FACULTY OF CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
UNIVERSITI TUN HUSSEIN ONN MALAYSIA
BFC34402
GEOTECHNIC II
SEMESTER 1
SESSION 2019/2020
FINAL PROJECT
Prepared by:
NO. NAME MATRIC NO.
1. MUHAMMAD AMIRIQMAL B HAZRITAUDING AF170043
2. MUHAMMAD LUQMAN BIN MOHD NASIR AF170067
3. MOHAMMAD HARITH BIN MUSTAFFA AF170204
4. ABDUL AL MUHAIMIN BIN ABU BAKAR AF170278
5. ARIF ISKANDAR BIN MOHD SHAHARIN AF170059
SECTION 7
LECTURER: Dr. NURUL HIDAYAH BINTI MOHD KAMARUDDIN
Submission date:
TABLE OF CONTENT
NO CONTENTS PAGE
1. INTRODUCTION
2. CASE STUDY
3. APPLICATION
4. CONCLUSION
5. REFERENCE
6. MINUTES OF MEETING
2.0 CASE STUDY
Soft clay is defined as soils with large fractions of fine particles such as silty and clayey soils, which have
high moisture content, peat foundations and loose sand deposits, located near or under the water table (Kamon and
Bergado, 1991). Any discussion on construction involving peats or soft soils requires a definition of the terms used
to describe these materials. Depending on the geographic origin and training of the engineer or geoscientist
involved, a "peat/ soft soil" may be defined as soil with an organic content greater than anywhere from 20% to 70%
of the total weight. At worst "peat/soft soil" may be used interchangeably with the term "organic soil" to describe
any soil that appears to have some organic content. In the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) peats are
described as soils consisting "predominantly" of plant remains, often with a distinctive smell. Organic clay, silt or
sand contains "substantial amounts" of vegetable matter.
The following parameters were determined to characterize the soft soil: (i)Water content : The water
content is measured using procedures specified in ASTM D2974 or BS 1377. (ii)Organic content : As a percentage
of dry weight. The organic content is measured in the laboratory using a Loss on Ignition Test, ASTM D2974 or BS
1377 Part 3(4), or a Chemical Oxidation Test, BS 1377 Part 3(3). (iii)Degree of Hurnification (Decomposition) of
the organic material. The degree of humification represents the degree to which the organic remains have decayed.
The range lies between fresh plant remains and a completely decayed visibly amorphous material with no
recognizable plant structure. Where a soft soil/peat lies within this spectrum radically affects its engineering
behaviour. In the field it may be assessed by the Von Post Squeeze Test. A sample of the peat is squeezed in the
hand. The color and form of fluid that is extrude between the fingers is observed together with the pressed residue
remaining in the hand after squeezing . The degree of humification on a 10-point scale, Hl t H10 , is obtained by
comparing the observations t those described in Table 1. (iv)Atterberg Limits: The fibres in peat make determination
of the Atterberg limits difficult, and results depend strongly on the methods used to prepare the samples.
In generally, soft clay usually living in coastal or marine area and rural area where the existing soils are
weak and more deformations. This area usually become a great challenge to civil engineering to design suitable
foundation or make any of construction. The soft clays have low strength, low permeability and weak confining
pressure. The soft clays also are highly compressible soft clays and it exhibits moderate swelling when comes in
contact with moisture. This behavior is due to the presence of clay minerals with expanding lattice structure. The
soft clay is very hard when it is dry but loses its strength on wetting. These characteristics will give the problems for
the structure or foundation because of the shear failure or different settlement and it is become more serious in the
future because of the damage that will be happen either in slow or fast condition. Therefore, it is necessary to
improve the behavior of this soil by using any of the appropriate soil stabilization techniques such as lime treatment
that will be done for this study.
For many years soil stabilization techniques have been used in land-based projects with a variety of
applications. These techniques are more commonly practiced because it have provide an alternatives that are more
affordable and require shorter construction periods than foundation. Soil stabilization techniques have been used
widely for a new project to allow any of construction at the poor subsurface conditions. Soil stabilization techniques
are recommended in difficult ground conditions as mechanical properties are not adequate to bear the superimposed
load of infrastructure to be built, swelling and shrinkage property more pronounced, collapsible soils, soft soils,
organic soils and peaty soils, karst deposits with sinkhole formations, foundations on dumps and sanitary landfills,
handling dredged materials for foundation beds, handling hazardous materials in contact with soils, using of old
mine pits as site for proposed infrastructure.
Lime is one of the chemical modification/stabilization agents and can be used to treat soils to varying
degrees, depending upon the objective. The least amount of treatment is used to dry and temporarily modify soils.
Such treatment produces a working platform for construction or temporary roads. A greater degree of treatment
supported by testing, design, and proper construction techniques produces permanent structural stabilization of soils.
The previous experience has shown that lime reacts with medium, moderately fine, and fine grained soils to produce
decreased plasticity, increased workability and strength and reduced well.
Most lime used for soil treatment is high calcium lime, which contains no more than 5 percent magnesium
oxide or hydroxide. Lime stabilization having started as an aid in maintenance work in temperate areas, now covers
most fields in construction. This includes highways, farm to market roads, shoulders and parking lots as well as non-
highway uses such as airport runways, building foundation and railroad subgrades.
3.0 APPLICATION
The materials used for this test are natural clay soil, high calcium hydrated lime and water. Based on journal
of Scientific & Technology Research Volume 2, issue 10 October 2013 about ‘An Investigation into The Use of Lime
Stabilized Clays Subgrade Material’, the natural clay soil sample was collected along Ise / Ikere Road, Ikere-Ekiti,
Ekiti State, Nigeria. It was collected at 1m depth below the ground level. The sample was taken to the laboratory in a
polythene bag. The sample used for the moisture content test was kept in a small polythene bag and sealed to prevent
loss of moisture. The lime (hydrated high calcium lime, (Ca(OH)2) and was procured from a retail chemical store at
Ado Ekiti and was properly packed in order to ensure the material remain in its original state before being used. It was
ensured that the water used is fit drinking.
The samples were subjected to the following laboratory tests carried out. There were several methods tests
conducted to identify the experimental material used which is:
1. Mechanical sieve analysis and hydrometer test
2. Specific gravity
3. Moisture content
4. Atterberg limit tests
5. Compaction test
6. California bearing ratio (CBR) test
a) Mechanical sieve analysis and hydrometer test
The sample was prepared by washing it through a 75 μm micron sieve. The portion retained on the
sieve was dried and sieved through a series of sieve. The portion passing the 75 μm sieve was subjected to
hydrometer test which involves determining the density of the soil-water mixture at fixed time intervals. The
results of both tests were combined. The procedures for the tests are detailed in British Standard.
b) Specific gravity
The specific gravity was determined using the pycnometer method. The sample was oven-dried at
105 0C and was weighed in the pycnometer with and without water. The test was carried out in accordance
with British Standard. The specific gravity was calculated as shown in equation 1.
Gs =
Where : m1 = mass of container (g) m2 = mass of the container
and soil (g) m3 = mass of container, soil and water (g) m4 =
mass of container and water (g).
c) Moisture content
The moisture content is the ratio of the weight of water (Ww) in a given volume of soil to the weight
of dry soil (Wd) particles in that same volume of soil. This involves measuring the weight of the clay soil
collected and sealed in the polythene to prevent the loss of moisture. The soil was dried at 105 0C and the
natural moisture content calculated as shown in equation 2. The test was carried out in accordance with
British Standard. Moisture content, w (%) =
d) Atterberg limit tests
The Atterberg limit tests include the plastic limit, liquid limit and the shrinkage limit tests. The
plastic limit is the moisture at which a soil becomes too dry to be in plastic condition, and becomes friable
and crumbly. The liquid limit is the moisture content at which a soil passes from the liquid to plastic state
and the shrinkage limit is the moisture content at which an initially dry soil sample is just saturated with and
change in its total volume. The tests were conducted in accordance with British Standard. The shrinkage limit
was calculated as shown in equation 3.
Linear shrinkage (%) =
Where Lo = Length of wet soil bar, and Lf = Length of dry soil bar
e) Compaction test
The standard Proctor test was adopted for this study. The test was carried out to evaluate the
compaction characteristics of the natural clay soil and lime-modified clay soil. This involves compacting air-
dried soil sample into a cylindrical mold. The mass of the soil was determined and its bulk and dry densities
calculated as shown in equations 4 and 5, respectively. The process was repeated until the mass of the soil in
the mold was less than the proceeding measurement. The test procedure is described in British Standard.
Bulk density, l (kg/m3) =
Where: l = bulk density and w = moisture content
f) California bearing ratio (CBR) test
This test was used to assess the strength of the natural clay and lime-modified clay soil. The test
involves compacting the natural clay or the lime stabilized clay in the CBR mold at the optimum moisture
content determined from the compaction test. The plunger of the CBR machine is made to penetrate the
compacted soil at 0.25 mm interval up till 7.5 mm. The load at each penetration is recorded and the CBR is
calculated as shown in equation 6. The test procedure is detailed in British Standard.
CBR = X 100%
3.1 Results
Ogundipe and Olumide Moses (2013) in their article “An Investigation Into The Use Of Lime-
Stabilized Clay As Subgrade Material” shown us the results which related on our problems. Based
on their method, we get the data results for mechanical sieve analysis and hydrometer test, specific
gravity, moisture content, atterberg limit tests, compaction test and California bearing ration (CBR).
3.1.1 Mechanical sieve analysis and hydrometer test
Based on Ogundipe and Olumide Moses (2013) articles, Figure 1 shows the result particle size distribution
curve of the clay soil and form the results this types shows is classified as clay and with group index of zero
and they are rated as poor subgrade material.
Figure 3: The result particle size distribution curve of the clay soil
3.1.2 Moisture Content
The results moisture content based on Ogundipe and Olumide Moses (2013) articles, was shown
20.2%. Based on this results, it shown clearly the high water absorption capability of the soil and this give
an insight to the volume stability problem that is associated with the absorption and loss of water from clay.
3.1.3 Specific Gravity
Normal specific gravity is between 2.6-2.9 but based on Ogundipe and Lumide Moses (2013), they
get average of the specific gravity is 2.48. Based on this results, they soil may presence of organic substances
in the soil.
3.1.4 Atterberg Limit
Figure 2 show the addition based on 2%, 4%, 6%, 8% and 10% of lime content into soil which
shown by Ogundipe and Lumide Moses (2013) show us atterberg result which liquid limit for 2% to 8% of
lime content give us reduction in plasticity of the clay. However at 10% the liquid limits is increasing. The
result show reduction in the liquid limit could be result of the pores in the clay soil being occupied by lime.
Next, for plasticity index addition at 2% to 6% of lime to the clay it show increasing while at 8% and 10%
the plasticity index reduces. Meanwhile, the shrinkage limit of the soil sample reduces with increase the
percentage of the lime content with the lowest value at 10% lime percent.
Figure 4 : Atterberg limit results
On other hand from article Skels, Nielsen, Jorgensen, Bondars, and Skele (2011), get the result atterberg limit
as Figure 3 which addition differences of lime ratio. From this result it shown, increase at plastic limits, liquid limits
increase from natural soil to addition 1% lime content but decreased to next addition lime content, and plasticity index
show decreasing for each addition lime content.
Figure 5 : Atterberg Limit differences ratio
3.1.5Compaction Test
Compaction test by Ogundipe and Lumide Moses (2013), shown as Figure 4. From this result we
can see that MDD is increasing at 8% of lime content but decreased at 10%. Meanwhile, OMC shown the
maximum at 10% lime content. This is shown increased caused by hydration reactions between the cations
of the clay particles and the lime.
Figure 6 : Maximum Dry Density (MDD) and Optimum Moisture Content (OMC) versus lime content
3.1.6 California Bearing Ratio (CBR) Test.
Based on Ogundipe and Lumide Moses (2013), Figure 5 shown the results of CBR. CBR show
increasing but it changing decreasing after 8% lime content. Besides, the maximum obtained at 8% while
reduction at 10%. This reduction might due to the excess lime in the clay not required for the early strength
gain as a result of flocculation.
Figure 7 : CBR versus Lime content
4.0 CONCLUSION
Based on our understanding from some articles that we have been studied shown that
the lime stabilization has the potential to reduce initial construction costs through improved
subgrade stability and soil stabilization for road construction in specific to reductions in
pavement structure. Besides, lime can also provide greater long-term stability of the
pavement structure and lower pavement life-cycle costs through reduced pavement
maintenance. In Malaysia, lime stabilization were used to improved soil stabilization for road
construction based on the BS 1924-2:1990 Standard and this standard used in Malaysian
Public Works Department.
Besides, the atterberg limits test in BS standard show that in the table, the item no
one mention that properties of the liquid limits must be less than 45% in the subgrade layer
and this test method used BS 1377: Part 2: 1990. The item no mention about properties of the
plasticity index must be less than 20% in the subgrade layer this test method used the same to
the liquid limits test. Another item mention is about the properties of compaction test must
use MDD and OMC and the item no four mention about properties of the soaked CBR test
(compacted to 95% of MDD and soaked for four day) must be less than 5%. The test method
used in this last two item is BS1377: Part 4: 1990. All this properties meet the requirement
the Malaysia standard and useful for the road construction.
In conclusion, the lime stabilization have useful in the construction such as road
construction to avoid any significant problem, for example of pavement failure from unstable
soils or structure. Therefore, the lime stabilization used in construction must meet the
requirement from any standard for example BS standard.
5.0 REFERENCE
1.https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Lime+used+in+Soft+clay+for+r
oad&btnG=#d=gs_qabs&u=%23p%3DZ0i3tOA57h0J
2. https://gsmpubl.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/agc2000_45.pdf
3. Engineering PR Properties of Batu Phat Soft Clay Stabilized with lime, cement and Bentonite
for sub grade in road construction by Rufaizal B Che Mat
4. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8689/e686b84b677dbffd305ccb83ea616e8e4dd1.pdf
5.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305731306_Alluvial_Soil_Characteristics_and_Prop
erties_for_Riverbank_Filtration_at_Sungai_Kerian_Lubuk_Buntar_Kedah_Malaysia
MINUTE OF MEETING 1
GEOTECHNICAL PROJECT
FACULTY OF CIVIL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
DATE : 27 OCTOBER 2019
TIME : 8.00 PM
PLACE : UTHM TUNKU TUN AMINAH LIBRARY
Members Present: (list all members that attended meeting)
1. Mr. Muhammad Amiriqmal B Hazritauding (Chairperson)
2. Mr. Muhammad Luqman Bin Mohd Nasir (Secretary)
3. Mr. Abdul Al Muhaimin Bin Abu Bakar
4. Mr. Mohammad Harith Bin Mustaffa
5. Mr. Arif Iskandar Bin Mohd Shaharin
Members Apologies: (list members that did not attend the meeting)
NO SUBJECT ACTION FEEDBACK
BY
1.0 CHAIRPERSON ADDRESS
Given instruction from the lecturer to form a Mr. Amiriqmal
group of which consist of five people with
same gender.
2.0 PAPER PRESENTATION BY MR LUQMAN
I. Choose a group member ( each group has 5
group member ) The group were formed and
consist of 5 males which are:
1. Muhammad Amiriqmal B Hazritauding Mr. Abdul Al Muhaimin Understand the instruction
2. Muhammad Luqman Bin Mohd Nasir Mr. Mohammad Harith given
3. Abdul Al Muhaimin Bin Abu Bakar Mr. Arif Iskandar
4. Mohammad Harith Bin Mustaffa
5. Arif Iskandar Bin Mohd Shaharin
II. Every group members are given
instructions for search about the title and get
a few information and also case study for us
to refer and got our info about our project
3.0 CLOSING
Secretary gave a brief summary of the Mr. Amiriqmal
meetings held and closed the meeting with Mr. Luqman
thanks for the cooperation given by each
members of the group.
Prepared by: Approved by:
__________________ __________________
MR LUQMAN (Secretary) MR AMIRIQMAL (Chairperson)
MINUTE OF MEETING 2
GEOTECHNICAL PROJECT
FACULTY OF CIVIL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
DATE : 11 NOVEMBER 2019
TIME : 8.00 PM
PLACE : UTHM TUNKU TUN AMINAH LIBRARY
Members Present: (list all members that attended meeting)
1. Mr. Muhammad Amiriqmal B Hazritauding (Chairperson)
2. Mr. Muhammad Luqman Bin Mohd Nasir (Secretary)
3. Mr. Abdul Al Muhaimin Bin Abu Bakar
4. Mr. Mohammad Harith Bin Mustaffa
5. Mr. Arif Iskandar Bin Mohd Shaharin
Members Apologies: (list members that did not attend the meeting)
NO SUBJECT ACTION FEEDBACK
BY
1.0 CHAIRPERSON ADDRESS
Welcoming speech to all members of the Mr. Amiriqmal
group that came in that day by a leader. Our
group discuss about the project progress..
2.0 PAPER PRESENTATION BY MR LUQMAN
-After we have been Googled about the title
and got a few information and also case
study for us to refer and got our info for our
project.We meet again to present what we Mr. Abdul Al Muhaimin Find title of project that
got for the project. Mr. Mohammad Harith the title choosen are
-Based on the discussion of ideas most Mr. Arif Iskandar related or relavent.
members of the group choose soft soil and
peat soil.
-Than we conclude to choose soft soil for our
study case.
3.0 CLOSING
Secretary gave a brief summary of the Mr. Amiriqmal
meetings held and closed the meeting with Mr. Luqman
thanks for the cooperation given by each
members of the group.
Prepared by: Approved by:
__________________ __________________
MR LUQMAN (Secretary) MR AMIRIQMAL (Chairperson)
MINUTE OF MEETING 3
GEOTECHNICAL PROJECT
FACULTY OF CIVIL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
DATE : 20 NOVEMBER 2019
TIME : 8.00 PM
PLACE : UTHM TUNKU TUN AMINAH LIBRARY
Members Present: (list all members that attended meeting)
1. Mr. Muhammad Amiriqmal B Hazritauding (Chairperson)
2. Mr. Muhammad Luqman Bin Mohd Nasir (Secretary)
3. Mr. Abdul Al Muhaimin Bin Abu Bakar
4. Mr. Mohammad Harith Bin Mustaffa
5. Mr. Arif Iskandar Bin Mohd Shaharin
Members Apologies: (list members that did not attend the meeting)
NO SUBJECT ACTION FEEDBACK
BY
1.0 CHAIRPERSON ADDRESS
Welcoming speech to all members of the Mr. Amiriqmal
group that came in that day by a leader. Our
group discuss about the project progress and
what we should do for the next steps.
2.0 PAPER PRESENTATION BY MR LUQMAN
-We met up meeting and discuss about the
soft soil method by searching last week. Mr. Abdul Al Muhaimin Found the five journals
-We began looking for the journals that is Mr. Mohammad Harith that is suitable for our
suitable for our choosen topic Mr. Arif Iskandar choosen topic
- Our report has start progress.
3.0 CLOSING
Secretary gave a brief summary of the Mr. Amiriqmal
meetings held and closed the meeting with Mr. Luqman
thanks for the cooperation given by each
members of the group.
Prepared by: Approved by:
__________________ __________________
MR LUQMAN (Secretary) MR AMIRIQMAL (Chairperson)
MINUTE OF MEETING 4
GEOTECHNICAL PROJECT
FACULTY OF CIVIL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
DATE : 28 NOVEMBER 2019
TIME : 8.00 PM
PLACE : UTHM TUNKU TUN AMINAH LIBRARY
Members Present: (list all members that attended meeting)
1. Mr. Muhammad Amiriqmal B Hazritauding (Chairperson)
2. Mr. Muhammad Luqman Bin Mohd Nasir (Secretary)
3. Mr. Abdul Al Muhaimin Bin Abu Bakar
4. Mr. Mohammad Harith Bin Mustaffa
5. Mr. Arif Iskandar Bin Mohd Shaharin
Members Apologies: (list members that did not attend the meeting)
NO SUBJECT ACTION FEEDBACK
BY
1.0 CHAIRPERSON ADDRESS
Welcoming speech to all members of the Mr. Amiriqmal
group that came in that day by a leader. Our
group discuss about the project progress and
what we should do for the next steps.
2.0 PAPER PRESENTATION BY MR LUQMAN
-Continue our progress report
-We got another searching for article and put Mr. Abdul Al Muhaimin Understand the instruction
it in appendix. Mr. Mohammad Harith given
-We began to start drafting for our project Mr. Arif Iskandar
video
-We began to shoot for our project
3.0 CLOSING
Secretary gave a brief summary of the Mr. Amiriqmal
meetings held and closed the meeting with Mr. Luqman
thanks for the cooperation given by each
members of the group.
Prepared by: Approved by:
__________________ __________________
MR LUQMAN (Secretary) MR AMIRIQMAL (Chairperson)
MINUTE OF MEETING 5
GEOTECHNICAL PROJECT
FACULTY OF CIVIL & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
DATE : 3 DECEMBER 2019
TIME : 8.00 PM
PLACE : UTHM TUNKU TUN AMINAH LIBRARY
Members Present: (list all members that attended meeting)
1. Mr. Muhammad Amiriqmal B Hazritauding (Chairperson)
2. Mr. Muhammad Luqman Bin Mohd Nasir (Secretary)
3. Mr. Abdul Al Muhaimin Bin Abu Bakar
4. Mr. Mohammad Harith Bin Mustaffa
5. Mr. Arif Iskandar Bin Mohd Shaharin
Members Apologies: (list members that did not attend the meeting)
NO SUBJECT ACTION FEEDBACK
BY
1.0 CHAIRPERSON ADDRESS
Welcoming speech to all members of the Mr. Amiriqmal
group that came in that day by a leader. Our
group discuss about the project progress and
what we should do for the next steps.
2.0 PAPER PRESENTATION BY MR LUQMAN
-Continue our last progress report before
compile.
-Check all the mistake like a spelling in the
report. Mr. Abdul Al Muhaimin Understand the instruction
-Final editing for our video Mr. Mohammad Harith given
-Putting the softcopy of the report , journals Mr. Arif Iskandar
and our project video in the CD
3.0 CLOSING
Secretary gave a brief summary of the Mr. Amiriqmal
meetings held and closed the meeting with Mr. Luqman
thanks for the cooperation given by each
members of the group.
Prepared by: Approved by:
__________________ __________________
MR LUQMAN (Secretary) MR AMIRIQMAL (Chairperson)
