show that the
compressive strength of fly ash can be significantly increased by compaction and
addition of cement, as shown in Fig. 2.6.
Fig. 2.6 Unconfined compressive strength at optimum water content
for cement stabilized fly ash
For stabilization, fly ash helps to reduce the Plasticity Index and swell and to give the
soil additional strength. Since fly ash begins to hydrate immediately after the addition
of water, and the rate of hydration for fly ash is much higher than for Portland cement,
the soil strength and density are dependent on the mixing and compaction time.
Delays in compaction will decrease the strength and density of the soil dramatically
(Ferguson, 1993).
Studies (Kolias, Kasselouri-Rigopoulou et al. 2005) give the effect of addition of fly
ash on the compressive strength of clay soil (A-6), which indicates that clay combined
with 20% fly ash produces a high strength, as shown in Fig. 2.7.
Fig. 2.7 Uniaxial compressive strength of fly ash stabilized clay
The properties of fly ash differ significantly due to the production methods. Two major
classes of fly ash are specified in ASTM C 618 on the basis of their chemical
composition resulting from the type of coal burned; these are designated Class F and
Class C. Class F is fly ash normally produced from burning anthracite or bituminous
coal, and Class C is normally produced from the burning of subbituminous coal and
lignite (Halstead, 1986). Class C fly ash usually has cementitious properties in addition
to pozzolanic properties due to free lime, whereas Class F is rarely cementitious when
mixed with water alone. In their studies (Kalinski and Hippley, 2005) state that Class
C fly ash contains sufficient quicklime to be self-cementing, and doesn’t require the
12
addition of a cementing agent such as Portland cement to achieve significant strength.
However, addition of cement can increase the strength and accelerate strength gain,
because cement hydrates faster than fly ash.
2.4 CEMENT
Cement stabilization has become a popular option to enhance pavement performance.
The stabilized base material is stronger, more uniform and more water resistant than
the un-stabilized base material. Loads are distributed over a larger area and stresses in
the subgrade are reduced (Yoon and Abu-Farsakh, 2009). For stabilizations several
types of cement can be used several types of cement. In the world there are different
names of cement that are used. In the European Union a CEM II Portland fly ash
cement (6-35% fly ash and Portland Cement) is often used in stabilizations. CEM III
Blast furnace cement (36-65% blast furnace slag and 35-64% Portland Clinker) and
CEM I (100% Portland Cement) are less frequently used.
Parsons and Milburn (2003) investigated the properties of soil with the addition of
different stabilizers. The improved compressive strength results are indicated in Fig.
2.8. The results showed that lime and cement stabilized soils exhibited the most
improvement in soil performance for multiple soils.
Fig. 2.8 UCS of soil stabilized with multiple soils
In this literature study, the review focuses on the cement stabilization, which is
described in the following chapters in detail.
2.5 CONCLUSIONS
In this chapter, various stabilizing agents are briefly described. The addition of a
stabilizing agent can help to improve the properties of the basic soil (e.g. reduction of
plasticity, increase in bearing capacity) or secondary or primary granular materials
and to obtain a more durable material.
The choice between these types of stabilization is dependent on the nature of the basic
material to be stabilized and the desired function of the stabilized layer in the
13
pavement structure. Lime is effective in stabilizing cohesive materials such as clay
and silt, while cement is more effective in stabilizing granular materials such as
gravel and sand.
14
15
CHAPTER 3
MATERIALS FOR CEMENT STABILIZATION
Cement-bound materials are defined as mixtures of in-situ and/or secondary soil,
cement and water that binds and hardens after compaction and curing to form a strong
durable paving material.
Soils treated with a relatively small proportion of cement (less than that required for
the hardened soil-cement) are commonly classified as cement-modified soil, which
aims to improve the properties of the in-situ soil such as susceptibility for moisture
conditions. Soil and/or granular material (crushed aggregates, asphalt…), cement and
water are the three basic materials needed to produce cement stabilized materials.
3.1 SOIL
3.1.1 Particle size and soil structure
Soil used in stabilization contains a wide range of grain sizes, like gravel, sand, silt
and clay. The chemical composition of the soil has an important influence on the
properties of the stabilizations. Especially highly organic soils (peat) have a negative
influence on the properties of cement stabilizations. With RoadCem also an organic
soil was successfully stabilized2. However, the scope of this study is on inorganic soils.
The type of soil is generally specified in terms of the particle size. Soils can be
generally classified into two categories according to the grain size.
a) fine grained soil (mainly clay and silt)
2 Trail on Piako Road, reference number, RC.20100211.NZ.0292, PowerCem Technologies, 2010,
Moerdijk
16
b) coarse grained soil (sand and gravel predominantly)
or in shear strength terms
a) cohesive (e.g. clays, clay silt mixture, organic)
b) non-cohesive(e.g. sands and gravels)
The soil types shall be classified according to the detailed particle size and the
classification is different for various countries, which is indicated in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1 Particle size ranges in different countries
Range (mm)
Netherlands United kingdom USA
Clay <0.002 <0.002 <0.005
Silt 0.002-0.063 0.002-0.060 0.005-0.075
Sand 0.063-2 0.060-2 0.075-4.75
Gravel 2-63 2-60 4.75-76.2
Cobbles >63 60-200 >76.2
Boulders − >200 −
In order to specify the type of soil, the particle size distribution curve is to identify the
range of particle sizes. The particle size distribution is usually described in terms of
the cumulative percentage (by mass) of particles passing each sieve used in the
analysis and may be plotted in the form of a graph. Examples of particle size
distribution curves are indicated in Fig. 3.1.
Fig. 3.1 Typical soil particle size distribution curves (K.H, 1980)
A−uniformly-graded curve (poorly-graded curve)
B−well-graded curve
C−gap-graded curve
There are three typical types of distributions in Fig.3.1. A well-graded soil is
characterized by a smooth curve of a wide range of particle sizes. For a gap-graded
soil, the soil particles are deficient in a certain range of sizes. A uniformly-graded soil
consists of a small range of particle sizes. If the grain size distribution approaches the
Fuller curve, this means that the densest packing is approached.
Examples of particle size distribution curves of some typical soils are given in Fig.
17
3.2.
Fig. 3.2 Particle size distribution curves for sands and gravels (K.H, 1980)
There are also some specified coefficients to characterize the grading of a soil. The
coefficient of uniformity ( uC ) and the curvature index ( cC ) are used to determine
whether the soil is well graded or poorly graded and they are defined as follows:
60u
10
dC
d= (3-1)
2
30C
60 10
dC
d d=
×
(3-2)
d10 − sieve size through which 10% of material passes
d30 − sieve size through which 30% of material passes
d60 − sieve size through which 60% of material passes
d10, d30, and d60 are shown in Fig. 3.3.
Fig. 3.3 Particle size gradation coefficient
Table 3.2 gives the indication of the coefficients, uC and cC for gravel and sand.
18
Table 3.2 Indication of uC and cC
Index Gravel Sand
uC ≥4 ≥6
cC 1-3 1-3
Rating Well graded Well graded
In addition to the particle grain size, the particle arrangements also play an important
role with respect to the soil properties. Soil consists of particles, voids and moisture.
Three typical examples are indicated in table 3.3.
Table 3.3 Three physical states of the soil-aggregate mixtures (Molenaar, 2005)
(a) Aggregate with no
fines
(b) Aggregate with
sufficient fines
(c)Aggregate with great
amount of fines
Grain-to-grain contact Grain-to-grain contact
with increased resistance
against deformation
Grain-to-grain contact
destroyed, aggregate
‘floating’ in the soil
Variable density Increased density Decreased density
Non-frost susceptible Frost-susceptible Frost-susceptible
High stability if confined,
low if unconfined
High stability in confined
and unconfined conditions
Low stability
Not affected by adverse
water condition
Not affected by adverse
water condition
Greatly affected by adverse
water condition
Very difficult to compact Moderately difficult to
compact
Not difficult to compact
It should be noted that the fine particles can cause problems when they interact with
the moisture. An excessive amount of fine particles can lead to loss of stability,
susceptibility to frost action, and even mud pumping under traffic loads in practice.
Especially, when the fine particles are clay, the soil structure will become strong when
it is dry, and then will lose strength when it becomes wet. So in practice, the fines
content in the soil should be limited as required in the specifications.
19
3.1.2 Atterberg limits
In the presence of different amounts of water, cohesive soil can exist in four states:
solid, semi-solid, plastic and liquid. The Atterberg Limits are moisture contents which
are used to give empirical information on the soil’s reaction to water. The Atterberg
limits comprise the Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit and Shrinkage Limit:
The Liquid Limit (LL) is the water content at which a soil changes from a liquid to a
plastic state. The Plastic Limit (PL) is the relatively low water content at which soil
changes from a plastic to a solid state. The range of moisture content between PL and
LL is defined as Plasticity Index: PI=LL-PL.
The Plasticity Index (PI) is a measure of the soil’s cohesive properties and is
indicative for the amount and nature of the clay minerals in the soil. High PI soils
have the potential for detrimental volume changes during wetting and drying which
subsequently can lead to pavement roughness. The higher the PI, the more plastic the
soil will be (PCA, 2003).
Depending on the PI value, the soil can be qualified as being more or less plastic,
indicated in Table 3.4.
Table 3.4 Plasticity and dry strength related to Plasticity Index PI (Molenaar, 2005)
Plasticity Index PI Rate of plasticity Dry strength
0-5 Non-plastic Very low, can be crumbed
between thumb and finger
6-15 Medium plastic Moderate to low, can be broken
with the hands
16-35 Plastic Moderate to low, can hardly be
broken with hands
>35 Very plastic Very high, can’t be broken under
the palm of the hand
Clay with a high Plasticity Index (PI) also indicates a high clay content. Fig.3.4 shows
the values of clay content of a wide range of soils, together with the Plasticity Index.
Fig. 3.4 Relationship between clay content and Plasticity Index (Croney, 1977)
20
A high clay content can lead to severe volume changes as the moisture content
changes. A high clay content also requires more cement for stabilization, which
definitely results in shrinkage. So it is suggested to first treat clay soil with lime and
then stabilize the clay with less cement to reduce the adverse effects.
The shrinkage limit (SL) indicates a certain moisture content below which the volume
of the soil doesn’t change anymore when it is dried, as indicated in Fig. 3.5.
Fig. 3.5 Volume change of a soil specimen during drying
The shrinkage limit should be higher than the optimum moisture content, which is
determined in a Proctor density test (see Paragraph 4.2).
Fig. 3.6 gives an overview of the Atterberg limits of soil with the variation of water
content.
Fig. 3.6 Phases of soil and Atterberg limits (Molenaar, 2005)
Soil with a moisture content greater than the liquid limit has no bearing capacity. And
soil with a moisture content lower than the plastic limit is difficult to compact. And
soils with a high PI and LL can experience a large amount of moisture loss and
absorption, which can result in excessive shrinkage or swelling. These volume
changes can result in lower bearing capacity and cause significant damage to the
pavement structure. So it is preferred to stabilize a cohesive soil with a low PI-value
21
to decrease the moisture-susceptibility (Molenaar, 2005).
3.1.3 Soil classification
Soil classification systems have been developed based on the particle size distribution
and their Atterberg limits. The best known classification systems are the AASHO and
USCS classification systems.
1. AASHTO Soil Classification System
The AASHTO system is developed by the Association of American State Highway
and Transportation Officials. The system contains seven classes to identify soils and
granular materials. Materials belonging to the groups A-1 to A-3 are coarse grained
materials while materials belonging to the groups A-4 to A-7 are fine grained
materials. The A-1 and A-2 groups have a sub-rating. Table 3.5 is an overview of this
system (Molenaar, 1998).
Table 3.5 Soil classification according to AASHTO
Main type Group Symbols Requirement
Coarse-grained
(<35% passing 0.075 mm)
A-1
A-1-a
<15% passes 0.075 mm,<30% passes
0.425 mm.<50% passes 2 mm and PI
<6
A-1-b <25% passes 0.075 mm, <50% passes
0.425 mm and PI <6
A-2 <35% passes 0.075 mm, except A-1
and A-3
A-2-4 to A-2-7 Depending on the plasticity limits ,
refer to plasticity chart in Fig. 3.7
A-3 <10% passes 0.075 mm, >50%passes
0.425 mm, no plastic
For fined-grained (<35%
passing 0.075 mm) A-4
>35% passes 0.075 mm, PI<10 and
LL<40
A-5 >35% passes 0.075 mm, PI<10 and
LL>40
A-6 >35% passes 0.075 mm, PI>10 and
LL<40
A-7 >35% passes 0.075 mm, PI>10 and
LL>40
22
Fig. 3.7 AASHTO plasticity chart
2. Unified Soil Classification System (USCS)
The USCS classification system identifies three major soil divisions: coarse-grained
soils, fine-grained soils, and highly organic soils. These three divisions are further
divided into a total of 15 basic groups. Table 3.6 presents the symbols used in USCS.
Table 3.6 Symbols used in USCS
Primary letter Secondary letter
Coarse-grained soils G=Gravel
S=Sand
W=Well-graded
P=Poorly graded
Fine-grained soils F=Fines
M=Silt
C=Clay L=Low plasticity
H=High plasticity Organic soils
PT=Peat
O=Organic
The USCS classification system is shown in Fig. 3.8 and the fine grained materials are
classified according to the plasticity chart as shown in Fig. 3.9 (ASTM D2487-85).
Fig. 3.8 USCS classification chart
23
Fig. 3.9 USCS plasticity chart
The differences between both systems are distinct. The particle size boundary in the
AASHTO system used to decide whether a material is coarse or fine grained is rather
larger than in the USCS system. The AASHTO system can’t indicate whether or not
the material is well graded, while the USCS system doesn’t allow to identify highly
plastic soils (Molenaar, 1998).
Clay can be made to exhibit plasticity within a range of water contents and exhibits
considerable strength when air dry. For classification, clay is fine-grained, or the
fine-grained portion of a soil, with a plasticity index equal to or greater than 4 (ASTM
D2487).
Clay soils present problems of shrinkage and swell under different moisture
conditions. The amount and type of clay determine its expansive characteristics. There
are three main groups of clays: kaolinite, montmorillonite and illite. Soils with more
than 50% clay in the fine fraction are called heavy clay. Clay is the finest of the soil
particles and can actually bond other particles together if sufficient clay and moisture
is present (Croney, 1977).
In spite of the high clay content, cement and lime can be used to stabilize clay to
reduce its high Plasticity Index and increase the strength. Some typical results are
shown in Table 3.7.
Table 3.7 Examples of the effect of cement-modification
on clay soils (PCA, 2003)
Soil No. Cement content (%) Plasticity Index Shrinkage Limit (%)
1 None 30 13
3 13 24
5 12 30
2 None 36 13
3 21 26
5 17 32
It is clear that the addition of cement substantially reduces PI and increases the
24
shrinkage limit, which indicates the improvement in the volume change characteristics
and stability.
The term “Activity” (Ac) has been developed to evaluate the activity of clay by
considering PI and the amount of fine particles.
c
PIA
C= (3-3)
Where
PI − Plastic Index
C − Percentage of particles < 2 µm
cA < 0.75 inactive clay
0.75 < cA < 1.25 normal clay
1.25 < cA < 2 active clay
cA > 2 highly active clay (Molenaar, 1998)
An increasing PI due to a greater activity of the clay leads to a decrease of the
cohesion. A very great activity makes the soil unsuitable for application in pavement
structures.
For stabilization, some typical cement contents for sandy clays and non-expansive
clays with low plasticity are shown in Table 3.8 (Lay, 1998).
Table 3.8 Cement requirement for different soil types
Clay types Cement requirement by mass of dry soil (%)
Well graded sandy clay 2-5
Sandy clay 4-6
Silty clay 6-8
Heavy clay 8-12
Very heavy clay 12-15
In this research, the soil to be used for stabilization is mainly sand and clay. Sands in
the Netherlands are usually uniformly graded. The average grain size d50 is mostly
between 146 and 269 µm and the coefficient of uniformity Cu = d60/d10 is between
1.55 and 2.45. The CBR value varies between 10 and 15% (Molenaar, 2001).
3.1.4 Shrinkage and swell
Most soils contain a fraction of clay as a part of their overall composition. Shrinkage
and swell of soils containing a relatively large clay fraction (particles < 2 µm) can
lead to severe damage on road pavements. Unequal swell can result in serious
25
cracking and unevenness of the pavements (Molenaar, 1998). However, cement
modification can decrease the plasticity and volume change characteristics, increase
the bearing capacity and provide a stable platform for the construction equipment.
(PCA, 2003).
The swell potential is dependent on the amount and type of clay in the soil. The
Plasticity Index is a rough measure for the swell potential as PI is determined by the
fine fraction of the soil (Donaldl, 1994). Table 3.9 gives the relationship between PI
and swell potential (Molenaar, 1998).
Table 3.9 Relationship between shrinkage limit, PI and swell potential
Shrinkage limit Plasticity Index Swell potential
>18 <15 Small
12-18 15-24 Moderate
8-12 25-46 Great
<8 >46 Great
Fig. 3.10 shows that the swell of a natural clay soil strongly reduces through
stabilization with addition of cement.
Fig. 3.10 Effect of addition of cement on the swell (PCA, 2003)
The tests were performed to evaluate the effect of the addition of cement to a
moderately expansive AASHTO Class A-7-6 (16) clay soil. The results showed that
three percent cement reduced the expansion, as measured in a CBR test, from 3.9% to
0.15%.
Fig. 3.11 gives an example of the effect of cement addition on the reduction of the
silt-clay content.
Fig. 3.11 Reduction of silt-clay content due to cement modification (PCA, 1949)
26
As seen above, the silt-clay content of 93% in the untreated soil was reduced to 53%
by the addition of 6% cement. A cement content of about 3% or 4% by weight would
reduce the PI sufficiently to meet the specifications. The cement hydration products
bind some of the particles together to form larger grains in the size ranges of fine sand
particles. The result is that the treated soil contains less silt and clay and more sand,
and in addition, the remaining clay has been altered chemically to become a less
expansive material (PCA, 2003).
3.1.5 Organic content
Organic materials are mostly present in soils like peat and mud and soils with a low
bearing capacity. They can interfere with the hydration of the cement, which will
cause a reduction in strength and durability. Sulfate may influence the long-term
durability of the cement-stabilized layer and thus pavement structure.
Soils that do not react with cement may owe to the presence of organic matter which
causes delayed reaction or to the presence of sulfates that cause swelling or reduction
in strength in the presence of water (Kersten, 1961). Kersten investigated the effect
of sulfate concentration. Results showed that a sulfate concentration in excess of 0.5
to 1.0 percent greatly reduced the strength of the immersed specimens. Research at
RRL has shown that for non-cohesive materials the total sulfate content should not
exceed 1% (as SO3). For cohesive materials the limit is 0.25%. In order to avoid the
adverse effect of organic content and sulfate, a chemical analysis should be done prior
to the mixing to determine the content of organic material.
In highly organic soils, the cement reaction will be adversely affected by the presence
of destructive acids, resulting in lower strength gain in mud and peat. Therefore, this
research concentrates on inorganic soil rather than organic soil. However, PowerCem
Technologies is contributing to the application of the stabilization of all types of soil
(even clay and high organic soils) and contaminated soils3.
Another issue that should be considered in the stabilization of soils is chromium,
which is an unavoidable trace element in many raw materials used in industry and
mining as well as the manufacturing of Portland cement clinker. Chromium VI
compounds are classified as extremely toxic because of their high oxidation potential
and their ability to penetrate the human skin and many are carcinogenic. For normal
strength concrete the content of Cr VI would be 140 ppb (part per billion), where the
acceptable risk limit in South Africa is 200 ppb. For high strength concrete or
variation in the manufacturing of cement, it may lead to an environmental risk when
considering the Cr VI. However, tests in PowerCem Technologies have shown that the
Cr VI content was reduced from 200 000 ppb to 140 ppb using industrial waste from a
3 Trail on Piako Road, reference number, RC.20100211.NZ.0292, PowerCem Technologies, 2010,
Moerdijk
27
chrome melter in a concrete matrix with the addition of PowerCem additive (Kurt,
2006).
3.2 CEMENT
Cement can be used as an effective stabilizer for a wide range of materials, and it is
particularly effective in stabilizing medium to low plasticity materials. The types of
cement are mainly are Portland, mixed with fly-ash and with high blast furnace slags.
Hydraulic cement refers to any cement that sets and hardens after it is combined with
water. Portland cement is hydraulic cement composed primarily of hydraulic calcium
silicates and is the most common used, ranging from TypeⅠto Type Ⅴ. TypeⅠis for
general purpose use and TypeⅡis used where precaution against moderate sulfate
attack is required. Type Ⅲ cements are chemically and physically similar to TypeⅠ
except they are ground finer to provide the early strength. Blended cement is also
hydraulic cement and is made by mixing two or more types of cement. Usually the
primary materials used in blended cement are Portland cement and slag cement. There
are two main types of blended cement: Portland blast furnace slag cement and
Portland-pozzolan cement.
Soil can be modified by cement to improve its quality or stabilized with a relatively
larger amount of cement to increase the strength and durability. Because when cement
is mixed with water, hydration is initiated rapidly. Cement hydration produces
cementitious material (e.g. C-S-H). Cement develops a high bond strength between
the hydrating cement and the soil particles. It also improves the gradation of the
stabilized clay soil by forming larger aggregate particles from fined-grained particles.
Although it is possible to treat almost any soil with cement to improve its properties,
in practice it is difficult to treat fine, clayey materials with cement owing to the high
cement content required and the difficulty in pulverizing the soil and mixing the
cement (TRH 14, 1985). In general, the soil should have a PI less than 30.
For the plastic materials, the addition of cement reduces their plasticity in terms of
Plasticity Index and increases the shrinkage limit as well as the UCS of the hardened
cement-bound mixture, which is shown in Table 3.10.
Table 3.10 Average change in properties for clay soils
% Stabilizer Plasticity Index Shrinkage Limit 7-day UCS 28-day UCS
3% Cement -52% 122% 468% 605%
3% Lime -55% 123% 183% 348%
5% Cement -64% 158% 775% 993%
5% Lime -64% 151% 266% 481%
As indicated in table 3.10, cement and lime accomplish a similar reduction in PI and
increase in shrinkage limit at similar content levels. Cement generally produces a
much higher strength than lime at all ages (Kersten, 1961).
28
The cement content plays a significant role in the properties of cement-bound
materials The selection of the cement content to be used is dependent on the soil
classification and the desired degree of improvement in soil quality. Generally small
amounts of cement are required when it is simply desired to modify the soil properties
such as gradation, workability and plasticity. When it is desired to improve the
strength and durability significantly, larger quantities are required (Donaldl, 1994).
Table 3.11 shows examples of required cement contents for the different soils.
Table 3.11 Cement requirement of different soils (Molenaar, 1998)
Soil type Amount of cement (%)
By weight By Volume
A-1-a 3-5 5-7
A-1-b 5-8 7-9
A-2 5-9 7-10
A-3 7-11 8-11
A-4 7-12 8-13
A-5 8-13 8-13
A-6 9-15 10-14
A-7 10-16 10-14
As indicated in the research (Kersten, 1961; Donaldl, 1994; Molenaar, 1998), a
good quality mix is obtained with a cement content generally in the range of 8% to
14% (depending on the soil type). The compressive strength increases as the cement
content increases. However, the higher the percentage of cement, not only the higher
the costs but also the more severe the shrinkage cracking.
For the field condition, it is generally accepted that the full-scale field-mixing process
is less efficient than the closely controlled laboratory mixing process, and hence it is
common practice to increase the lab-determined cement content by a multiplication
factor of about 1.5 to give a cement content appropriate in the field (Guthrie and
Rogers, 2010).
3.3 WATER
Water serves two purposes for stabilization: it helps to obtain the maximum dry
density during compaction and it is essential for cement hydration. The water content
for maximum compaction should be at optimum moisture content, for less or more
water will reduce the dry density. For cement hydration, sufficient water contributes to
the complete hydration and to achieve a high strength.
The Optimum Moisture Content (OMC) is the moisture content at which the material
reaches the maximum dry density, which can be obtained by the Proctor test
(described in paragraph 4.3). Prior to the mixing, the Proctor test should be performed
29
to get the Optimum Moisture Content, which is an important parameter for the
stabilization. After the mixing and compaction, the mixture should be covered to
avoid moisture loss. The specimen should be cured in a moist environment to ensure
hydration.
3.4 ADDITIVE
Many additives are currently available to improve the performance of the stabilized
material. In this research the effect of additive on the performance of the cement
stabilized soil will be investigated. The additive technology for stabilization is
summarized in this review.
3.4.1 Traditional additives
(1) Limestone based additives
When the soil contains a large amount of clay, the soil particles have a large surface
area and subsequently adsorb much water. The adsorbed water is strongly bonded to
the clay particles and difficult to remove unless by particular chemicals. Limestone
can be used to remove the bonded water, by ion exchange, which results in a lower
bonded water content.
Based on this, some products were introduced for clay stabilization, which have
advantages of improving workability, compaction and increase the soil’s shear
strength and bearing capacity, etc. They also can be applied as a stabilizer for sands
and silty soils.
(2) Polymer additives
Orts, Sojka et al. (1999) present a polymer that can be applied for reduction of the
soil erosion. Polymers are brought in the stabilization in a liquid form in order to
obtain a more homogeneous mixture (Egyed, 2010).
The product based on polymer technology has been applied as an environmentally
safe stabilizer at various soil conditions. It is reported that it can reduce or eliminate
the following problems: base failure of paved and unpaved roads, dust pollution, soil
permeability and soil erosion. However the lifetime of the polymers in soil
stabilization is short.
(3) Enzymes additives
A liquid enzyme stabilizer has been used for soil stabilization, which contributes to
increase in bearing capacity and reduction in soil permeability. Compared with
conventional additives, the use of an enzyme additive is more cost effective, and this
provides a beneficial alternative for road construction. Some additives of enzymes
have been proven to strengthen the road structure and significantly reduce the
30
construction cost.
3.4.2 RoadCem
The RoadCem additive is based on Nano technology and produced by PowerCem
Technologies. It has been used world widely as an additive and specifically designed
for applications in road construction and stabilization. It enhances and increases the
strength and flexibility of stabilized road layers and improves the overall performance
of cement-bound materials used in road construction. This study is intended to
evaluate the effect of RoadCem on the performance of cement-bound materials.
The marl soil (see Appendix A) was stabilized with RoadCem–cement to investigate
the effect of the additive. The results in terms of CBR values are shown in Fig. 3.12.
Fig. 3.12 Comparison of CBR values for lime stabilized marl soil
In Fig. 3.12 the CBR values are much higher with RoadCem than only with cement4.
Moloisane (2009) evaluated the strength behavior of unpaved roads stabilized with
non-traditional stabilizers. Table 3.12 presents the DCP-CBR strength of the stabilized
experimental panels after 8 months. DCP indicates Dynamic Cone Penetrometer.
Table 3.12 DCP-CBR strength for stabilized panels with different stabilizers
(Moloisane, 2009)
Panel
Number Stabilizer used
In-situ DCP-CBR Soaked DCP-CBR
Maximum CBR in
first 5 months
Maximum CBR in
first 5 months
1 Cement 222 179
2 Perma-Zyme 11X 152 49
3 RoadCem and cement 336 246
4 Dustex and Bitumen Emulsion 207 75
5 Dustex 154 121
6 Ecobond ((UF) resin) 190 150
7 Bitumen Emulsion 222 157
In this research, seven different commercial stabilizer products from five generic
4 Trail on Piako Road, reference number, RC.20100211.NZ.0292, PowerCem Technologies, 2010,
Moerdijk
31
group types were applied: one from the electro-chemicals generic group type
(Perma-Zyme 11X), and others were from the organic non-petroleum group (Dustex),
organic petroleum group (Bitumen Emulsion), polymer group
(Ecobond/urea-formaldehyde (UF) resin) and cement catalyst group (RoadCem). It
can be seen that the soaked CBR strength decreased for every type of stabilizer, but
the RoadCem and Cement treated experimental panel showed the highest strength. In
comparison with the panel with only cement, the panel treated with cement plus
RoadCem significantly outperformed in both in-situ and soaked conditions.
Also by environmental investigations and testing on the end-product, RoadCem has
been proven to be an environmentally friendly fine-powder substance5 . 6 . 7
(PowerCem Technologies, 2008).
3.5 CONCLUSIONS
In this chapter, the soil properties (e.g. particle size, classification and swell) are
discussed. Clay has a relative large particle surface area which will results in more
cement consumption for stabilization. Sand and gravel are the most suitable for
cement stabilization. Clay soil due to the high clay content is reported to be
susceptible to volume change. A chemical analysis should be done to determine the
content of organic material.
The cement content is a significant factor for the properties of stabilized materials.
The cement content should be determined to meet the requirement in accordance to
the strength and durability specifications. The water content must be determined by
the Proctor test to obtain the Optimum Moisture Content, which is essential for the
compaction and cement hydration. Compared with traditional additives, RoadCem is
reported to be effective in improving the properties of the cement stabilization.
5 Analyses of drilling Invert Cuttings versus PowerCem/OPC modifications and reference
mixtures, ref number: 60769/06, UEG, May 2006, Wetzlar (D) 6 Material Safety Data Sheet RoadCem,ref. number: 15-9722, Chemwatch , July 2008, Moerdijk
7 Immobilization of Cr VI in cement materials using PowerCem, reg.No: 1956/01084/06,
Bateman, April 2006, Pretoria (RSA)
32
33
CHAPTER 4
PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS
The properties of cement-bound materials are dependent on several factors:
(a) The nature of the materials whether it is clay, silt, sand or coarse aggregate
(b) The proportions of the mix (soil, cement and water)
(c) Degree of compaction and curing conditions (temperature and age)
(d) Environmental factors.
In this chapter, the review is mainly about the soil tests and compaction of the
soil-cement mixture.
4.1 SOIL TESTS
Prior to mixing with cement, the following soil tests should be conducted to classify
the soil type and evaluate the soil properties:
• Particle size distribution
• Atterberg limits (Plastic Limit, Liquid Limit and Shrinkage Limit)
• Maximum Dry Density
• Chemical analysis
4.1.1 Particle size distribution
The particle size distribution of soil is investigated by sieving. The soil sample is
distributed through various sieves of decreasing sieve size. The percentage passing
through every sieve against the sieve size is plotted to get the particle size distribution
(see Fig. 3.1). This test is performed based on the standard NEN-EN 933-1. The
equipment for the analysis is shown in Fig. 4.1.
34
Fig. 4.1 Particle size analysis of coarse grained soils using sieves
The smallest sieve size opening generally used is 0.063 mm, and below this the
distribution of silt and clay particles is determined using sedimentation techniques.
Wet sieving of the soil particles is the process to separate the fine grained soil from
the coarse grained soil, which is shown in Fig. 4.2.
Fig. 4.2 Wet sieving for particle size distribution of fine grained materials
4.1.2 Liquid Limit and Plastic Limit
The determination of the Plastic Limit is normally made in conjunction with the
determination of the Liquid Limit. Standard testing methods for Liquid Limit (LL)
and Plastic Limit (PL) are described in ISO/TS 17892-12 and ASTM D4318 -84. Both
LL and PL are determined on particles smaller than 0.425 mm.
1. Liquid Limit (LL)
In standards of ISO/TS 17892-12, the cone equipment (shown in Fig. 4.3) is used to
determine the Liquid Limit. The soil sample at its original state is mixed with a
certain amount of distilled water and then placed in the cup. The cone is allowed to
penetrate and the penetration is recorded, after this the water content is determined.
The procedure is repeated at least three times with different water content. For the
calculation of LL, the water content (%) and the cone penetration are plotted on a
35
linear scale (as shown in Fig. 4.4).
1. adjustable stand arm
2. plexiglass with graded scale
3. cone
4. specimen
5. mixing cup
6. index line
Fig. 4.3 Cone equipment
020406080100
10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28cone penetration/mmwater content/%
Fig. 4.4 Example of relationship between water content and cone penetration
The Liquid Limit is the water content determined from the specified penetration,
which is dependent on the cone (shown in Table 4.1).
Table 4.1 Cone penetration requirement
Cone penetration requirements 80g/30º (cone) 60g/60º (cone)
Initial penetration about 15 mm about 7 mm
Penetration range 15 to 25 mm 7 to 15 mm
wL determined from the penetration 20 mm 10 mm
In ASTM 4318-84 the liquid limit is determined by shaking the soil sample. The soil
sample is placed in a metal cup and a 2 mm wide groove is made in the center. The
soil is shocked by dropping the cup at a rate of 2 drops per second and the number of
drops when the two parts of the soil are drawn together along a distance of 13 mm
(shown in Fig. 4.5) is recorded. This procedure is repeated at different water content.
Plot a graph of number of drops and water content. The water content at 25 drops is
36
the liquid limit.
Fig. 4.5 Soil pat after groove closed
2. Plastic Limit (PL)
For determination of the plastic limit, the methods described in the standards ISO/TS
17892-12 and ASTM 4318-84 are similar. In ASTM 4318-84 the Plastic Limit is
determined by alternately pressing together and rolling into a 3.2 mm diameter thread
(shown in Fig. 4.6) a small portion of plastic soil until its water content is reduced to a
point at which the thread crumbles and is no longer able to be pressed together and
rerolled. The water content of the soil at this stage is reported as the Plastic Limit.
Fig. 4.6 Test for Plastic Limit
3. Plasticity Index
The Plasticity Index is calculated as the difference between the Liquid Limit (LL) and
Plastic Limit (PL). PI=LL-PL.
4.1.3 Chemical analysis
Soil with a high organic content corresponds to increased water absorption and in
most of the cases a low PH value, both have a big negative influence on the cement
reaction. It is essential to detect the presence and content of organic matter.
Organic material contains high amounts of carbon compounds, which when heated to
high temperatures are converted to carbon dioxide and water. In chemical analysis, a
dry solid sample is heated to a high temperature. The organic matter in the soil is
37
given off as gases. This results in a change in weight which allows for calculation of
the organic content of the sample.
First dry the granular materials to 100ºC ± 5ºC, so the water evaporates. This must be
done until constant weight to determine the presence of soil and organic material.
To determine the exact amount of organic matter, dry the soil sample for four hours to
600ºC and calculate the weight change. Because the organic material starts burning at
temperatures > 500ºC.
4.2 COMPACTION OF MIXTURE
Compaction is the process of packing the particles more closely together and reducing
the porosity which can increase the bonding strength and enhance durability. With
good compaction the materials can also obtain a better resistance to water and an
increased life span. This procedure can be performed according to standard NEN-EN
13286-2.
The dry density of the compacted soil is one of the main factors that influence the
strength of the sample. And the optimum moisture content is essential to achieve the
maximum dry density and to aid in cement hydration (Yoon and Abu-Farsakh, 2009).
There is an optimum moisture content for compaction, above or below which reduced
dry densities are obtained (J.Kennedy, 1983). The compaction curves are developed
to identify the maximum dry density and the optimum moisture content.
4.2.1 Compaction test
There are two approaches for compacting cement stabilized materials as described in
NEN-EN 13286-2, i.e. the standard and modified Proctor compaction test respectively.
The tests consist of compacting materials inside moulds with different dimensions
(shown in Table 4.2 and 4.3) according to the soil particle sizes, using a hammer
weight dropped from a fixed height at a prescribed number of drops. The procedure is
repeated for a sufficient number of water contents. The dry density is then plotted
against water content and the compaction curve is obtained.
38
Table 4.2 Summary of sample preparation methods
Percentage passing test sieves Mass of sample ( Kg) Proctor
mould 16 mm 31.5 mm 63 mm
100 ─ ─ 15 A
40 B
75 to 100 100 ─ 40 B
<75 75 to 100 100 40 B
─ <75 75 to 100 200 C
Table 4.3 Dimensions of the cylindrical test mould
Proctor mould Diameter (mm) Height (mm)
Thickness
Wall (mm)
Base
plate (mm)
A 100.0±1.0 120.0±1.0 7.5±0.5 11.0±0.5
B 150.0±1.0 120.0±1.0 9.0±0.5 14.0±0.5
C 250.0±1.0 200.0±1.0 14.0±0.5 20.0±0.5
Table 4.4 illustrates the summary of the Proctor test and modified Proctor test.
Table 4.4 Summary of the Proctor test and modified Proctor test
Types of test Characteristic Dimension
Proctor mould
A B C
Proctor test Mass of rammer kg 2.5 2.5 15.0
Diameter of rammer mm 50 50 125.0
Height of fall mm 305 305 600
Number of layers - 3 3 3
Number of blows per layer - 25 56 22
Modified
Proctor test
Mass of rammer kg 4.5 4.5 15.0
Diameter of rammer mm 50 50 125.0
Height of fall mm 457 457 600
Number of layers - 5 5 3
Number of blows per layer - 25 56 98
As indicated above, the modified Proctor test corresponds to a larger compaction
effort. Fig. 4.7 gives a comparison of the results of the two compaction methods.
39
155015701590161016301650167016900 2 4 6 8 10Moisture content (%)Dry density (kg
/m3) Modified Proctor Standard Proctor
Fig. 4.7 Moisture-density curves of a cohesive soil for
different compaction (Molenaar, 1998)
It can be noted that Modified Proctor compaction results in a higher dry density due to
the larger compaction effort. For practical use, whether standard or modified, the
required field density for base and sub-base layers is between 95% and 101% of the
maximum Proctor density determined in the laboratory.
4.2.2 Factors influencing compaction
1. Compaction methods
Soil is usually compacted by different compaction methods. Bahar, Benazzoug et al.
(2004) investigated the effect of different compaction methods on the strength of soil
stabilized with cement (5% percent by weight). Compaction was achieved by means
of static, vibratory and dynamic compaction. Static compaction was obtained by
applying a static pressure using a universal compression testing machine. The soil is
classified as moderately plastic clay type A-6 according to the AASHTO system. The
results are shown in Fig. 4.8 and Fig. 4.9.
Fig. 4.8 presents the compaction curves obtained by different compaction methods. It
can be observed that the three different methods of compaction used didn’t affect
significantly the dry density of the soil. The highest density was obtained with the
dynamic method when the water content is on the dry side of the curve and with the
vibro-compaction method when the water content is on the wetter side.
Fig. 4.8 Effect of compaction methods on the density
40
Fig. 4.9 Effect of compaction methods on the compressive strength
In Fig. 4.9 it can be found that, for dry specimens, dynamic compaction yields the
highest compressive strength for every cement content of the stabilized soil (Bahar,
Benazzoug et al. 2004).
Compaction with different energy should result in different dry density-moisture
curves, which is indicated in Fig. 4.10.
Fig. 4.10 Density-moisture curves for sandy clay soil with different compaction effort
It is clearly that the maximum dry density increases and the optimum moisture content
decreases with increasing compaction effort (Croney, 1977).
2. Cement content
Compared with the compaction of the raw materials, the compaction of the mixture of
soil-cement may be a little different. Fig. 4.11 gives examples of the compaction
curves obtained for an un-stabilized and cement stabilized sands (A-2, according to
AASHTO system) with different cement contents.
Fig. 4.11 Dry Density-Moisture curves for a sand stabilized with
different cement contents (Yoon and Abu-Farsakh, 2009)
41
The dry density increases with an increase in cement content. The optimum moisture
content of the cement stabilized sands (OMC = 10% to 11% ) is slightly lower value
than that of the un-stabilized sand (OMC = 11.5%).
The optimum moisture content and maximum dry density of compacted soil-cement
are approximately the same as those of the raw materials. Some soils do, however,
exhibit marked differences in optimum moisture content and maximum dry density,
but they are limited in the range of 1 to 3 pcf (pounds per cubic foot) (Kersten, 1961).
Table 4.5 gives typical ranges of increases and decreases for different soils stabilized
with cement.
Table 4.5 Maximum dry density and moisture contents of soil-cement compared to the
corresponding values for the raw soils (Kersten, 1961)
Soil group and type Change in Maximum
Density (in pcf)
Change in Optimum
Moisture Content (in
percentage units)
A-2 sandy loams 0 to +3 -1 to +1
A-3 sands 0 to +6 0 to -1
A-4 silts and loams 0 to -6 0 to +3
A-5 silts -3 to +1 0 to -3
A-6 medium clays 0 to +1 0 to -2
A-6 heavy clays -1 to +2 0 to -4
3 Soil type
Clay is very difficult to compact when dry or wet. The compaction of clay very much
depends on the water content. To achieve good results, the water content should stay
within ±2% of the optimum moisture content (Molenaar, 2005). Fig. 4.12 presents
examples of compaction curves of typical raw soils.
G = gravel S = sand
M = silt C = clay
W = well graded L = low plasticity H = high plasticity
Fig. 4.12 Dry density-moisture curves for a range of soil types
As shown above, with a decrease in soil particle size, the optimum moisture content
for a given compaction method is increasing. Clay particles have a relatively large
42
surface, so they need a larger amount of water for compaction.
4. Delayed compaction
In many studies it is found that delayed compaction has a detrimental effect on the
compressive strength and maximum dry density. Because cement begins hydrating as
soon as it comes into contact with water, compaction should be performed as soon as
possible after mixing in order to minimize the adverse effect of cement hydration on
the stabilized materials to be compacted.
Fig. 4.13 gives examples of delayed compaction influencing the dry density and
strength (TRH 14, 1985). Fig. 4.13 shows the loss in density and strength with
increase in time between mixing and compaction. So it is essential to perform the
compaction as soon as possible after mixing.
Fig. 4.13 The effect of a time lapse between mixing and compaction on the dry
density and unconfined compressive strength
4.3 MIX COMPOSITION
The proportions of cement, water and soil in the mixture significantly affect the
properties of the stabilized material. Therefore, the mix composition design is an
important process for stabilization.
4.3.1 Requirements for materials
In many studies, there are different requirements for soils suitable for cement
stabilization. In a research study (Molenaar, 1998) it is presented that the soil is
suited for cement-stabilization if:
% < 0.075 mm (#200 sieve): <35%
% > 0.075 mm: > 55%
Maximum grain-size: <75 mm
LL: < 50
PL: < 25
The specification for soil-cement requires:
43
1. The material should be well-graded with a coefficient of uniformity of not less
than 5.
2. The material passing the 425 µm sieve should have a Liquid Limit not greater
than 45 percent and a Plastic Limit not greater than 20 percent (Croney, 1977).
According to NEN-EN 14227-1, the aggregates grading for cement-bound granular
mixture is indicated in Fig. 4.14.
Y−Percentage passing by mass
X−Sieve size, in millimeter (mm)
1−Envelope A
2−Envelope B
Fig. 4.14 Soil gradings for cement-bound mixture
Fig. 4.14 covers all gradings with which practical experience in cement bound
granular mixtures exists. Gradings characterized by envelope A include sands.
Gradings characterized by envelope B include well-graded coarse aggregates with
limited contents of fines < 0.063 mm.
For a given soil that reacts normally with cement, the cement content determines the
nature of the cement-stabilized soil. The proportion of cement alters the plasticity,
volume change, susceptibility to frost heave, elastic properties, resistance to wet-dry
and freeze-thaw cycles (Kersten, 1961).
For stabilization, the quantity of cement required to give the specified strength for
soil-cement varies with the grading of the soil. Table 4.6 gives the ranges of cement
contents likely to be required for different type of soils.
Table 4.6 Cement content requirement for soils (Croney, 1977)
Soil Cement content (% by weight)
silt-clays 9-12
sandy-clays 8-10
well-graded sands 5-7
sandy gravels 3-5
Standard (NEN-EN 14227-1) gives the minimum cement content required for
stabilization (Table 4.7).
44
Table 4.7 Minimum cement content according to the maximum grain size
Maximum nominal aggregate size (mm) Minimum cement content (% by weight)
> 8.0 to 31.5 3
2.0 to 8.0 4
< 2.0 5
For stabilizing soil, the water content of the mixture should be the Optimum Moisture
Content obtained by the Proctor test. Water to be used should be clean and free from
deleterious materials and other organic substances without using RoadCem. Water
suitable for drinking is generally accepted for use.
4.3.2 Mix design method
In this research, the central composite design method is employed for mix
composition. The two independent variables are the cement content (C) and the
additive content (A). In a PhD thesis (Medani, 2000) the central composite design
method is described, see Table 4.8 and Fig. 4.15.
Table 4.8 Variables for central composite design
Trial Ccoded Acoaded
1
2
3
4
-1
+1
-1
+1
-1
-1
+1
+1
5
6
7
8
-ψ
+ψ
0
0
0
0
-ψ
+ψ
9-13 0 0
Fig. 4.15 Coded test conditions for the central composite rotatable design
As indicated in Table 4.8 and Fig. 4.15, trials 1-4 combine the corner values with the
distance from the center point ±1. Trials 5-8 are called star points, and the distance
45
from the center is ψ, which depends on certain properties desired for the design and
on the number of factors involved. If the value of ψ is set at 2 , the design is called
rotatable. This means that the variance of the predicted response at any point x
depends only on the distance of x from the design center point.
To scale the coded terms of Table 4.7 into values within the range of interest, ψ= 2
is set equal to half the ranges of the variables and the scaling factors for the tests
follow from (Medani, 2000):
scaling max min
12 ( )
2C C C= − (4-1)
scaling max min
12 ( )
2A A A= − (4-2)
In which
scalingA − scaling factor for additive content
scalingC − scaling factor for cement content
maxA − maximum additive content (kg/m3)
minA − minimum additive content (kg/m3)
maxC − maximum cement content (kg/m3)
minC − minimum cement content (kg/m3)
Finally the experimental values of the cement content and additive content follow from:
max min
1( )
2coded scaling
C C C C C= × + + (4-3)
max min
1( )
2coded scaling
A A A A A= × + + (4-4)
4.4 CURING CONDITIONS
The curing condition plays an important role in the properties of cement stabilized
materials on the short and long term. Proper curing methods significantly contribute to
the development of the strength of specimens. Appropriate temperature, moisture
conditions and time are required for curing.
Fig. 4.16 gives an example of the strength development of samples with different
cement content during the first 28 days. The soil is classified as ML/A-4 according to
USCS/AASHTO.
46
Fig. 4.16 Variation of unconfined compressive strength at 1, 7 and 28 curing days of
samples with different cement contents (Altun, Sezer et al. 2009)
The compressive strength increases rapidly during the first 7 days and after that the
rate of increase rate is relatively low. After 28 days, the compressive strength almost
remains the same.
The strength is also related to the curing temperature, which is essential for the
cement hydration. During curing, moisture may be lost by evaporation, which will
affect the cement hydration and reduce the final strength, so the specimen should be
cured properly to avoid moisture loss. An example of the effect of the curing
temperature on the 7 days compressive strength of cement-stabilized sand (cement
content 6%) is shown in Fig. 4.17.
Fig. 4.17 Relationship between unconfined compressive strength and curing
temperature for cement stabilized sand (TRH 14, 1985)
As shown in Fig. 4.17, the 7-day strength increases as the temperature increases and
this effect has been used to develop accelerated test methods, i.e. curing at high
temperature, to give an early indication of the long-term strength.
4.5 CONCLUSIONS
For stabilization laboratory soil tests should be performed first to indicate the soil
properties. The tests consist of grain size distribution, Liquid Limit and Plastic Limit,
and chemical analyses, which can be performed according to the specified standards.
Proctor test is usually used for laboratory compaction. Also the Proctor compaction is
essential to obtain the Optimum Moisture Content for stabilization and the maximum
dry density as a reference for field density. Compaction of the soil-cement mixture is
essential for stabilization, which can increase the strength and durability of cement
47
stabilized materials. Different soil types result in different compaction curves. The
moisture content for mix design is consequently determined from the optimum
moisture content of the curve. The curing condition should also be taken into account
for the strength development.
The selection of the materials for stabilization should refer to the specifications, and
the quantities of the components are determined according to the guidelines and
practical experiences. In this research, the central composite design method is
employed for the mix composition.
48
49
CHAPTER 5
MAIN MECHANICAL PROPERTIES
Four major variables control the degree of stabilization with cement:
1. The nature of the soil
2. The cement content
3. The moisture content during compaction
4. The dry density attained in the compaction.
If the moisture content and the dry density are controlled according to the standard
methods, and normal mixing and curing procedures are applied, the nature of soil and
the cement content used determine the degree of stabilization (Kersten, 1961).
5.1. COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
The compressive strength is the most commonly used mechanical property for
evaluating cement treated materials, and is extensively used for the mix design and
quality control (TRH 14, 1985). The compressive strength is dependent on the soil
type, the amount and type of cement and the degree of compaction. The moisture
content and curing conditions also affect the compressive strength. These influencing
factors are described hereafter.
1. Cement content
The cement content has a significant effect on the strength of cement stabilized
materials. The strength increases as the cement content increases, because the
hydration products fill the pores of the matrix and enhance the bond strength between
the particles.
50
Park (2010) has published 12 SEM (Scanning Electron Microscopy) photos of
specimens after failure, which clearly show the microstructure of the cement
stabilized material specimens with different cement content, as presented in Fig. 5.1.
Fig. 5.1 SEM photos of cement stabilized sand specimens after testing
(a) 4% cement; (b) 8% cement; (c) 12% cement; (d) 16% cement (Park, 2010)
As shown in the pictures, for the specimens with a cement content of 4 and 8% the
sand particles protrude from the mixture, and some voids between these particles can
be observed. However, when the cement ratio was relatively high, such as 12 and 16%,
the sand particles are buried into cement and don’t appear.
Examples of the effect of the cement content on the compressive strength are
presented in Fig. 5.2. In this research (TRH 14, 1985) the compressive strength of
different soils stabilized with various cement contents was investigated. Similar
research results from PowerCem Technologies are also included in Fig. 5.2 to get an
indication of the trends. It should be realized that the soils stabilized with cement plus
RoadCem are not exactly the same as the soils stabilized with only cement in the
eighties.
Furthermore, the test conditions (specimen size, loading rate, etc.) might be different.
The strength increases more or less linearly with the cement content but at different
rates for different soils. The larger the particle sizes of the soil, the higher the
compressive strength of the stabilized material. A well-graded particle size
distribution also results in a better strength. As for the addition of RoadCem, the
compressive curves are all above the curves for the same cement content but without
additive, which indicates that Roadcem can improve the compressive strength, when
the right doses of RoadCem is used, for all types of raw materials.
51
(1) Silty clay
(2) Uniformly graded sand
(3) Well graded sand
(4) Gravel
Fig. 5.2 Relationship between unconfined compressive strength and curing period for
different soils stabilized with various cement content
2. Moisture content
The water content is also an important factor to determine the compressive strength
because the moisture content is essential to achieve the Maximum Dry Density and to
52
hydrate with the cement to gain strength. Yoon and Abu-Farsakh (2009)
investigated the effect of the moisture content and the water/cement ratio on the
compressive strength at 7 days, shown in Fig. 5.3 and Fig. 5.4. The soil is classified as
silty sand (SM) and A-2 according to the UCCS and AASHTO system, respectively.
Fig. 5.3 Relationship between moisture content and UCS
Fig. 5.4 Relationship between water to cement ratio and UCS
As shown above, the unconfined compressive strength has a positive correlation with
the moisture content at the dry side of the Optimum Moisture Content. The optimum
water to cement ratios that correspond to the highest strength are about 0.75, 1.05 and
1.25 for the silty sand sample mixed with 12, 10, and 8% cement, respectively.
Yoon also proposed a correlation model to estimate the unconfined compressive
strength of cement stabilized sand:
0.62( / )
wc a
ini
Cf p
e w c= × (5-1)
Where
cf −unconfined compressive strength (kPa)
ap − reference pressure (atmospheric pressure) (kPa)
ini
e − initial void ratio unit (%)
wC − cement content (%)
The moisture is not only needed for compaction, but must also be sufficient to ensure
the cement hydration. The effect of ratio of water and cement on the compressive
strength was investigated by Yoon, which is shown in Fig. 5.5.
53
0123456789
0 2 4 6 8 10Water/Cement RatioUnconfined Compressive strength (MPa) soil/cement ratio=0.47soil/cement ratio=1.0soil/cement ratio=1.54soil/cement ratio=4
Fig. 5.5 28-day strength of cement treated clay
Fig. 5.5 shows the data plotted separately according to the soil-cement ratio. As can be
seen, for a given water-cement ratio. This relationship can be expressed in the
following equation
( / )
0( / )
m s c
c n
ef f
w c= (5-2)
Where
0f , m and n are experimentally assigned values. For the cemented slurry clay
samples, m =0.62, n =3 and 0f = 4,000 kPa for the 7-days strength and 6,000 kPa
for the 28-days strength (Yoon and Abu-Farsakh, 2009).
The experimental work in (Kersten, 1961) showed that the compressive strength
increases to a maximum at a moisture content slightly less than the optimum moisture
content for the sandy soil and the silty soil, and at a greater moisture content than the
optimum moisture content for clay soil.
The influence of the moisture content is more related to its ability to improve
workability and facilitate compaction to obtain a coherent mass than that it is to the
water requirement for hydration, because adequate water for compaction ensures
adequate water for hydration provided it is not lost during curing (Kersten, 1961).
3. Curing conditions
Appropriate curing conditions significantly help develop the compressive strength.
The curing age is an important factor affecting the strength development. In research
(TRH 14, 1985) the effect of the curing age on the compressive strength was
investigated for soil stabilized with two types of cement. Based on this result, the
effect of adding Roadcem is included in Fig. 5.6. The curve with RoadCem is
obtained from Powercem Technologies. It can be seen that by use of RoadCem, the
compressive strength at 28 days is 20% to 30% higher than the strength only with
cement. However, it has to be realized that the soil type and test conditions will have
been different.
54
00.511.522.533.544.553 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14Cement content (%)Compressive strengt
h (MPa) 112days56days28days14days7days4days2days1day112 days withRoadCem
(a) Ordinary Portland Cement
(b) Portland Blast Furnace Cement
Fig. 5.6 Effect of curing age on the unconfined compressive strength
Fig.5.6 shows the increase in strength with age. It has been found that the 28-days
strength is between 1.4 and 1.7 times the 7-days strength. For estimation purposes a
factor of 1.5 may be used.
Bahar, Benazzoug et al. (2004) investigated the strength of immersed specimens
stabilized with cement (5% percent by weight). The soil is classified as moderately
plastic clay type A-6 according to the AASHTO system. The compressive strength of
specimen at dry state and after 48 hours immersion at an age of 28 days are given in
Fig.5.7.
Fig. 5.7 Compressive strength for dry and wet specimens at 28 days
After immersion in water for 48 hours, the strength of the specimens decreased
significantly compared to the dry specimens, because soaking reduces the bonding
strength of the particles. Experiments by Kersten (1961) show that the compressive
strength after 28 days immersion was in all cases lower than after 7 days immersion.
55
In practice the field strength may differ from the laboratory results due to the
environmental conditions. In order to predict the variations of strength due to
environmental changes, (Davis, Warr et al. 2007) evaluated the effect of wetting on
the strength of cement-stabilized sand (SP, according to the USCS system) by soaking
(1 day) the specimens up to 5 times and measuring the strengths after 28 days curing,
as presented in Fig. 5.8.
Fig. 5. 8 28-day strength variation with number of wetting
At low cement ratio (4%) the compressive strength varied a little. But at relatively
high cement ratios of 8%, 12% and 16% the strength increased gradually up to three
cycles of wetting and drying, and after that it stayed constant or decreased a little.
4 Dry density
The strength and durability of cement stabilized soil are strongly influenced by the dry
density. The cement stabilized soil samples must be compacted to the maximum dry
density in order to reduce the porosity and enhance the bond strength.
Croney (1977) determined the unconfined compressive strength of cylinders of a
cohesive soil sample compacted to different dry density. The results in Fig. 5.9 show
that a higher dry density yields a higher compressive strength.
Fig. 5.9 Compressive strength of samples at different dry density (Croney, 1977)
For design purposes, the minimum compressive strength should be specified. In UK,
the minimum strength of 2.76 MPa at 7 days is required for moist-cured cylindrical
specimens having a height/diameter ratio of 2:1 (Guthrie and Rogers, 2010).
5. With RoadCem
Based on the research (Altun, Sezer et al., 2009) and (Bnattacharja and Bhatry,
2003), similar compressive test results from PowerCem Technologies are added in Fig.
56
5.10 and Fig. 5.11. Again it has to be realized that the soil type, the methods of
manufacturing specimens and the testing conditions might be different.
Fig. 5.10 Variation in the 1, 7 and 28 curing days strength of samples
Fig. 5.11 Effect of curing age on compressive strength
The main observation in Fig. 5.10 and Fig. 5.11 is that due to the addition of
RoadCem the strength keeps on developing during a longer period of time, compared
to cement stabilization only. In this latter case, the gain in strength after 7 days is very
limited.
Fig. 5.12 illustrates the SEM images A–D of the experimental panel treated (stabilized)
with RoadCem and Cement, at 5 000 (images A and D), 2 500 (image C), and 1 500
(image B) times magnification. Fig. 5.12 (A) and (C) are the images of one month and
five months after construction and show the dense crystalline microstructure
(indicated by arrows). It is worth noting that an extended and more profound
crystalline microstructure formation is visible in image (C). The image in Fig. 5.12 (B)
is the image three months after construction and it does not show the microstructure
clearly (lowest magnification), hence, it was disregarded for the analysis.
Fig. 5.12 (D) is the image of eight months after construction and it shows a
dense-cemented matrix in the form of interlocked clusters (indicated by circles), and it
is an increase in linking between particles. That contributed to bond strength and
strength gain. The cementitious growths have fully developed between the particles
forming bonds; hence, there is no evidence of shrinkage cracking. This efficiency to
fill up the voids improves strength.
The typical needle-like crystals seen in the experimental panel are not visible when
the soil is stabilized with only cement. Therefore, it looks as if the RoadCem stabilizer
affects conventional cement stabilization. The SEM images show different
57
characteristics because of the different magnifications sizes.
Fig. 5.12 SEM images of RoadCem and Cement treated soil/material
(PowerCem Technologies, 2008)
5.2 TENSILE STRENGTH
Sub-bases and bases in pavements structures are subjected to tensile stresses and
strains under applied traffic loads. Therefore the tensile strength of the cement-bound
base material is required for most design methods.
The direct tensile test, the indirect tensile test and the flexural tensile test are three
tests that can be used to determine the tensile strength of cement stabilized materials.
The indirect tensile test is easy to perform, therefore it is to be preferred to the direct
tensile test, which is more difficult (TRH 14, 1985). According to NEN-EN 14227-1,
the tensile strength tf can be derived from the indirect tensile strength itf using the
relationship t it0.8f f= . In practice the indirect tensile test and the flexural tensile test
are the two primary types of test utilized to obtain the tensile strength.
5.2.1 Indirect tensile strength
The indirect tensile strength is defined as the stress at failure of a cylindrical specimen
subjected to a compression force applied on two opposite directions, shown in Fig.
5.13. It can be performed according to the standard NEN-EN 13286-42.
58
1 − specimen
2 − packing strips
F − load
Fig. 5.13 Indirect tensile test
Kolias, Kasselouri-Rigopoulou et al. (2005) have presented test results on the effects
of the cement content on the indirect tensile strength of cement stabilized clay (soil
type: A-6, according to the AASHTO system), see Fig. 5.14.
Fig. 5. 14 Effect of cement content on the indirect tensile strength at 28 days
The indirect tensile strength increases significantly with the cement content up to
about 10% and beyond that the rate of increase is slower.
Consoli, da Fonseca et al. (2011) have evaluated the effect of the cement content and
porosity on the indirect tensile strength. The soil is classified as well graded silty sand
(SM). The results of 7-day strength by use of cement (CEM Ⅲ) are presented in Fig.
5.15.
Fig. 5.15 Variation of the indirect tensile strength of cement
59
As shown in Fig. 5.15, the addition of cement promoted an increase in the indirect
tensile strength, and a reduction of the porosity also results in increased indirect
tensile strength. Reduction of the porosity results in much more contact between the
particles which enhances the bonding strength.
In this research (Consoli, da Fonseca et al., 2011), the relationship between the
voids/cement ratio and the 7-day indirect tensile strength is also given, as shown in
Fig. 5.16.
Fig. 5.16 Variations of the indirect tensile strength with cement content and porosity η
It is shown that the voids/cement ratio ( ivη / C ) is an appropriate index parameter to
evaluate the indirect tensile strength.
The relationship between indirect tensile strength and compressive strength has been
evaluated, as shown in Fig. 5.17. It can be seen that a high compressive strength
corresponds to a high indirect tensile strength.
Fig. 5.17 Relationship between compressive strength and indirect tensile strength
(Shacklock, 1974)
In research (Babi, 1987) two linear mathematical models were utilized to define the
correlation between the compressive strength and the indirect tensile strength.
i t cf af b= + (5-3)
it c'f a f= (5-4)
Where
itf is the indirect tensile strength
60
cf is the compressive strength
a , b and 'a are the coefficients
The gradation of the granular materials has practically no influence on the relationship
between itf andc
f . The compaction of the mix influences the relationship. With a
degree of compaction of 98%, 95% and 90% (Modified Proctor) the indirect tensile
strength was 11.5%, 13.0% and 15.0% of the compressive strength, respectively.
5.2.2 Flexural tensile strength
The flexural tensile strength is often referred as the modulus of rupture. The flexural
test simulates the field condition of the cemented layer in a pavement structure when
subjected to a wheel loading, and it is easy and quick to perform, so it is preferred to
be used. The flexural test assumes the applicability of the beam-bending theory and
that the material has the same elastic modulus in compression and tension (Otte,
1978)
The flexural tensile strength of cemented materials is about one-third of the
compressive strength for low-strength materials and about one-fifth of the
compressive strength for high-strength materials (TRH 14, 1985). Research (Ronald
et al. 1979) gives an almost linear relationship between the flexural tensile strength
and the compressive strength, indicated in Fig. 5.18.
Fig. 5.18 Flexural tensile strength plotted against compressive strength
In another research (Kersten, 1961) comparable data on unconfined compressive
strength and flexural strength of hardened cement-treated soils shows a nearly linear
relationship at all cement contents and at all ages. The flexural strength was
approximately 20 percent of the compressive strength.
The strain at break is defined as the strain beyond which the material fails in response
to the applied load. It is a determining factor for calculating the structural thickness
for static loading or roads with high axle loads. The higher the strain at break, the
61
thinner the required pavement structure.
The strain at break can be obtained based on the flexural strength and the deflection.
Traditional cement-bound materials like concrete and cement stabilized sand have a
strain at break of 150 to 200 µm/m and about 125 µm/m, respectively. Through the
addition of Roadcem the strain at break increases very substantially. So it is possible
to create more flexible cement-bound materials by the addition of RoadCem
(PowerCem Technologies, 2008).
5.3 ELASTIC MODULUS
5.3.1 Static modulus
A typical stress-strain curve for an unconfined compression test on a cemented
material is shown in Fig. 5.19.
Fig. 5.19 Typical stress-strain curve for cement stabilized materials
The slope of the initial straight line represents the elastic modulus of the cemented
material. When concrete and other cemented materials are subjected to tensile stress
the stress-strain relationship becomes non-linear when the applied stress exceeds
40-70 percent of the failure stress (Maclean, D.J., Robinson et al. 1952).
The stress-strain relationship can be affected by many factors. Fig. 5.20 gives the
curves for basaltic crushed rock stabilized with different cementitious binders with
3% additive content.
Fig. 5.20 Typical unconfined compressive stress-strain relationships for 7-days cured
specimens with different binders (Chakrabarti and Kodikara, 2003)
Fig. 5.21 presents the effect of addition of cement on the elastic modulus of samples
62
at the age of 28 days (Bahar, Benazzoug et al. 2004). The soil is classified as
moderately plastic clay type A-6 according to the AASHTO system. In can be seen
that the cement stabilization increases the slope of the curve.
Fig. 5.21 Stress-strain curve for samples under compression
Kersten (1961) investigated the variation of the static modulus of elasticity of cement
treated sand-clay mixtures with the clay content ranging from 0 to 100 percent. The
results show that the static modulus decreased with increasing clay content, which is
shown in Fig. 5.22.
Fig. 5.22 Influence of clay content on the modulus of elasticity (Kersten, 1961)
In order to estimate the elastic modulus of cement stabilized materials, it is usually
related to the strength. TRH 14 (1985) reports the following relations:
Cement-treated crushed stone tE 8 3500f= + (5-5)
Cement-treated natural gravel tE 10 1000f= + (5-6)
Cement-treated crushed stone 0.88
cE 4.16( ) 3484f= + (5-7)
Cement-treated natural gravel 0.88
cE 5.13( ) 1098f= + (5-8)
Where:
E − static modulus of elasticity (kPa)
cf − unconfined compressive strength (kPa)
tf − flexural tensile strength (kPa)
63
Molenaar (2005) reported that the flexural strength and flexural stiffness for cement
treated fine grained, cohesive soils can be estimated using the following equations.
t c0.0042 0.1427f f= − + (5-9)
0.885
f cE 1435 f= (5-10)
Where:
cf − compressive strength (MPa)
tf − flexural tensile strength (MPa)
fE − stiffness modulus in flexure (MPa)
According to the standard NEN-EN 14227-1, cement bound granular mixtures shall
be classified by the tensile strength and the elastic modulus, shown in Fig. 5.23.
Fig. 5.23 Characterization of cement-bound granular mixtures by the
tensile strength (MPa) and modulus of elasticity (MPa)at 28 days
The tensile strength ( tf ) shall be derived from the indirect tensile strength using the
relationship t it0.8f f= . The elastic modulus shall be measured in indirect tension.
5.3.2 Dynamic modulus
The dynamic modulus of elasticity is a material property that indicates how the load is
distributed when the material is dynamically loaded. A model (5-11) was given to
indicate the relationship between the pulse velocity and the dynamic modulus (Babic,
1987).
d
bE aV= (5-11)
Where:
V is the pulse velocity (km/s)
a and b are coefficients.
64
An example of relation (5-11) is given in Fig. 5.24.
Fig. 5.24 Dynamic modulus and pulse velocity
For estimation of the dynamic modulus, Fig. 5.25 gives examples of an experimental
relationship between the dynamic modulus and compressive strength (Babic, 1987).
Fig. 5.25 28-day compressive strength–dynamic modulus of elasticity correlations
As indicated in Fig. 5.25, the relationship between the compressive strength and the
dynamic modulus of elasticity is mostly non-linear. The results can be described by a
mathematical model of the following form:
d cln( )E a bf c= + (5-12)
The relationship between the compressive strength and the dynamic modulus is based
on experimental results with variable cement content, soil gradation and dry density.
No single correlation for all stabilized mixes could be established.
A relationship between the dynamic modulus and the flexural tensile strength is given
in research (Croney, 1977), which is shown in Fig. 5.26.
Fig. 5.26 Relationship between dynamic modulus and flexural tensile strength at 28
days for cemented granular materials
At a given flexural tensile strength, the dynamic modulus decreases with increasing
fines content in the soil. Clays, sands and gravels show different elastic deformation
behavior under repetitive loading, so when stabilizing with cement the mixtures will
65
behave quite differently.
Kersten (1961) presents that the static modulus of elasticity in compression is on
averages slightly more than 60 percent of the static modulus in flexure. In the study
there is presented a linear relationship between the dynamic modulus and the flexural
tensile strength, except for the lower strengths of the silty and clayey soils (Fig. 5.27).
The relationship trend also fits for that with compressive strength. This relationship
can be compared with that in Fig. 5.27, which is not linear.
00.511.522.533.50 5 10 15 20 25 30Dynamic modulus of elasticity (103 MPa)Flexural strength
(MPa) Sand-gravelSandy loamClayey Sa.GravelSilt loam
Fig. 5.27 Dynamic modulus and modulus of rupture (flexural tensile strength)
Croney (1977) presents a relationship between the dynamic and static Young’s
modulus for cemented granular materials. The equation is:
d sE =1000+0.88E (5-13)
Where dE and sE are the dynamic and static modulus (MPa), respectively.
In PowerCem Technologies, the dynamic modulus is determined by ultra-waves
(nondestructive, Fig. 5.28).
Fig. 5.28 Measurement of dynamic modulus of elasticity
Fig. 5.29 shows the damped harmonic vibration with RoadCem and without
RoadCem. It can be seen that with the use of RoadCem a higher damping is achieved,
which means better harmonic absorption of vibration when there are earthquakes.
This means that through the addition of RoadCem the cement-stabilized layer has a
better chance to survive earthquakes without structural damage.
66
Fig. 5.29 Comparison of damped harmonic vibration with RoadCem
and without RoadCem
5.4 FATIGUE PROPERTIY
Fatigue testing is conducted to determine the lifespan of a material subjected to
repeated dynamic loads. Fig. 5.30 shows the variation of the modulus of rupture MOR
(also known as flexural tensile strength) with the number of cycles of failure for silty
clay stabilized with cement.
Fig. 5.30 Dynamic flexure tests for 28-day curing time
It can be seen that the flexural tensile strength decreases by about 44%, when around
100,000 load cycles are applied. So it was demonstrated that as much as 44%
reduction in strength can occur when soil-cement beams are subjected to dynamic
flexure (Bhogal, Coupe et al. 1995).
Fatigue damage usually occurs when the applied stress amounts about 35 percent or
more of the strength. The failure starts with micro-cracking and a loss of bond at the
interface between the aggregate and the matrix of fine material. It can be concluded
that the material is able to withstand an unlimited number of load repetitions when the
stress ratio remains below 0.35, for the applied stress is then too low to start the
micro-cracking. (Otte, 1978)
The stress ratios are plotted against the number of cycles to failure to obtain the
so-called S-N curves. Typical S-N relationships for cement stabilized recycled
aggregate (SRA) compared with other materials (Sobhan and Das, 2007) are shown
67
in Fig. 5.31.
Fig. 5.31 Stress ratios versus number of cycles to failure
As indicated in Fig. 5.30, the performance of SRA is quite similar to these traditional
materials.
Generally, the fatigue failure criterion of cement stabilized soil is expressed by the
SN-N equation:
log NSN a b= − (5-14)
Where
t
σ
σSN = − Ratio of applied tensile stress and ultimate tensile stress
tσ − ultimate tensile stress
σ− applied tensile stress
In Netherlands, based on laboratory testing, a strain related fatigue curve was
determined for a particular sand cement:
log N 10 0.08ε= − (5-15)
Where
ε − Flexural tensile strain at the bottom of the sand cement layer (µm/m)
Compared with the laboratory determined fatigue relation, the field fatigue relation
can be written as
log N 8.5 0.034ε= − (5-16)
Where:
N − allowable number of 100 kN equivalent single axles,
ε − flexural tensile strain at the bottom of the cement treated base (µm/m)
Furthermore it appeared that the chance on fatigue failure is very small if the flexural
tensile strain level is 60 µm/m or less.
68
In South Africa, the following relationship for cement treated granular materials is
used,
tlog N 9(1- ε / ε )= (5-17)
ε − applied strain level (µm/m)
tε − flexural strain at break (µm/m)
For fresh crushed rock materials the strain at break varies between 100 and 250 µm/m.
The mean value was reported to be 160 µm/m (Molenaar, 2005).
In research (Otte, 1978) it is suggested to use strain as the criterion for controlling
fracture. Otte proposed 2 relationships between the strain ratio and the number of load
repetitions expressed as equations (5-18) and (5-19), shown in Fig. 5.32, namely:
fε / 1- 0.11log Nb
ε = (5-18)
0.079
b fε / ε N−
= (5-19)
Fig. 5.32 General fatigue curves for cement-treated bases
Croney (1977) performed fatigue tests at various frequencies of loading on two
concrete grades. The two concrete grades used were 25 MPa and 32 MPa unconfined
compressive strength at 28 days of curing. The results are shown in Fig. 5.33. CPM
indicates cycles per minute.
Fig. 5.33 Effect of loading frequency on stress/life relationship for concrete
The mean relationship shown in Fig. 5.33 can be used for the structural evaluation of
69
concrete pavements.
Although there seems to exist a large variation in fatigue relations, the relation
between applied stress or strain and allowable number of load repetitions always
exhibits very high values for the slope, indicating a rather brittle behavior. Compared
to the traditional materials, it has been proven that the addition of a specific
PowerCem product (RoadCem) can improve the fatigue property, which is shown in
Fig. 5.34.
(a) (b)
Ed—dynamic modulus
E0—initial dynamic modulus
Fig. 5.34 Fatigue behavior of cement bound materials
From Fig. 5.34, with RoadCem it is clear that at the end of the lifetime the material is
not suddenly breaking. This is due to the higher flexibility of the material with
RoadCem. In practice no cracks and no deformation are occuring when execution and
design is according to the instructions. And the fatigue curves with RoadCem are
between the asphalt and sand cement. (Birgisson, Egyed et.al. 2008)
5.5 DURABILITY
Durability can be defined as the ability of a material to retain stability and integrity
when exposed to the environmental conditions for many years. This is an important
property especially if the material is subjected to severe environmental conditions.
70
Durability of the base contributes greatly to the satisfactory performance of
pavements. Two tests are available to evaluate the durability of cement stabilized
samples, namely, by wetting and drying and by freezing and thawing (NEN-EN
12390-9). The freeze/thaw test procedure consists of freezing the cured specimens at
-25ºC in a freezer for 24 hours, and then thawing for another 24 hours at a
temperature of +22ºC and a relative humidity of approximately 98%.
Both test results are expressed by the loss in weight of a specimen after 12 cycles of
freeze/thaw cycles or wet/dry cycles. The suggested allowable material loss values are
given in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1 Durability requirements for cemented soils (Molenaar, 1998)
Soil Allowable loss in weight
A-1, A-2-4, A-2-5, A-3 < 14%
A-2-6, A-2-7, A-5 < 10%
A-6, A-7 < 7%
The durability of stabilized soil on repeated wetting and drying primarily depends on
the pore structure and the tensile strength of the material. Research (Bnattacharja
and Bhatry, 2003) gives an example of wet/dry test results for cement and lime
stabilized soil.
Fig. 5.35 Weight loss in wet-dry durability testing of soil stabilized with
6 and 9% cement and lime
It clearly indicates that cement stabilized soil exhibits superior performance to that
stabilized with hydrated lime.
Shihata and Baghdadi (2001) investigated the effect of the time of exposure to water
on the durability of the specimen (cement content 7%). The soil is A-2-4 according to
the AASHTO classification. Samples were tested after 12 cycles and then exposed to
saline water during different periods of time, which is indicated in Fig. 5.36.
71
Fig. 5.36 Change in weight loss with exposure period in the samples tested for
(a) Freeze-Thaw and (b) Wet-Dry tests
The results show that both trends of mass loss generally increase sharply up to 90
days of exposure after which the rate of increase drops to almost zero. The soil with a
larger amount of fines exhibited a larger mass loss in the wet-dry test, which is
opposite in the freeze-thaw test.
5.6 WATER PERMEABILITY AND ABSORPTION
Permeability is an important property when materials are exposed to water. For
practical use, impermeable material may be required to protect the underlying
material to prevent the water intrusion and avoid the strength loss.
Most soils can be made practically impermeable by addition of cement. The reduction
in permeability can be attributed to the hydration products filling the voids between
the particles. Bahar, Benazzoug et al. (2004) examined the variation of permeability
of a clay soil (A-6, according to the AASHTO system) by addition of cement and the
result is shown in Fig. 5.37.
Fig. 5.37 Effect of cement content on the water permeability
As shown above, the permeability of soil is closely related to the cement content. The
72
addition of cement can reduce the permeability. The stabilization of soil with cement
can lead to a larger mechanical strength and lower permeability and hence better
durability.
Research (Moloisane, 2009) evaluated the permeability of seven different commercial
stabilizer products from the five generic group types, two stabilizers from the
electro-chemicals generic group type (Perma-Zyme 11X and Con-Aid), and others
were from the organic non-petroleum (Dustex), organic petroleum (Bitumen
Emulsion), polymer (Ecobond/urea-formaldehyde (UF) resin), cement catalyst
(RoadCem). The results show that cement stabilization with RoadCem obtained the
lowest permeability.
In-situ soils are sensitive to moisture changes, but by stabilizing them with a binder
the stability can be maintained. Chakrabarti and Kodikara (2003) tested the degree
of water absorption at basaltic crushed rock stabilized with various binder contents.
Fig. 5.38 presents the effect of addition of a binder on the water absorption.
GB − general blended cement;
GP − general purpose cement;
AAS − alkali activated slag.
Fig. 5.38 Water absorption versus binder quality for specimens cured for 28 days
The results clearly show that the water absorption decreases as the binder quantity
increases, particularly for binder quantities > 3%.
Another issue is the potential for capillary rise of water within stabilized materials.
Higher water content in pavement material can give rise to excessive water pressures
and associated distress conditions.
Fig. 5.39 Capillary rise with time for 28-days cured specimens
73
(Chakrabarti and Kodikara, 2003)
Fig. 5.39 presents the moisture capillary rise as a function of time for basaltic crushed
rock stabilized with various contents of general purpose (GP) cement. The results
show that the rate of capillary rise decreases with the increase in cement content.
5.7 CONCLUSIONS
Compressive strength is an important property used to characterize cement bound
materials. Factors influencing the compressive strength are cement content, soil type,
curing conditions, and compaction effort, which have been reported in many previous
research results.
The indirect tensile test and flexural test are commonly used to obtain the tensile
strength. The relationship between compressive strength and tensile strength is nearly
linear and mathematical models have been created to indicate the correlation, but due
to the different compositions and soil type, there is no unique relationship.
For the modulus of elasticity, many relationships have been established to indicate the
modulus from the compressive strength or flexural tensile strength. The fatigue failure
criterion of cement stabilized soil is usually expressed by an SN-N equation, which
has a large variation.
Addition of cement can help reduce the permeability and increase the durability of
in-situ soils. Freeze/thaw and wet/dry tests are used to indicate the durability, which is
mainly affected by the cement content.
Addition of RoadCem has been proven to increase compressive strength, bearing
capacity and especially higher breaking strain and fatigue relation and this also with
clay soils and soil with organic material.
74
75
CHAPTER 6
CRACKING BEHAVIOR
Failure of a pavement system is sometimes associated with cracking in the bound base
course (Little, 1987). Cracks may occur in the base course and reflect through the top
layer under loading, resulting in visible surface cracks (as shown in Fig. 6.1), which
are referred as reflection cracks. Reflection cracks may not be a problem. If the cracks
are narrow (< 1/8 in. or 3 mm), sufficient load transfer normally exists through
aggregate interlock to keep the pavement structure functioning. However, if wide
cracks (> ¼ in. or 6 mm) occur at the surface, they will result in poor load transfer and
pumping of the subgrade materials due to water intrusion (Halsted, 2007). The severe
cracking will cause unevenness and structural failure of the pavement and increased
maintenance and repair costs.
(a) Narrow reflection crack (b) Wide reflection crack
Fig. 6.1 Reflection cracks (Adaska and Luhr, 2004)
When a cemented material is loaded beyond a certain limit microcracking first
develops at the interface between coarse particles and the matrix. The extent of the
microcraking increases upon subsequent loadings, and eventually the microcracks join
up into a macro-crack. Laboratory flexural and compressive tests indicated that
76
microcraking occurs at stress levels of about 35 percent and more of the ultimate
strength and strain levels or about 25 percent of more of the strain at break (TRH 14,
1985).
6.1 SHRINKAGE
There are generally two types of crack: shrinkage cracks and traffic induced cracks.
Drying shrinkage is the main cause of the shrinkage cracks. The final crack widths are
mainly dependent on the ultimate shrinkage strain and crack spacing (Halsted, 2007).
The degree of shrinkage is affected by various factors, the type of soil, degree of
compaction, curing, cement content, temperature changes and friction with
surrounding pavement layers.
The other type of cracking is traffic induced cracking. Traffic induced cracking will
not occur in cement treated bases when the strain level remains below 60 / 1.46
(environmental factor) = 41 µm/m in cases where the load transfer across transverse
cracks is poor. When a good load transfer can be guaranteed, this strain level is 50
µm/m. These values are proposed to be used as endurance limits for the material
investigated (Molenaar, 2001). Cracking due to environmental changes should be
distinguished from subsequent cracking caused by traffic.
When the hydrating cement treated material shrinks, friction develops between the
treated layer and the underlying layer and by consequence internal tensile stresses are
induced. The internal stresses may exceed the tensile strength and cracking occurs. In
research (TRH 14, 1985) it is described that the spacing and widths of the cracks are
determined by the rate of the tensile strength development relative to the shrinkage
tensile stress development.
Fig. 6.2 Cracking as a result of the interrelationship between shrinkage stress, strength
and time (TRH 14, 1985)
If the shrinkage stresses exceed the tensile strength at a relatively low strength then
the cracks will be more numerous, narrower and more closely spaced (shown as
77
Material A in Fig. 6.2). Such cracks will vary in width from fine hair cracks to 1 mm,
and they are usually up to 2 m apart. If the material develops a greater tensile strength
before the shrinkage stress exceeds the tensile strength, there will be fewer cracks, and
they may be 2 to 3 mm wide and 4 to 6 m apart (shown as Material B and C in Fig.
6.2).
6.2 FACTORES INFLUNCING SHRINKAGE
The degree of shrinkage is dependent on soil type, cement content, moisture content.
1. Cement content
Stabilization of soil with cement can reduce the shrinkage because the cement matrix
tends to restrain the soil movement, but the addition of cement doesn’t completely
prevent the shrinkage due to the moisture loss during the hydration. Fig. 6.3 illustrates
the effect of the cement content on the shrinkage of some granular material (A-2-4
and A-3, according to the AASHTO system).
Fig. 6.3 Effect of cement content on shrinkage (George, 1968)
As seen above, shrinkage is initially reduced with the addition of a small amount of
cement, but increases steadily as the cement content increases.
The combined effect of cement content and sand percentage was evaluated in research
(Kenai, Bahar et al. 2006). Fig. 6.4 shows the effect of the addition of cement, sand
and a mixture of cement and sand on the final shrinkage of samples. It can be
concluded that the shrinkage of cement stabilized soil compared to that of
un-stabilized soil was reduced by about 20% and 44% for 6% and 10% of cement
content, respectively. The addition of sand also reduced the shrinkage about 29% and
64% for 10% and 15% of sand content, respectively.
78
Fig. 6.4 Effect of sand and cement content on the shrinkage at the age of 28 days
2. Curing time
Shrinkage cracks may increase with time. Bahar, Benazzoug et al. (2004)
investigated the effect of the curing age on the shrinkage, as shown in Fig. 6.5. The
soil, classified as moderately plastic clay type A-6 according to the AASHTO system,
is stabilized with different cement contents.
Fig. 6.5 Development of shrinkage during first 28 days
It can be clearly seen that shrinkage increases rapidly during the first 4 days, and then
the rate of increase rate is slow. Hence, curing for the first 4 days will be beneficial in
reducing drying shrinkage and cracks.
Rapid moisture loss may also cause much shrinkage and is detrimental to the final
strength, because when materials dry quickly the volume will change rapidly, which
inevitably results in more shrinkage. Also there will not remain enough moisture to
continue hydration of the cement which will reduce the final strength. So it is essential
to control the curing environment and avoid rapid moisture loss.
However, due to the unavoidable variations of the environmental conditions, cracking
in a cement stabilized layer due to temperature and/or moisture content variation can’t
be avoided and must be accepted.
3. Moisture content
The shrinkage of stabilized materials mainly results from moisture loss. And moisture
loss is mainly caused by the cement hydration and evaporation. Therefore the
moisture content is a significant factor for controlling the degree of shrinkage. Fig. 6.6
presents the final shrinkage of sand stabilized with cement at variable moisture
content.
79
Fig. 6.6 Variation of final shrinkage at 28 days with mixing water content
(Kenai, Bahar et al. 2006)
This figure shows that as the water content increases the shrinkage increases rapidly,
due to the loss of excess of water which is not needed for cement hydration. So it is
essential to control the water content of the mixture, which is referred as the Optimum
Moisture Content obtained by the Proctor test.
Molenaar (1998) reported that the specimens that were compacted at the dry side of
the optimum moisture content showed lest shrinkage. For practice this means that if
one wants to limit problems due to shrinkage, compaction at a water content
somewhat lower than the optimum moisture content is recommended.
4. Compaction
A tight matrix of a well-compacted soil reduces the shrinkage potential, because the
soil/aggregate particles are packed densely together, resulting in a reduced voids
content. Good compaction also leads to better aggregate interlock and structural
support if a crack does develop (Adaska and Luhr, 2004).
Bhandari (1973) reported that compacting cement-stabilized soil at modified Proctor
compaction reduced the shrinkage by more than 50% compared to stabilized soil
compacted to standard Proctor density. In addition, the optimum moisture content at
Modified Proctor compaction is typically less than that at standard Proctor
compaction, which also helps to reduce shrinkage.
Fig. 6.7 Effect of dry density and moisture content on shrinkage (George, 1973)
Fig. 6.7 shows that increased dry density and reduced moisture content result in less
shrinkage of a cement-stabilized A-2-4 granular material.
80
The least amount of shrinkage is obtained for the stabilized material at highest density
and lowest moisture content. Many project specifications accept minimum densities of
95% of standard Proctor compaction.
5. Soil type
Studies (George, 1968; Nakayama, 1965) show that cement-stabilized fine-grained
soils (e.g. clays) exhibit more shrinkage than cement-stabilized granular soils. The
reason is that fine-grained soils have larger particle surface areas than granular
materials and typically require a higher moisture content for compaction and need a
higher cement content to achieve an adequate durability and strength. Both factors
contribute to a high moisture content and consequently a higher drying shrinkage
(Adaska and Luhr, 2004).
Research (George, 2002) presents an example of the effect of cement stabilized soils
on the crack pattern, as shown in Table 6.1. Clay particles have a large surface area
relative to their weight, so they hold a large amount of water, and have a high
optimum moisture content, so the potential for shrinkage cracking is greater.
Table 6.1 Effect of fines content on soil-cement crack pattern
Type of soil
Crack width
when last crack
occurred, mm
Crack spacing, when
last crack occurred
and later, m
Crack width
@ 7days,
mm
Terminal crack
width, mm
#1 (A-3/SM) 1.5 @ 1.6 days 13.0 3.40 6.0 @ 20.0 days
#2 (A-2-6/SC) 2.9 @ 1.2 days 6.0 6.00 10.8 @ 22.0 days
It is clearly that the crack width is substantially affected by the fine content of the soil:
the finer the soil, the larger the crack width.
6. Other factors
The factors contributing to the shrinkage are complicated, dependent on the inherent
properties as well as the environmental conditions. Fig. 6.8 presents the shrinkage
plotted against UCS for many materials.
Fig. 6.8 7-day UCS vs. beam shrinkage.
It shows that there exists an optimum strength that will produce the minimum
81
shrinkage and the optimum strength varies depending on the soil type.
6.3 METHODS OF CONTROLLING
Shrinkage is a natural characteristic of all cement-bound materials that should be
accepted. However, proper construction techniques and mix design methods can
minimize the adverse effects. With respect to the construction process, following the
proper construction techniques and providing good quality control during the field
operation can minimize cracking (PCA , 2003).
A number of research studies (PCA, 2003; Cho, Lee et al. 2006; FM 5-410) present
various methods to minimize shrinkage cracking, which include altering the mix
design, proper construction process and techniques, the use of “pre-cracking”, and
adding additives. In research (FM 5-410) it is reported that the drying shrinkage of
cement-treated soil can be significantly reduced by replacing a part of the cement with
fly ash. Not only the maximum dry shrinkage is reduced, but also the rate of shrinkage
is affected by the addition of fly ash. Fig. 6.9 gives an example that the addition of fly
ash reduces the drying shrinkage (Cho, Lee et al. 2006).
Fig. 6.9 Addition of fly ash to reduce drying shrinkage
PCA (2003) reports that “pre-cracking” is used by applying loading into the
soil-cement layer to obtain a network of closely spaced narrow cracks which acts to
relieve the shrinkage stresses and provides a crack pattern to minimize the
development of wide cracks. Research (PCA, 2001) shows that the microcracking
process substantially reduces the amount of pavement surface cracking, but not
significantly affects the base stiffness.
In addition to this, the use of RoadCem from PowerCem Technolygies company in
cement stabilization may result in no cracks and no deformations. Even when soils are
involved with a high organic content the cement reaction will get a boost with the
addition of RoadCem. Fig. 6.10 shows a cement stabilization with RoadCem in high
organic soil conditions in a Delta area without cracks after 4 years.
82
Fig. 6. 10 Cement stabilization with RoadCem showing no cracks after 4 years
(Birgisson, Egyed et al., 2008)
Due to the PowerCem additives a complex chemical reaction with cement, fly-ash,
water and granular material is initiated which leads to another mineral structure of the
cement bound material and a new type of crystalline structure is formed, which is
shown in Fig. 6.11.
Fig. 6.11 Picture from an electron microscope of the crystalline structure
(Birgisson, Egyed et al. 2008)
This new crystalline structure formed with addition of RoadCem results in a strong
flexural bound material, which efficiently prevents the cracking.
6.4 CONCLUSIONS
Reflection cracks at the surface of pavements are mainly caused by the cracks
occurring in cement-bound bases due to drying shrinkage. Shrinkage is a natural
characteristic of cement bound materials, which should be accepted. Cement content,
compaction and soil type influence the amount of shrinkage. Many measures can be
used to minimize the cracking due to shrinkage, including altering the mix
composition and following proper construction methods. Use of specific additive is an
efficient method. Additive from PowerCem Technologies has been proven to prevent
cracks.
83
CHAPTER 7
EFFECTS OF A FLEXURAL STABILIZATION
7.1 INTRODUCTION
Based on the specific information of the current stabilization a construction design
was made with RoadCem and without RoadCem.
For this calculation example a traditional asphalt pavement structure is compared with
a RoadCem structure. Both structures are assumed to have a similar theoretical
lifetime in terms of allowable number of standard axle load repetitions. In this
example the differences in failure mechanisms and the spreading of the loads to the
substructure are given in the following paragraphs:
1. Assumptions
2. Designs
3. Calculations
4. Deflections
5. Conclusions
7.2 ASSUMPTIONS
The calculation is based on the following assumptions, divided in the following parts:
• Traffic
• Soil
Traffic
The standard axle load is: 100 kN
84
The axle configuration is 2 times dual tires
Soil
Assumptions of the soil:
• Type of soil: clay
• Dynamic modulus of elasticity: 25 MPa
7.3 DESIGNS
Fig. 7.1 gives the detailed calculation for the traditional and the RoadCem asphalt
pavement structures.
½ x SAL = 50 kN
Front view
Y- axle
Side view
½ x SAL = 50 kN
X- axle
25 kN 25 kN
85
Asphalt 40mm Asphalt wearing course
Stiffness:Edy n: 6000 Mpa 180 mm
RoadCem
Stiffness:
Edy n = 3500 MPa
Concrete granulateStiffness: 250 mm
Edy n = 600 MPa
300 mm
Total thickness structure: 290 mm
Sand sub-baseStiffness:
Edy n = 100 MPa
700 mm
Total thickness structure: 1180 mm
Subsoil: Clay
Stiffness:
Edy n: 25 MPa
Traditional structure RoadCem structure
Fig. 7.1 Comparison of traditional and RoadCem asphalt pavement structures
7.4 CALCULATION METHOD
Step 1:
Determine the stresses, strains and deflections in the critical points of the pavement
structures by the linear elastic multilayer program BISAR.
Step 2:
Check the fatigue relationships of the normative asphalt pavement structures:
86
1. Traditional structure
Normative failure mechanisms of the traditional structure are given below.
Fatigue relation of the asphalt:
Neq8= EXP
(0.33796*LN(Edyn asphalt)^2-7.3642*LN(Edyn) +77.142-5.2438*LN(Strain) (7-1)
OR
Fatigue relation of the top of the unbound base course, which leads to pavement
deformations in the base (which reflects as rutting at the pavement surface):
Neq9 = 10^(-6.211-0.482*0.674-4*LOG(Deflection*0.000001)) (7-2)
The lowest value for Neq will be normative for the lifetime of the traditional structure.
2. RoadCem structure
Fatigue relation of the RoadCem layer:
Neq10
= 7*108*e
(-0.027*strain)*0.2 (7-3)
Due to the plastic behavior and the relatively low elastic modulus of the asphalt,
deformation could occur in the sub soil and could reflect at the pavement surface as
rutting. However, the plastic behavior of the Soil-RoadCem-cement material is low
and the dynamic modulus is relatively high. Due to this behavior the deformation in
the sub soil will NOT lead to deformations at the pavement surface. Just the fatigue
relation of the RoadCem layer will be normative for the lifetime of the RoadCem
structure.
The calculation of the two pavement structures is divided into 2 steps:
• Step 1: Calculation of the stresses and strains in the normative layers.
• Step 2: Calculation of the lifetime of the structures in terms of allowable
number of 100 kN in standard axle loads (Neq)
Step 1: Calculation of the occurring stresses and strains in the construction.
The strains and stresses occurring due to a passing vehicle are given in the table
below:
8 F78 asphalt fatigue relation
9 Fatigue relation for deformations in the top of unbounded materials, source CROW, publicatie
157 10
RoadCem fatigue relation, source Project: RC.20100718.CZ.0403 – Brusnice (internal PCT)
87
Table 7.1 Stresses and strains at the bottom of the bound layers
Construction Place Maximum
strain
Maximum
stress
U-deflection
Traditional
structure
Bottom Asphalt
layer
93 µm/m 0.65
N/mm2
518 µm
RoadCem
structure
Bottom RoadCem
layer
145 µm/m 0.63
N/mm2
NA
In the following figures are the strains and stresses (X-axle) and width (Y-axle) of the
road. With herein: Y = 0 is the center of the dual tires. These values are determined by
the calculation in the BISAR program.
Fig. 7.2 Horizontal strains in transverse direction at the bottom of the bound layer
over the width of the road due to a 50 kN dual tire load
Fig. 7.3 Horizontal strains in the longitudinal direction at the bottom of bound layers
over the length (X) of the road due to a 50 kN dual tire load
In Fig. 7.2 and 7.3 a clear difference is visible between the traditional and the
RoadCem pavement structure. The wheel loads in the RoadCem structure will be
more equal spread over the sub-layers. The reason that the strains are higher in
RoadCem structure because the material has a lower dynamic elastic modulus than the
asphalt of the traditional structure.
88
Fig. 7.4 Horizontal stresses in the transverse direction at the bottom of the
bound layers over the width of the road due to a 50 kN dual tire load
Fig. 7.5 Horizontal stresses in the longitudinal direction at the bottom of the
bound layers over the length of the road due to a 50 kN dual tire load
The differences in stresses at the bottom of the bound layers are shown in Fig. 7.4 and
Fig. 7.5. The stresses in the RoadCem structure are spread over a bigger area than the
traditional structure, what leads to a lower peak stress.
89
Step 2: Calculation of the lifetime of the structure:
The results of the lifetime of the structure are given in Table 7.2.
Table 7.2 Lifetime of traditional and RoadCem asphalt pavement structure
Traditional structure RoadCem structure
Normative failure mechanism of the
traditional structure:
Fatigue relation of the asphalt:
Neq = 2.92 x 106
OR
Fatigue relation of the top of the
unbounded base course, which leads to
rutting’s in the asphalt:
Neq = 4.04 x 106
The lowest value for Neq is normative
for the lifetime of the structure.
Normative failure mechanism of the
RoadCem structure:
Fatique relation of the RoadCem layer:
Neq = 2.79 x 106
Both structures have indeed about the same theoretical lifetime. It should be realized
that traffic wander and healing have not been taken into account in the calculation of
the pavement lifetimes.
7.5 DEFLECTIONS
In the following figures (Fig. 7.6 and Fig. 7.7) the deflections at the top of the
unbounded layer (concrete granulate base is the traditional structure and subsoil in the
RoadCem structure) are shown in a 3D graphic over the length and the width of the
road:
90
Fig. 7.6 Deflections at the top of the concrete granulate base in the traditional
structure over the length and the width of the road
Fig. 7.7 Deflections at the top of the subsoil in the RoadCem structure over the
length and the width of the road
The impact area of a passing vehicle on the top of the unbounded layer is in the
RoadCem structure much higher than in the traditional structure. This is because the
bending stiffness of the total bound layers is much higher in the RoadCem structure.
7.6 CONCLUSIONS
Despite the higher occurring stresses in the RoadCem layer, this structure has a
comparable lifespan in terms of allowable number of 100 kN standard axle repetitions
with the traditional asphalt pavement structure.
The main benefit of the use of RoadCem is the limited thickness of the structure
which saves materials, and labor in the execution. Besides the amount of materials
which have to be discharged and supplied is limited what makes this type of structure
a environmentally friendly technology.
91
The influence of the structure on the subsoil settlements are not included in this
example, but the limited weight of the pavement structures will definitely lead to less
settlements in the RoadCem structure in comparison with a traditional structure.
92
93
•
Chapter 8
CONCULSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
8.1 CONCLUSIONS
This literature review is undertaken to summarize the properties of cement bound
materials. Based on the literature study, the following conclusions can be given:
1) There is more than one stabilizing agent for every type of soil. The choice is
dependent on the nature of the soil and the desired function of the stabilized
layers as well as the overall cost. In general, lime is more effective to stabilize
cohesive soils like silt and clay, while cement is more suitable to stabilize
granular materials like sand and gravel.
2) Prior to soil stabilization, soil tests (Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, sieve analysis,
chemical composition, Proctor test) should be done to obtain the soil
properties. Based on the soil information, the appropriate mix composition can
be determined. The cement content is a significant factor influencing the
strength and the durability.
3) The mechanical properties of cement bound materials are influenced by
cement content, soil type, compaction, curing conditions and other
environmental factors. It is found that cement content and in-situ material type
are the main factors to control the strength of cement bound materials.
4) Shrinkage cracks in cement bound materials due to drying and moisture
changes can’t be avoided. Many appropriate methods can be used to reduce
these cracks and the risk for reflective cracking, like optimum mix
composition and proper construction technology.
5) For fatigue property, based on stress or strain controlled flexural tests, most of
the relationships are described by SN-N curves, which exhibit a large
variation.
6) RoadCem has been proven to be a very effective additive for soil stabilization.
94
• Improvement in compressive strength, flexural tensile strength, strain at
break and fatigue life.
• High resistance against earthquakes and vibrations.
• High resistance against erosion and natural disasters.
7) To evaluate the properties and the effect of using RoadCem as additive, a
comparison needs to be made for different soil types and mixture.
8.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
Soils stabilized with traditional materials like cement, bitumen and lime, often exhibit
insufficient performance (shrinkage cracks, brittle behavior, etc), which limits the
applications. However, non-traditional stabilizers have been introduced to improve the
properties of soil stabilization.
The product RoadCem, which is based on Nano technology, from PowerCem
Technologies has been widely used in many countries for cement stabilization, and the
laboratory tests and field results show excellent performance (no cracks, high strength,
high strain at break, etc). In this review, the comparison of the properties with other
traditional additives has been presented. For the future application, more research in
laboratory and field validation should be undertaken to systematically evaluate the
improvement of Roadcem in the soil stabilization. Based on this, the research will
focus on the effect of RoadCem on the mechanical properties of cement-bound
materials.
95
REFERENCES
Ingles, O.G,;Metcalf, J.B. (1972). Soil Stabilization Butterworths, Sydney
Sherwood, P. (1993). Soil stabilization with cement and lime. Transportation research
laboratory.
Little, D.N (1995). Handbook for stabilization of pavement subgrades and base
courses with lime. National lime association, Kendall/Hunt Publishing company,
Dubuque, Iowa.
Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC). Soil stabilization for pavements. US, 2004.
Kersten, M. S. (1961). Soil Stabilization With Portland Cement. Washington, D. C.,
National Academy of Sciences National Research Council
Molenaar, A.A.A. (1998). Road Materials Part 2 Soil stabilization. Lecture notes CT
4850, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
TRH 14. (1985). Cementitious Stabilizers in Road Construction South Africa, TRH 14,
Pretoria, South Africa.
Yong, R. N. and V. R. Ouhadi (2007). "Experimental study on instability of bases on
natural and lime/cement-stabilized clayey soils." Applied clay science 35(3-4):
238-249.
Maclean, D.J., Robinson, P.J.M., and Webb, S.B. (Oct.1952). “An Investigation of
the Stabilization of heavy clay soil with cement for road base construction .” roads
and road construction (London), 30:358, 287-92
Bnattacharja, S. and J. I. Bhatry (2003). Comparative Performance of Portland
Cement and Lime Stabilization of Moderate to High Plasticity Clay Soils, RD125,
Portland Cement Association, Skokie, USA.
Head, K.H. Manual of soil laboratory testing. Volume 1: Soil classification and
compaction tests. Pentech Press, Plymouth, 1980.
Kalinski, M. E. and B. T. Hippley (2005). "The effect of water content and cement
content on the strength of portland cement-stabilized compacted fly ash." Fuel
84(14-15): 1812-1819.
Ferguson, G. (1993). Use of self-cementing Fly ashes as a soil stabilization agent. Fly
96
ash for soil improvement. ASCE GSP 36. New York.1-14
Halstead, W. J. 1986. Use of fly ash in concrete. NCHRP 127 (October). Washington:
Transportation Research Board, National Research Council.
Yoon, S. and M. Abu-Farsakh (2009). "Laboratory investigation on the strength
characteristics of cement-sand as base material." KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering
13(1): 15-22.
Justin P. Milburn and Robert L. Parsons, 2004. P.E. Performance of soil stabilization
agents. K-TRAN: KU-01-8.
Molenaar, A.A.A. (2001). Prediction of fatigue cracking in asphalt pavements
Transportation Research Record (pp 155 - 162)
Croney,D. (1977). The Design and Performance of Road pavements. London,
Transport and Road Resarech Laboratory, Crowthorne, UK.
PCA (2003). "Properties and Uses of Cement-Modified Soil." Soil-cement
Information 11. Portland Cement Association, Skokie, USA
Donaldl. Basham, J. W. (Oct, 1994). "Soil Stabilization for Pavements." The Unified
Facilities Criteria.
PCA (2003). "Reflective Cracking in Cement Stabilized Pavements". Portland Cement
Association, Skokie, USA
Special studies No.42 and No.43 (1949) Unpublished report of Portland Cement
Association, Skokie, USA.
Kurt Waelbers, 2006. Immobilization of Cr VI in concrete structures using PowerCem.
Bateman Materials Limited Reg. No. 1956/01084/06
Guthrie, W. S. and M. A. Rogers (2010). "Variability in Construction of
Cement-Treated Base Layers." Transportation Research Record: Journal of the
Transportation Research Board 2186(-1): 78-89.
Orts, W. J., R. E. Sojka, et al. (1999). "Preventing soil erosion with polymer
additives." Polymer News 24: 406-413.
Moloisane, R.Y. (2009). Evaluation of the long-term strength behaviour of unpaved
roads stabilized with non-traditional stabilizers. University of Pretoria, South Africa.
25 Kennedy, J. (1983). "Cement-bound materials for sub-bases and road bases."
97
Bahar, R., M. Benazzoug, et al. (2004). "Performance of compacted cement-stabilised
soil." Cement and Concrete Composites 26(7): 811-820.
Molenaar, A.A.A. (2005). Road Materials Part 1 Cohesive and non-cohesive soils and
unbound granular materials for bases and sub-bases in roads. Lecture notes CT 4850,
Delft University of Technology, Netherlands.
Medani, T.O. and Molenaar, A.A.A. (2000). Estimation of fatigue characteristics of
asphaltic mixes using simple tests. Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Park, S. S. (2010). "Effect of Wetting on Unconfined Compressive Strength of
Cemented Sands." Journal of geotechnical and geoenvironmental engineering 136(12):
1713-1720.
Altun, S., A. Sezer, et al. (2009). "The effects of additives and curing conditions on
the mechanical behavior of a silty soil." Cold Regions Science and Technology
56(2-3): 135-140.
Kolias, S., V. Kasselouri-Rigopoulou, et al. (2005). "Stabilisation of clayey soils with
high calcium fly ash and cement." Cement and Concrete Composites 27(2): 301-313.
Consoli, N. C., A. V. da Fonseca, et al. ( 2011). "Voids/Cement Ratio Controlling
Tensile Strength of Cement Treated Soils." Journal of geotechnical and
geoenvironmental engineering 1(1): 306.
Shacklock, B.W (1974). Concrete constituents and mix proportions. Cement and
Consrete Association, London.
Babic, B. (1987). "Relationships between mechanical properties of cement stabilized
materials." Materials and Structures 20(6): 455-460.
E.OTTE, V. W. a. L. I. (1978). "Factors Affecting the Behavior of Cement Treated
Layers in Pavements
Bhogal, B. S., P. S. Coupe, et al. (1995). "Dynamic flexure tests of soil-cement
beams." Journal of materials science letters 14(4): 302-304.
Sobhan, K. and B. M. Das (2007). "Durability of Soil–Cements against Fatigue
Fracture." Journal of materials in civil engineering 19: 26.
Bjorn Birgisson, Christophe Egyed, et al. (2008). New Nano crystalline structure
leads to visco-elastic behaviour of cement based materials
Shihata, S. A. and Z. A. Baghdadi (2001). "Long-term strength and durability of soil
98
cement." Journal of materials in civil engineering 13: 161.
Chakrabarti, S. and J. Kodikara (2003). "Basaltic crushed rock stabilized with
cementitious additives: compressive strength and stiffness, drying shrinkage, and
capillary flow characteristics." Transportation Research Record: Journal of the
Transportation Research Board 1819(-1): 18-26.
Little, W. W. C. a. D. N. (1987). "Tensile Fracture and Fatigue of Cement-Stabilized
Soil " Transportation Engineering 113: 26-45.
Halsted, G. E. (2007). "Long-Term Performance of Full-Depth Reclamation with
Portland Cement: Research Synopsis." Portland Cement Association, Skokie, USA
Adaska, W. S. and D. R. Luhr (2004). Control of reflective cracking in cement
stabilized pavements, RILEM Publications.
George, K.P. (1968), “Shrinkage Characteristics of Soil-Cement Mixtures”, Highway
Research Record 255, Washington D.C..
Kenai, S., R. Bahar, et al. (2006). "Experimental analysis of the effect of some
compaction methods on mechanical properties and durability of cement stabilized
soil." Journal of Materials Science 41(21): 6956-6964.
Bhandari, R.K.M. (1973). “Shrinkage of Cement Treated Mixtures”, Journal of the
Australian Road Research Board, Vol. 5, No. 3, October,
George, K.P. (1973), “shrinkage characteristics of soil-cement mixtures”, Highway
Research Record 255, Washington D.C.
Nakayama, H., and Handy, R.L. (1965) “Factors Influencing Shrinkage of
Soil-Cement”, Highway Research Record 86, Washington, D.C.
George, K. P. (2002). Minimizing cracking in cement-treated materials for improved
performance, PCA Portland Cement Association, Skokie, USA.
Halsted, G. E. (2006). "Performance of Soil-Cement and Cement-Modified Soil for
Pavements: Research Synopsis." Portland Cement Association, Skokie, USA.
Cho, Y. H., K. W. Lee, et al. (2006). "Development of cement-treated base material
for reducing shrinkage cracks." Transportation Research Record: Journal of the
Transportation Research Board 1952(-1): 134-143.
FM 5-410. Soil Stabilization for Roads and Airfields.
99
PCA (2001). "Suggested Specifications for Soil-Cement Base Course Construction ".
Portland Cement Association, Skokie, USA
PowerCem Technologies (2008). RoadCem Laboratory guide.
“Soil Stabilization with Portland Cement”, Highway Research Board 292, Washington,
D.C., 1961.
Galloway, J.W. and H.M.Harding (1976). Elastic modulus of a lean and a pavement
quality concrete under uniaxial tension and compression. RILEM. Materials and
Strucutre,13-18.
Vertical Drainage (Dutch) Publication CROW (1993) 77, Ede, the Netherlands.
C.R.O.W. 1994. Publication 81. Gefundeerd op weg.
100
101
Appendix A
Fig. 1 Indication of marl soil in classification
102
Appendix B
CONVERSION TABLES (C.R.O.W. 1994)
Chart B.2.1 Conversion table length.
Chart B.2.2 Conversion table surfaces.0
103
Chart B.2.3 Conversion table volume.
Chart B.2.4 Conversion table mass.
104
Chart B.2.5 Conversion table density.
Chart B.2.6 Conversion table power and weight.
105
Chart B.2.7 Conversion table power and elasticity.
Chart B.2.8 Conversion table permeability
Chart B.2.9 Units
106
107
Appendix C
TRANSLATION OF TECHNICAL TERMS (C.R.O.W. 1994)
EnglishEnglishEnglishEnglish FrancaisFrancaisFrancaisFrancais DeutschDeutschDeutschDeutsch
AAAA aggregate granulat Zuschlagstoff, Gesteinsmaterial
aggressiveness agressivité Aggressivität
aligator cracking faïençage Netzrisse, Elefantenhaut
analysis analyse Untersuchung
analytical model modèle analytique analytisches (Rechen)Modell
articulated lorry camion articulé LKW - Zug
asphalt asphalte Asphalt
asphalt (2nd sense, US)
asphalt binder (US)
asphalt cement (US)
bitume Bitumen
asphalt concrete béton bitumineux Asphaltbeton
asphalt mixture enrobé asphaltique,
materiau bitumineux
Asphaltmischgut
asphalt pavement revêtement bitumineux Asphaltdecke, bituminöser
Oberbau
assessment of pavement
condition
évaluation de l'état du
revêtement (d’une chaussée)
Oberbau-Zustandserfassung
axle essieu Achse
axle load charge par essieu Achslast
axle spacing distance entre essieux Achsabstand
BBBB base course (US) couche de base obere Tragschicht
bearing capacity portance Tragfähigkeit
bedrock bedrock Felsuntergrund
bend courbe, virage Kurve
berm(e) berme Berme
binder liant Bindemittel
bindercontent teneur en liant Bindemittelgehalt
binder course couche de liaison Binderschicht
bitumen bitume Bitumen
bituminous binder liant bitumineux Bitumen, bituminöses
Bindemittel
bituminous layer couche bitumineuse bituminöse Schicht
bottleneck goulot d'étranglement Engstelle, Engpass
108
CCCC calibration factor
capping layer
coefficient de calage
couche de forme
Anpassungsfaktor
verbesserter Unterbau
carriageway chaussée Fahrbahn
canalisation (of traffic) canalisation (des véhicules) Kanalisierung (des Verkehrs)
cement ciment Zement
cement-bound material matériau traité au liant
hydraulique
hydraulisch gebundenes
Material
central reserve terre-plein central Mittelstreifen
clay argile Ton
cohesion cohésion Kohäsion
coarse aggregate granulat grossier Grobkorn
commercial vehicle véhicule commerciale Nutzfahrzeug
compaction compactage Verdichtung
concrete béton Beton
concrete pavement chaussée en béton Betondecke
construction traffic trafic de chantier Baustellenverkehr
core carotte Bohrkern
course couche Schicht
crack
longitudinal crack
reflection crack
transverse crack
fissure
fissure longitudinale
remontée de fissure
fissure transversale
Riß
Längsriß
Reflektionsriß
Querriß
cracking fissuration Rißbildung
structural cracking fissuration structurelle tragfähigkeitsbedingte
surface cracking fissuration superficielle oberflächliche
crazing faïençage feine Netzrisse
cross roads carrefour Kreuzung
cross section, cross profile profil en travers Querschnitt, Querprofil
crossfall pente transversale/dévers Querneigung
crown of a carriageway plateforme Straßenkrone
curb bordure (de trottoir) Bordstein
cycle path (track) piste cyclable Radweg
DDDD debonding décollement d’interface Verlust der Schichthaftung
deflection déflexion Einsenkung
deformation
elastic
plastic
viscous
déformation
elastique
plastique
visqueux
Verformung
elastische
plastische
viskose
delamination délamination Abplatzen, Ablösen einer
109
Schicht
density masse volumique Dichte
design conception,
dimensionnement
Entwurf, Bemessung
design criterie critère de dimensionnement Bemessungskriterien
design life durée de vie Bemessungslebensdauer,
Nutzungsdauer
design mix mélange théorique,
formule d’ enrobage
Eignungsprüfungsrezeptur
design period période de dimensionnement Bemessungsperiode
design traffic trafic escompté, trafic de
dimensionnement
Bemessungsverkehr
deterioration dégradation Schädigung,
Schadensentwicklung
distress
pavement distress
dégradation
dégradation de chaussée
Schaden
Oberbauschaden
ditch fossé Graben
ditch at top of slope cunette de crête de talus oberer Abfanggraben
ditch at foot of slope fossé de pied de talus unterer Abfanggraben
drainage drainage, évacuation des
eaux
Entwässerung
dual carriageway route à double voie zweistreifige Straße
durability durabilité Dauerhaftigkeit
dynamic load charge dynamique dynamische Belastung
EEEE elastic stiffness rigidité élastique elastische Steifigkeit
embankment remblai Damm
empirical model modèle empirique empirisches Verfahren
equivalent standard axle
load
essieu standard équivalent äquivalente Standardachslast
eveness uni Ebenheit
FFFF fatigue fatigue Ermüdung
filler filler (fines) Füller
flexible pavement chaussée souple flexibler Oberbau
(ungebundene und
Asphaltschichten)
footway trottoir, chemin piétonnier Fussweg, Gehweg
forecasting
short term
long term
prévision
à court term
à long term
Vorhersage
Kurzzeit-
Langzeit-
formation (level) plate-forme Unterbauplanum
110
foundation fondation Gründung
freight transport transport de marchandises Güterverkehr
friction course couche de roulement,
couche d’usure
Rauhbelag, Deckschicht
frost-susceptibility gélivité Frostempfindlichkeit
full depth asphalt
construction
structure bitumineuse
épaisse
Vollasphaltoberbau
GGGG global index
granular layer
indice global
couche granulaire
globaler (Zustands)wert
ungebundene Schicht
granular material granulat Gesteinsmaterial
gross vehicle mass masse totale du véhicule Fahrzeuggesamtmasse
gross vehicle weight poids total du véhicule Fahrzeuggesamtgewicht
gussasphalt asphalt coulé Gußasphalt
HHHH hard shoulder for emergency
stop
bande d'arrêt d'urgence Standstreifen, befestigter
Seitenstreifen
heavy vehicle poids lourd Schwerfahrzeug,
Lastkraftwagen
highway route Straße, Fernstraße
IIII improvement of soil sol traité, sol amélioré Bodenverbesserung
improved subgrade fondation traitée,
fondation améliorée
verbesserter Untergrund
interface
rough interface
smoth interface
interface
interface collée
interface glissante
Grenzfläche
rauhe Grenzfläche
glatte Grenzfläche
intersection carrefour routier, intersection Kreuzung
JJJJ junction carrefour Knotenpunkt
joint joint Fuge
KKKK kerb bordure Bordstein
LLLL layer couche Lage
levelling course couche de reprofilage Ausgleichsschicht
long-term performance comportement à long terme Langzeit-Gebrauchsverhalten
lorry (UK), truck (US) camion, poids lourd Lastkraftwagen, LKW
lorry with trailer camion avec remorque LKW mit Anhänger
lorry with semi-trailer camion avec semi-remorque LKW mit Sattelanhänger,
Sattelzug
load charge Last, Beladung
longitudinal profile profil longitudinal,
profil en long
Längsprofil
MMMM macrotexture macrotexture Makrotextur, Grobrauheit
maintenance entretien Erhaltung
111
mastic asphalt mastic, mastic d’ asphalte Asphaltmastix
mechanistic model modèle mechanique mechanistisches
(Rechen)Modell
median (US) terre-plein central Mittelstreifen
microtexture microtexture Mikrotextur, Feinrauheit
mix mélange Gemisch
mix design formulation Eignungsprüfung,
Rezeptentwurf
mix-in-place
mix-in-plant
mélange en place
mélange en centrale
Baumischverfahren
Zentralmischverfahren
modulus module Modul
modulus of elasticity
resilient modulus
module d’elasticité
module reversible
Elastizitätsmodul
Verformungsmodul
(Untergrundmodul)
moisture humidité Feuchtigkeit
moisture content teneur en eau Wassergehalt
motorway autoroute Autobahn
OOOO overlay recouvrement,
couche de renforcement
Hocheinbau,
Verstärkungs-schicht
PPPP particle size distribution granularité, distribution
granules, distribution
granulometrique
Korngrößenverteilung
passenger car véhicule léger, V.L. Personenkraftwagen, PKW
pave recouvrir, revêtir befestigen
pavement chaussée Fahrbahn
pavement
flexible pavement
flexible composite
pavement
rigid pavement
pavement deterioration
revétement
chaussée souple
chaussée semi-rigide,
chaussée mixte
chaussée rigide
revêtement rigide
dégradation de chaussée,
du revêtement
Oberbau
flexibler (bituminöser)
Oberbau
bit. Oberbau mit
zementstab. Tragschicht
starrer Oberbau
Verschlechterung des
Oberbau-zustandes,
Oberbauschädigung
pavement design dimensionnement de
chaussée
(Straßen-) Oberbaubemessung
pavement failure rupture de chaussée,
dégât de chaussée
Oberbauschaden
pedestrian piéton Fussgänger
112
performance comportement, tenue Gebrauchsverhalten
performance factor facteur de comportement Verhaltenskenngröße
(Schadensart)
performance model modèle de comportement Verhaltensmodell
plant-mixed mélange en centrale Zentralmischverfahren
porous asphalt enrobé drainant, enrobé
poreux
Drainasphalt, offenporiger
Asphalt
pot hole nid de poule Schlagloch
precracking pré-fissuration gezielte Rißbildung
QQQQ quality qualité Qualität
quarry carrière Steinbruch
RRRR raveling arrachement Kornverlust, Kornausbruch
reconstruction reconstruction Erneuerung
regulating course couche de reprofilage Ausgleichsschicht
rehabilitation rehabilitation Instandsetzung
response model modèle de comportement Beanspruchungsmodell
resurfacing rechargement,
renouvellement du surface,
resurfaçage
Deckschichterneuerung
rigid layer couche rigide starre Schicht
rigid pavement chaussée rigide starrer Oberbau (Beton),
Betonstraße
road
trunk road
toll road
road base (UK)
road construction
route
route à grand circulation
route à péage
couche de base
construction routière
Straße
Hauptverkehrsstraße
Mautstraße
obere Tragschicht
Straßenbau
road surface surface de chaussée Straßenoberfläche, Fahrbahn
roller rouleau, cylindre Walze
rut orniére Spurrinne
rutting orniérage Spurrinnenbildung
roughness rugosité Rauhheit, rauhe Stelle
roughness uni Ebenheit
SSSS safety fence (guardrail) glissière de sécurité Schutzplanke
(A: Leitschiene, CH:Leitschranke)
screed régle (de finisseur) Bohle, Einbaubohle (Fertiger)
semi-rigid pavement chaussée semi-rigide halbstarrer Oberbau
(zement-stabilisierte und
Asphaltschichten)
serviceability viabilité Befahrbarkeit
113
shoulder accotement Bankett
shoulder bas-côté Randstreifen
single axle essieu simple Einzelachse
skid resistance adhérence Griffigkeit
slab dalle Platte
slope talus, pente Böschung
soil
non-cohesive soil
stabilized soil
soil cement
sol
sol non cohésif
sol stabilisé
sol ciment,
sol stabilisé au ciment
Boden
nichtbindiger Boden
verfestigter Boden
mit Bindemittel (Zement)
verfestigter Boden
soil mechanics mécanique des sols Bodenmechanik
specification specification Vorschrift, technische
Beschreibung
standard axle essieu standard Standardachse
stiffness rigidité Steifigkeit
stiffness modulus module de rigidité Steifigkeitsmodul
strain allongement, déformation
relative
Dehnung
strength résistance Festigkeit
strengthening,
reinforcement
renforcement Verstärkung
stress contrainte Spannung
stripping désenrobage Ablösen(ung)
studded tyres pneus à clous Spikesreifen
subbase couche de fondation untere Tragschicht,
Frostschutzschicht
subgrade sol de fondation, sol support Untergrund, Unterbau
surface dressing enduit superficiel bituminöse
Oberflächen-behandlung
surfacing couche de surface Decke
TTTT tack coat couche d'accrochage bituminöser Haftanstrich,
Vorspritzung
tandem axle essieu tandem Tandem- (Doppel)achse
tensile test essai de traction Zugprüfung
test essai Prüfung, Versuch
total land requirement emprise Straßengrund
traffic flow flux de trafic Verkehrsfluß
traffic lane voie de circulation Fahrstreifen
114
traffic volume volume de trafic Verkehrsstärke
transverse distribution distribution transversale Querverteilung (des Verkehrs)
transverse profile profil en travers Querprofil
tridem axle essieu tridem Dreifachachse
truck (US) camion, poids lourd Lastkraftwagen, LKW
tyre, tire pneu Reifen
single tire roue simple Einzelreifen
twin tire roues jumelées Zwillingsreifen
UUUU unbound material matériau non traité,
matériau non lié
ungebundenes Material
unevenness défaut d'uni Unebenheit
transverse transversal Quer-
longitudinal longitudinal Längs-
VVVV voids content teneur en vides Hohlraumgehalt
WWWW wear usure Abnützung, Abrieb
wearing course couche de roulement Deckschichte
weight poids, charge Gewicht
weigh-in-motion (W.I.M) pesage en marche Wiegen während der Fahrt
wheel roue Rad
wheel assembly roue jumelée Zwillingsrad
wheel base écartement des roues Radstand
wheel load charge par roue Radlast
wheel path frayée, bande de roulement Radspur
widening elargissement Verbreiterung
ParParParParts of the road ts of the road ts of the road ts of the road
total land requirement emprise Straßengrund
crown of a carriageway plate-forme Straßenkrone
pavement chaussée Fahrbahn
traffic lane voie de circulation Fahrstreifen
hard shoulder for emergency
stop
bande d'arrêt urgence befestigter Seitenstreifen
Standstreifen
shoulder accotement Bankett
ditch fossé Graben
berm(e) berme Berme
central reserve
median (US)
terre-plein central (TPC) Mittelstreifen
slope talus, pente Böschung
115
cycle path (track) piste cyclable Radweg
ditch at top of cunette de Oberer
slope crête de talus Abfanggraben
ditch at foot of fossé de pied Unterer
slope de talus Abfanggraben
safety fence glissière de sécurité Schutzplanke
Structure of the pavementructure of the pavementructure of the pavementructure of the pavement t t t
pavement revêtement (2e sens)
Oberbau
road foundation corps de la chaussée Tragschichten (Oberbau ohne
Decke)
subgrade sol de fondation Unterbau
road surface surface de la chaussée
couche de surface
Fahrbahnoberfläche
Decke
surface layer,
wearing course
couche de roulement Deckschichte
binder course couche de liaison Binderschicht
road base (UK)
base course (US)
couche de base (obere) Tragschicht
subbase couche de fondation untere Tragschicht,
Frostschutzschicht
capping layer couche de forme verbesserter Unterbau
natural ground terrain naturel Untergrund
formation(level) forme Planum (Unterbau-)