Validation and Refinement of Chemical Stabilization Procedures for Pavement Subgrade Soils in Oklahoma

Similar documents
VALIDATION AND REFINEMENT OF CHEMICAL STABILIZATION PROCEDURES FOR PAVEMENT SUBGRADE SOILS IN OKLAHOMA VOLUME II

Full-Depth Reclamation with Cement

CHEMICAL STABILIZATION PAVEMENT SUBGRADE CHEMICAL STABILIZATION OF PAVEMENT SUBGRADE

STABILIZATION OF OKLAHOMA EXPANSIVE SOILS USING LIME AND CLASS C FLY ASH. by Russell L. Buhler 1 and Amy B. Cerato 2

2012 Purdue Road School Chemical Use for Subgrade Modification of Soils

SCOPE OF ACCREDITATION TO ISO/IEC 17025:2005

Sustainable Reconstruction of Highways with In-Situ Reclamation of Materials Stabilized for Heavier Loads

Lime Use For Soil & Base Improvement

ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT (FISCAL YEAR 2008)

How to Select the Appropriate Pavement Rehabilitation Option. David Rettner, PE American Engineering Testing, Inc.

IFCEE 09, American Society of Civil Engineers, 2009, Orlando, Florida

Pavement Design Webinar

Quality Assessment for Stabilization of Black Cotton Soil by Using Lime

SOIL STABILIZATION WITH WASTE OF PAPER INDUSTRY (WPI) FOR SUB-BASE OF FOREST ROADS

Water Susceptible Properties of Silt Loam Soil in Sub grades in South West Pennsylvania

Feasibility of Lime Stabilized Expansive Soil as a Subbase Material for Flexible Pavements

TECHNICAL NOTE TECH NOTE NO: 14. TITLE: ADMIXTURE STABILIZATION (Lime Treatment of Subgrades)

General Stabilization Methods

A Simplified Pavement Design Tool TxAPA Annual Meeting Danny Gierhart, P.E. Senior Regional Engineer Asphalt Institute.

QUANTIFYING THE COSTS AND BENEFITS OF PAVEMENT RETEXTURING AS A PAVEMENT PRESERVATION TOOL

THE EFFECT OF SOAKING IN WATER ON CBR OF LIMESTONE

Nazli Yesiller ~, James L. Hanson 2, and Mumtaz A. Usmen 3

STATE OF OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SUPPLEMENT 1120 MIXTURE DESIGN FOR CHEMICALLY STABILIZED SOILS. June 13, 2011

V. Subramani #1, S.Sridevi *2 PG student, Department of Civil Engineering

Renae Kuehl, PE, SRF Consulting Group Dan Wegman, PE, Braun Intertec Corporation November 2, 2017

EGGSHELL POWDER UTILIZATION AS CBR MODIFYING AGENT TO IMPROVE THE SUBGRADE SOIL

OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR SUBGRADE STABILIZATION

Utilisation of Phosphogypusm and Flyash in Soil Stabilisation

National AustStab Guidelines Pavement design guide for a cement stabilised base layer for light traffic [Version B 31 July 2012]

FULL DEPTH RECLAMATION. FDR Candidates STABILIZER DESIGN. Benefits. Benefits LOCAL ROADS PROGRAM What is Full Depth Reclamation (FDR)?

Cement Kiln Dust. Filter

Technical Brief. The Versatile Chemical. National Lime Association. Lime-Treated Soil Drying, Modification, and Stabilization

Mix Design Issues for. In-Place Recycling Products

Roadway Base Stabilization Current Practice

FULL DEPTH RECLAMATION FOR CITIES AND COUNTIES. OTEC - October 27, 2015

CTL Engineering of Indiana, Inc.

Bureau of Materials and Physical Research

Enhancement of Soil Properties by Adding Stone Dust & Scrap of Crushed Aggregate

32.02 RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE TESTING AGENCY

An Evaluation of Free-Lime Containing By-products to Produce CCB Grouts for Use in AMD Abatement

Subgrade Modification A Practitioner s Experience With Sustainable Materials

Full Depth Reclamation

PAVEMENT DESIGN SUMMARY TANGERINE ROAD CORRIDOR PROJECT INTERSTATE 10 TO LA CANADA DRIVE PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA

APPLICATION OF GROUND PENETRATING RADAR FOR COLD IN-PLACE RECYCLED ROAD SYSTEMS

Lime Kiln Dust and. Self-Cementing Fly Ash. for Drying and Improving Soil at the Construction Site

Optimizing Pavement Base, Subbase, and Subgrade Layers for Cost and Performance of Local Roads

Pennoni Associates, Inc.

Geotechnical Engineering Report

Geotechnical Engineering Report

Stabilizing Sulfate-Rich Soils Using Traditional Stabilizers: A Continuing Case Study of State Highway 289 in Grayson County, Texas

ENHANCING THE ENGINEERING PROPERTIES OF COHESIVE SOILS USING PORTLAND CEMENT

Stephanie Drain, P.E Midwestern States Regional In-Place Recycling Conference Schaumburg, IL September 11, 2013

An Introduction to Flexible Pavement Design

Implementation of Technology for Rapid Field Detection of Sulfate Content in Soils

DETERMINATION OF OPTIMUM CEMENT CONTENT FOR STABILIZATION OF SOIL - A CASE STUDY

Geotechnical Engineering Report

A Systematic Literature Review on Performance of Fly Ash On the Strength Parameters in Cohesive Soils

Cement Treated Sub-Base For Bituminous Pavement

2016 Louisiana Transportation Conference Danny Gierhart, P.E. Regional Engineer Asphalt Institute

Tube Suction Test for Evaluating Durability of Cementitiously Stabilized Soils

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT ROADWAYS JIMMIE ROGERS III SUBDIVISION SUZANNE AVENUE AND ALPHA ROAD VIAN, OKLAHOMA PROJECT NO.

UTILIZATION OF COPPER SLAG TO IMPROVE GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES OF SOIL

Engineering Properties of Stabilized Subgrade Soils for Implementation of the AASHTO 2002 Pavement Design Guide

Performance Engineered Mixtures So what

Resilient Moduli and Structural Layer Coefficient of Flyash Stabilized Recycled Asphalt Base

Research Article Volume 6 Issue No. 12

SECTION / ENGINEERED AGGREGATE PIERS (SOIL REINFORCEMENT AND FOUNDATION SYSTEM)

A STUDY ON THE PERFORMANCE OF DEEP LAYER SUBGRADE STABILIZATION

REPORT OF LIMITED SUBSURFACE AND EXISTING PAVEMENT EVALUATION Melrose Street Reconstruction Winston-Salem, North Carolina S&ME Project No.

A Study on Cement Stabilized Conventional Waste and Marginal Material for Pavement Layer Construction

Union County Vocational - Technical Schools Scotch Plains, New Jersey

Effect of Compaction delay Time on Soil-Lime Stabilization

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SPONSORSHIP

Structural System. Design Considerations Concrete Structures. Materials Formwork Labor Time

Engineering Properties of Lime Stabilized Swelling Soils from Sudan

Iowa Thickness Design Guide for Low Volume Roads Using Reclaimed Hydrated Class C Fly Ash Bases

Lantz-Boggio Architects, P.C LBA Project No

Effect of Lime Stabilisation on the Strength and Microstructure of Clay

Academia Arena 2015;7(10)

MODEL STUDY ON CYCLIC LOADING RESPONSES OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT SYSTEM LAID ON EXPANSIVE SUBGRADE

Chemical Stabilization of Selected Laterite Soils Using Lateralite for Highway Pavement

AN EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION ON STRENGTH PROPERTIES OF FLY ASH BLENDED SOILS TREATED WITH CEMENT

Laboratory Study Geotechnical Benefits of Mixing Construction and Demolition Screenings with Cement- Amended Dredged Materials

Special Provision No. 199S64 July 2016

Strength gain of lime stabilized plastic clays used in Pavements.

AESCO, Inc. Huntington Beach, California, USA

A Comparative Study of the Effects of Rice Husk Ash and Lime on the Geotechnical Properties of Lateritic Soil for Use as Highway Materials

OHD L-54 STANDARD METHOD OF TEST FOR MAKING, CURING, AND TESTING CEMENT-TREATED BASE FIELD SAMPLES

Mechanistic-Climatic Characterization of Foamed Asphalt Stabilized Granular Pavements in Saskatchewan

Soil-Cement Technology for Pavements: Different Products for Different Applications

APPLICATION OF SELF-CONSOLIDATING CONCRETE FOR BRIDGE REPAIR

CERTIFICATE OF ACCREDITATION

Standard Testing & Engineering, LLC

Determination of Mechanical Properties of Materials Used in WAY-30 Test Pavements

Flood Testing Laboratories, Inc.

and Surfacing Alternatives

CERTIFICATE OF ACCREDITATION

PROJECT REFERENCE NO.: 38S0482

PAVETEX Engineering, LLC

UNDERSTANDING UNPAVED ROAD MATERIAL PERFORMANCE INTERPRETATION David Jones, PhD University of California Pavement Research Center

Transcription:

Validation and Refinement of Chemical Stabilization Procedures for Pavement Subgrade Soils in Oklahoma ANNUAL REPORT FOR FY 2009 ODOT SPR ITEM NUMBER 2207 Submitted to: Ginger McGovern, P.E. Planning and Research Division Engineer Oklahoma Department of Transportation 200 N.E. 21 st Street Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73105 Submitted by: Amy B. Cerato, Ph.D., P.E. and Gerald A. Miller, Ph.D., P.E. School of Civil Engineering and Environmental Science University of Oklahoma and Don R. Snethen, Ph.D., P.E. Consultant October 5, 2009

Problem Statement: To optimize and validate Oklahoma Department of Transportation Materials Division s recommended Standard OHD L-50 entitled, Soil Stabilization Mix Design Procedure. Due to the prevalence of fine grained soils in Oklahoma it is common practice to use chemical stabilization in the construction of highway subgrades. Additionally, chemical stabilization is sometimes used in the construction of sub-base and base course layers using marginal quality aggregate materials. The traditional method of mix design for stabilized subgrade, according to ASTM D4609 for example, can be time consuming and create delays during design and construction. A test can take a week or more including sample collection, preparation, curing time and testing. If subgrade conditions are well known prior to construction, a mix design may be feasible; however, often times subgrade conditions are not well known during the design phase and differ from those encountered during construction. Thus, if an entirely new mix design is required significant delays in construction may occur. In an effort to streamline the mix design process, the Oklahoma Department of Transportation Materials Division developed the OHD L-50 Standard entitled Soil Stabilization Mix Design Procedure. At the heart of this standard is a table titled Soil Stabilization Table, which provides recommended additive amounts for soils in the Soil Group Classifications found in AASHTO Standard M145. Additive amounts are given for Portland Cement (PC), Fly Ash (FA), Cement Kiln Dust (CKD), and Lime (hydrated and quick lime). OHD L-50 recommends a traditional mix design approach to address particular project concerns or non-approved chemical sources but allows projects having no unusual soil conditions to use the soil stabilization table. While the development of this table is based on a significant amount of research and experience in Oklahoma, it is possible that recommended additive amounts may not be appropriate for all soil and additive combinations within a particular soil group classification. In other words, the use of the recommended additive content may not achieve the desired effect that would normally be targeted in a full mix design process. The desired effect may be quantified, for example, in terms of the unconfined compression strength of the soil-additive combination after a standard amount of curing. Objectives: 1) Refine and optimize the recommendations in OHD L-50 by examining potentially useful and quick methods for selecting additive contents, 2) Determine a correlation between stabilized soil strength gain and stiffness, 3) Understand the similarities and/or differences between predicted laboratory stabilized soil strength gain and stiffness and actual field conditions after construction and make necessary recommendations. 1

Proposed Activities for FY10: The tasks necessary to complete the stated objectives include A) Select roadway projects in alignment characterization or grading and drainage stages which represent different sub-grade soil types, chemical additive types, and climatic conditions across Oklahoma, B) Collect representative soil samples from project locations for classification, quality control, and engineering property testing. C) Collect representative chemically treated soil samples from construction project sites for engineering property testing. D) Following compaction and acceptance of the chemically treated subgrade, conduct a time sequence (1, 3, 7, 14, 28 days) field evaluation of strength and stiffness using field test equipment, including the Dynamic Cone Penetration and PANDA Penetration Tests. E) Establish time rate of development and maximum level of strength gain relationships and compare to previous structural number correlations, then adjust design equation input parameters accordingly. We will also continue the original project tasks (see next section for complete list) as follows: C4. Quantify change in plasticity of stabilized soil using Atterberg Limit Tests. E1. Use the linear shrinkage, SSA, ph and conductivity tests to determine protocols that would relate additive content to strength gain and take additive and soil variability (because tests are a function of mineralogy) into account. Compilation of Completed and for FY09 The specific tasks addressed in FY09 are shown in italics: A. Identify and investigate the variations in soil characteristics of Oklahoma Soils within each AASHTO Soil Group Classification (AASHTO M145). A1. Examine the variability of surficial geologic materials, particularly along transportation corridors, using available published information including, but not limited to, soil surveys, geologic maps, and available records of subsurface exploration. A2. Interview personnel from ODOT headquarters and residencies across the state to identify typical as well as unusual soil behavior and to identify soil stabilization case histories of interest. A3. Collect three to five samples representing different soils within the same AASHTO M145 classification groups to represent the variations found in Oklahoma Soils. 2

B. Determine the variability of chemical additives used for soil stabilization in Oklahoma. B1. Determine the number and location of all approved additive sources used in construction of Oklahoma highways. B2. Obtain existing chemical data and measure additional properties of these additives (as needed). B3. Select and obtain one to three sources for each additive type. C. Evaluate OHD L-50 Soil Stabilization Mix Design Procedure for the test soils and test additives identified in Objectives A and B. C1. Determine testing schedule to optimize resources and time while considering the extent of soil and additive variability across Oklahoma. C2. Determine basic physical and engineering index properties with standard laboratory tests. C3. Determine moisture-density curves of raw and treated soil via the calibrated Harvard Miniature Procedure. C4. Quantify change in plasticity of stabilized soil using Atterberg Limit Tests. C5. Determine unconfined compressive strength of raw and treated soils to assess degree of stabilization achieved using the recommended ODOT additive quantities. C6. Determine if the recommended additive contents meet the strength limits defined in ASTM D4609 and OHD L-50. Choose soils, including those that do not meet expectations, to perform further analyses as outlined in Objective E. D. Thoroughly characterize the test soils identified in Objective A to determine mineralogical, physical, chemical, and engineering index properties and use the of these tests to analyze the observed in Objective C. D1. Perform laboratory tests focused on physico-chemical understanding of soils including Specific Surface Area (SSA), powder X-Ray Diffraction (XRD), carbonate content, organic content, ph, electrical conductivity, iron content and Ion Chromatography (IC). E. Refine and optimize the recommendations in OHD L-50 by examining potentially useful and quick methods for selecting additive contents. E1. Use the linear shrinkage, SSA, ph and conductivity tests to determine protocols that would relate additive content to strength gain and take additive and soil variability (because tests are a function of mineralogy) into account. 3

September 2009 -Task C3: moisture-density curves with all additives for a A-6 soil to understand Task A3: Find additional A-4 soils to add to the database accurate Task C4: Performing Atterberg limit tests on 0-day and 14-day cured samples Task D1: Performing additional laboratory tests (SSA, CEC, ph, and conductivity) on stabilized samples Field Task A: Two sites have been selected thus far. One in Geary, OK on US 281 which is has in-situ soils including A-4 and A-6 and is being treated with Class C Fly Ash from the Red Rock plant. The other site selected is on Penn Ave in Logan County north of Waterloo Rd. This site includes A-6 soils being stabilized with Class C Fly Ash from the Red Rock plant as well. Task B: Both of the previously mentioned sites have been sampled and approximately 300 kg of natural-untreated soil has been collected from each site for laboratory testing. Task C: Both of these two sites (US 281 and Penn Ave.) have been chemically treated and representative treated samples have been collected from both sites for the use of engineering property testing. Task D: Both of these sites have been treated and compacted and time interval testing has begun at both sites. Both the DCP and the PANDA have been used to determine strength and stiffness as well as the Falling Weight Deflector test has been used to 4

obtain a dynamic modulus. Testing has been done for the untreated soil and the treated/compacted soil at the US 281 location for 3 & 7 days and will be done for 14 days on October 8th, 2009. Testing at the Penn Ave. location has been done for 1 & 3 day testing and 6 day testing will be conducted on October 8th, 2009. August 2009 Task C3: moisture-density curves with all additives for a A-7-6 soil to understand Task C3: moisture-density curves with all additives for a A-6 soil to understand Task A3: Find additional A-4 soils to add to the database Task C5:Performing repeatability HM tests on Hollywood (A-7-6) soil to ensure accurate Task C5: Performing HM tests on additional A-6 and A-7-6 soils to add to database July 2009 Task A3: Find additional A-4 soils to add to the database 5

accurate June 2009 Task A3: Find additional A-4 soils to add to the database accurate May 2009 Task A3: Find additional A-4 soils to add to the database 6

accurate April 2009 accurate Task A3: Looking for another A-4 soil (or two) to add to the database March 2009 7

Task E1:maintaining growing database of all soils and properties and ensuring valid Task E1:Performing linear shrinkage and shrinkage limit tests on stabilized soils to accurate Task C5: Performing HM tests on additional A-6 and A-7-6 soils to add to database -ask C5: Determine unconfined compressive strength of raw and treated soils Task A3: Looking for another A-4 soil (or two) to add to the database February 2009 -Task C3: moisture-density curves with all additives for a A-6 soil to understand accurate Task A3: Looking for another A-4 soil (or two) to add to the database January 2009 8

accurate Task A3: Looking for another A-4 soil (or two) to add to the database December 2008 Task E1: Performing linear shrinkage and shrinkage limit tests on stabilized soils to Task C3, C5: Performing repeatability HM tests on Hollywood (A-7-6) soil to ensure accurate, as well as performing complete -moisture-density curves with all additives to understand November 2008 Task E1: Performing linear shrinkage and shrinkage limit tests on stabilized soils to Task C3, C5: Performing repeatability HM tests on Hollywood (A-7-6) soil to ensure accurate, as well as performing complete -moisture-density curves with all additives to understand 9

October 2008 Task C4: Performed Atterberg Limits (14-day cured) on selected stabilized soils Task E1: Performed linear shrinkage on A-6 stabilized soil Task E1: Performing linear shrinkage and shrinkage limit tests on stabilized soils to Task C3, C5: Performing repeatability HM tests on Hollywood (A-7-6) soil to ensure accurate, as well as performing complete -moisture-density curves with all additives to understand 10