International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)

ISSN (Online): 2319-7064

Index Copernicus Value (2013): 6.14 | Impact Factor (2015): 6.391

Stabilization of Soil: A Review

Santosh Dhakar1, S.K. Jain2
1
M.E. Student
2
Professor

Abstract: If good earth is not available at the construction site, it becomes imperative to opt for soil stabilization. Soil stabilization is a
process to treat a soil to maintain or improve the performance of the soil as a construction material. The stabilizing agent improves the
strength parameters of sub grade of road pavement and leads to strengthening of embankment. The objective of this paper is to review
the applications of different stabilizing agents such as lime, fly ash, cement, rice husk, expanded polystyrene geofoam and waste paper
sludge for different type of soil.

Keywords: Fly ash, Lime, Cement, Expanded polystyrene (EPS) Geofoam, Waste paper sludge

1. Introduction Soil properties like strength, compressibility, workability,

swelling potential and volume change tendencies may be
General: The soil which contains the silt and clay particles altered by various soil stabilization and modification
show considerable sign of distress accompanied by loss of methods.
strength of the soil during rainy seasons and shrinkage
during summer. Black cotton soil is one such type of soil Stabilization is derived by thermal, mechanical, chemical or
which loses its strength during rainy season due to their electrical means. Thermal and electrical is rarely used and
expansive behavior. The problems of expansive behavior of less data is available about these two. Mechanical
soil are as follows (N.B.O. 1962). stabilization or compaction is the densification of soil by the
a. Expansive soils have high plasticity and compressible use of mechanical energy. By the densification air is
when they are saturated. expelled from the soil voids without much change in
b. These types of soil have high strength in dry state, moisture content. This method is used to stabilize
becomes soft after saturation. Filling up water into cohesionless soils where compaction energy can cause
fissures and cracks, accentuates the process of softening rearrangement and interlocking of particles. But, the
causing reduction of shear strength and leading to low techniques are not effective if the soil is subjected to
bearing capacity. significant moisture fluctuation. The efficiency of
c. Structure built in a dry season show differential heaving compaction may also diminish with an increase of fine
as a result of swelling of soils during subsequent wet content, fraction smaller than 75micron, of the soil. This is
season. Restriction on swelling causes swelling because inter particle bonding andrearrangement during
pressure, making the structure unstable. This causes compaction. Changing the physio-chemical properties of
structure supported on soils to lift up with the fine grained soil by chemical stabilization is a more effective
development of cracks. form of durable stabilization then densification. Chemical
d. Structure built at the end of wet season when the natural stabilization of non cohesive, coarse grained soil with
water content is high show shrinkage crack and greater than 50% by weight coarser than 75micron is also
settlement, during dry season. Shrinking cause a profitable if a substantial stabilization reaction achieved in
downward thrust on the foundation through skin friction the soil (Dallas and Syam, 2009).
thus increasing the foundation load.
2. Quality improvement due to stabilization
Due to these reasons expansive soils need treatment prior to
use as an engineering material. These treatments are By the stabilization better soil gradation, increase in
generally classified into two process, viz. (1) soil durability, increase in strength, reduction of plasticity index
modification and (2) soil stabilization. and reduction in swelling potential is achieved. Stabilization
improves the properties of construction materials and gives
Soil stabilization is the process of blending and mixing the following attributes (IRC:SP:89-2010).
materials with a soil to improve certain properties of the soil.
The process may include the blending of soils to a) After saturation with water substantial proportion of their
commercially available admixtures that may alter the strength is retained.
gradation, texture or plasticity, or act as a binder for b) Resistance to erosion.
cementation of the soil (IRC:SP:89-2010). c) Surface deflection is reduced.
d) The elastic moduli of layers constructed above stabilized
Soil modification is the stabilization process in which layer are increased.
improvement in some property of the soil but does not result e) The stiffness and strength of a soil layer can be increased
in a significant increase in soil strength and durability through the use of admixture to reduce the thickness of
(IRC:SP:89-2010). the road pavement.

Volume 5 Issue 6, June 2016

www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: NOV164184 http://dx.doi.org/10.21275/v5i6.NOV164184 545
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN (Online): 2319-7064
Index Copernicus Value (2013): 6.14 | Impact Factor (2015): 6.391
3. Possible Problems due to Stabilization from 0 to 50%. Soil under study has O.M.C. 20.4%, M.D.D
14.7N/m3 C.B.R (Soaked) 3.1%, CBR (Unsoaked) 6.89%.
The stabilization of soil also causes the following problems Stabilization of soil was done at 0%, 10%, 20%, 30%,
(IRC:SP:89-2010). 40% and 50% of fly ash content. O.M.C is maximum at 10%
(a) Due to thermal and shrinkage cracks stabilized layer of fly ash, has 29.17%. M.D.D. is maximum at 20% fly ash,
may be crack. has 14.97N/m3. Soaked CBR is 2.52% for 10% fly ash and
(b) Crack can reflect through the surfacing and allow water unsoaked C.B.R. is 22.90% for 20% fly ash.
to enter the pavement.
(c) If CO2 has access to the material, the stabilization Bhuvaneshwari et al., (2005) studied the effect of fly ash on
reaction is reversible and the strength of layer can soil. Authors increase the fly ash content from 0 to 50%. The
decrease. soil has Liquid Limit 30%, Plastic Limit 18%, Plasticity
(d) The construction operation requires more skill than un- Index 12%, Dry Density 18.04 KN/m3 and Unconfined
stabilize materials. compressive strength 2697KN/m2. The Dry Density was
continuously decreases and15.13KN/m3at 50% of fly ash.
4. Materials Unconfined compressive strength is also decreases and
becomes 1176KN/m2 for 50% of fly ash.
a) Fly Ash
Fly ash itself has less cementitious value but it reacts Brooks (2009) stabilized expansive soil of CH type. Author
chemically and form cementitious compound in presence of uses Fly ash and Rice Husk ash (RHA) to stabilize the soil.
moisture. Cementitious compound formed improves the O.M.C and M.D.D of untreated soil is 20% and 15.5 kN/m3
strength and compressibility of soil (Karthik et al., 2014). respectively. In stress strain graph of unconfined
compressive strength it is clearly shown that failure stress
Karthik et al., (2014) evaluated the effect of fly ash derived and strain increased by 106% and 50% respectively when
from combustion of sub-bituminous coal at electric power the fly ash content was increased from 0 to 25%. When the
plants, for stabilization of soft fine grained red soil. The RHA content was increased from 0 to 12%, unconfined
Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit and Specific gravity of soil was compressive stress increased by 97% while CBA improved
32%, 23.37% and 2.7 respectively. Test was conducted on by 47%. Author concluded that 12% of RHA and 25% of fly
soil and soil-fly ash mixtures prepared at optimum water ash is used for strengthening the expansive sub grade soil.
content of 9%. At 6% of fly ash the bearing capacity of soil Based on laboratory test 15% of fly ash was mixed with
changes from 10kg/mm2 to 35kg/mm2 and CBR value RHA to form a swell reduction layer.
changes from 3.1% to 4.82%. Due to increase in CBR values
the thickness of pavement decreases from 12 inches to 8.5 Anil Kumar and Sudhanshu (2014) stabilize the expansive
inches. soil using fly ash and Rice Husk ash. Soil was collected
from village Sukkha, District Jabalpur Madhya Pradesh. Soil
Ahmed (2014) stabilized the clayey soil for the construction has 8% sand and 92% silt + clay. The Liquid limits, Plastic
of urban roads using fly ash. Author found that the optimum limit, C.B.R, O.M.C, MDD (kN/m3) and free swell Index of
ratio of fly ash with clayey soil is 15% by weight of soil. A soil is 53%, 30%, 1.5-2%, 26%, 1.52% and 35%
dramatic reduction in the properties of soil is seen for 0% to respectively. In his study author comes to the conclusion that
15% of fly ash content but no noticeable decline appear in Liquid Limit is decreases to 55% for 20% FA+25% RHA,
the range 15% to 20% of fly ash content. For compaction, plasticity Index is decreases to 86% for 20% FA+ 25%
the dry density and O.M.C were measured for various fly RHA, Differential free swell is decreases to 75% for 15%
ash ratios. The dry density raise as the fly ash increases up to FA + 20% RHA and specific gravity changes from 2.61to
15%, then reduced to 1.53 at 20% of fly ash. The liquid limit 2.20.
decreased from 55% to 48% for increase of fly ash from 0%
to 15% by weight. Plasticity Index changes from 30% to Dilip Shrivastava et al., (2014) used the soil of Bilhari area
13% for addition of 0%to 15% of fly ash. C.B.R value of of Jabalpur (M.P.). Soil has specific gravity 2.56, Liquid
soil changes from 3% to 56%. limit 48.5%, Plastic limit 22.7%, Plasticity Index 25.8%,
shrinkage limit 8.61%. Authors made a series of laboratory
Gyanen et al., (2013) evaluates the compaction of stabilized experiments on 5% lime mixed with 5%, 10%, 15% and
black cotton soil using two type of fly ash, viz. (1) fine and 20% of RHA by weight of dry soil. The CBR value is
(2) coarse. The natural black cotton soil was taken from increased by 287.62% and unconfined compressive strength
Gadag district of Karnataka. The Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, is improved by 30%. The Differential free swell index is
Natural water content and Specific gravity of soil were 66%, decreased by 86.92% with increase of RHA form 10 to 20%.
37.12%, 8.95% and 2.68. Fine fly ash soil has M.D.D
1.35g/cc for 95% of soil and 5% of fly ash. The M.D.D Yadu and Tripathi (2013) stabilized the soft soil, collected
becomes 1.35g/cc for 95% soil and 5% fly ash mixture and from Tatibandh-Atari, rural road of Raipur Chhattisgarh, by
lowest density was 0.6g/cc for 70% soil and 30% fly ash. the use of Granulated blast furnace slag and fly ash. The soil
The coarse fly ash has M.D.D 1.35g/cc for 95% soil and 5% was classified as CI-MI as per Indian standard classification
fly ash mixture and lowest density about 1.0g/cc for 70% system. Different amount of GBS, i.e. 3, 6 and 9% with
soil and 30% fly ash. different amount of fly ash i.e. 3%, 6%, 9% and 12% were
used to stabilize the soil. Based on compaction and C.B.R
Ashish et al., (2013) stabilize the Black cotton soil found in test, authors concluded that the optimum amount of GBS
Maharashtra using fly ash. The fly ash content was increased with fly ash was a 3% fly ash and 6% GBS.

Volume 5 Issue 6, June 2016

www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: NOV164184 http://dx.doi.org/10.21275/v5i6.NOV164184 546
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN (Online): 2319-7064
Index Copernicus Value (2013): 6.14 | Impact Factor (2015): 6.391
Raut et al., (2014) stabilized the clayey soil collected from 0% to 29.0% at 8% lime, while that of „C‟ improved from
nearby of Yeshwantro College of engineering, Wanadongri 2.5% to 8.6% at 6%. The compressive and shear strength
Nagpur. In his study murrum of Kalmeshwar quarry and fly were also improved. The uncured compressive strength of
ash of Koradi power plant near Nagpur is used. The clayey „B‟ improved from 119.13KN/m2 at 0% to 462.81KN/m2 at
soil has Gravel 1%, sand 20%, silt 28%, and clay 51%. 6% lime. Author concluded that sample A and B will be
Based on these properties soil is classified as CH. Specific suitable as base material while sample „C‟ will be suitable as
gravity, Liquid limit, plastic limit, plasticity Index, M.D.D sub grade material.
and O.M.C of soil is 2.55, 52%, 20.80%, 30.50%, 16.88%
and 19.0% respectively. Authors stabilized the soil by fly Malhotra and John, describes the use of mechanical
ash and murrum. With increase in content of fly ash and equipment in the construction of four stretches of lime
murrum UCS and M.D.D. increases up to certain proportion stabilized roads extending over a length of twenty kilometer.
and then decreases. Maximum value of UCS and M.D.D, He selected four roads of Amraoti circle in Maharastra, viz.
found at 7.5% of murrum and 5% of fly ash, was (1) Amraoti Asra road, (2) Asra Mana road, (3) Daryapur
4.95gm/cm3 and 0.328gm/cm2. Amla road, (4) Achaopur Kakda road. All the four roads
were B.C soil of CH group. In his study authors stabilized
Singh and Pani (2014) used Lime and fly ash as a the B.C soil by 2% of lime and their service behavior was
stabilization material for Highway. Author evaluated the observed. For a period of four year, stabilized sections
C.B.R values for both soaked and un-soaked condition, behaved very satisfactorily but thereafter, the lime treated
O.M.C, M.D.D of compacted fly ash mixed with 1%, 2%, stretches started deterioration.
5% and 10% lime. After the work they come to the result
that dry unit weight changes from 1.142 to 1.255KJ/m3, and Ankur et al., (2014) stabilize the Black cotton soil using
O.M.C decreases from 30.2 to 24.2%. With addition of lime Lime and stone dust. For his study, Black cotton soil sample
M.D.D increases and OMC decreases. Addition of lime were collected from Gwalior-Jhansi road (M.P) and stone
results in filling the voids of compacted fly ash thus dust was collected from Aman Vihar Industrial area, New
increased the density. The maximumun soaked and soaked Delhi. The Black cotton soil had specific gravity 2.61,
CBR valuess 25.39% and 1.546% respectively. percentage passing Is sieve 75 micron is 58.0%, liquid limit
57%, plastic limit 31.4%, plasticity index 26.5%, differential
b) Lime Stabilization free swell 41.0%, M.D.D 16.1KN/m3, CBR (soaked) 1.50%
Reaction of lime with soil is grouped into two parts, viz (i) and unconfined compressive strength 166.2KN/m2. Author
Initial and (ii) Long term. The initial reaction involved classified soil as CH according to the unified soil
flocculation and ion exchange. Longer term reactions classification system. In their study, authors determine
involve reaction between the soil particle and free lime. optimum percentage of lime was 9% and stone dust was
These reactions are pozzolanic because they involved mixed by 5%, 10%, 15%, 20% and 25% by weight of lime-
pozzolans. These pozzolanic reaction occur when free lime black cotton soil. The MDD of lime stabilized B.C. soil
reacts with water as a result cementing effect is occur increases up to the addition of 20% stone dust and further
between soil and lime. The increase in strength of soil is increase of the stone dust decreases the value. Similarly for
depending on the degree of pozzolonic reaction between CBR and UCS the strength increases up to 20% addition of
lime and soil (Dallas and Syam, 2009). stone dust in lime stabilized soil.

Wu Li (2010) uses lime as stabilization material to stabilize c) Cement Stabilization

the Tanzania soil. Author uses three types of soil moderately Cement can be used to stabilize any soil except highly
plastic silty clay, moderately plastic tan clay and Heavy clay organic soils (IRC:SP:89-2010). Numbers of reactions occur
with 5% of hydrated Lime. Author designated them as N-11, when cement is added to the clayey soil. These reactions are
N-12 and N-13 respectively. Plasticity Index decreases form flocculation, ion exchange, carbonation and pozzolanic
25% to 4% for N-11, 29% to 6% for N-12 and 36to9% for reactions (Rawas et al., 2005). Due to these reactions
N-13. Unconfined compressive strength changes from 145 to property of soil like strength and durability improved.
2770KPa for N-11, 280 to 3000KPa for N-12 and 163 to
2200KPa for N-13. Resilient modulus changes from 79MPa Oyediran and Kalejaiye (2011) studied the effect of
to 275MPa for N-11, 53MPA to 63MPA for N-12 and increasing of cement by weight on the strength and
35.8MPA to 209MPA for N-13. compaction parameter of lateritic soil of south west Nigeria.
Three soil samples were collected from pit at depths of
Olugbenga et al., (2011) stabilized the Lateritic soil by the 0.5m, 1.0m and 2.0m. The soil was stabilized with 2%, 4%,
use of lime. Lateritic soil form a group comprising a wide 8%, 10%, and 20% by weight of cement. The average of
variety of Yellow, brown, red, fine grained residual soil of properties of soil collected from pit are as follows; Specific
light texture. They are characterized by the presence of iron gravity 2.60, Liquid Limit 40.91%, plastic limit 23.59%,
and aluminum oxide or hydroxide which gives the colour to plasticity Index 17.31%, gravel 8.33%, sand 52.33%, silt
the soil. In this paper author studied the suitability and lime 18.00%, clay 21.33% and amount of fineness 39.33%.
stabilization requirement of lateritic soil samples. Soil M.D.D, C.B.R and UCS of soil increased while there is
samples A, B, C collected from a dam site and stabilized reduction in O.M.C as cement was increases. But addition of
with 0%, 2%, 4%, 6%, 8% and 10% of lime. Optimum lime more than 10% by weight of cement decreased M.D.D, UCS
content for the samples A, B, C were 8%, 6%, 6% and C.B.R and increase in the O.M.C. Author concluded that
respectively. Plasticity Indices is reduced as the lime the increasing in percentage of cement was not guarantee for
increases. The C.B.R of sample „A‟ increased from 10.6% at the improvement of geotechnical properties.
Volume 5 Issue 6, June 2016
www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: NOV164184 http://dx.doi.org/10.21275/v5i6.NOV164184 547
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN (Online): 2319-7064
Index Copernicus Value (2013): 6.14 | Impact Factor (2015): 6.391
Zoubi (2008) stabilized expansive soil from Jordan by the Biological and Environmental Engineering, CBEE, pp
use of cement. The natural soil has liquid limit of 53% and 76-78.
plasticity index of 26%. According to the unified soil [4] Gyanen, Takhelmayum., Savitha, A.L.,Krishna,
classification system, author classified the soil as inorganic Gudi.(2013), “Laboratory Study on Soil Stabilization
clay of high plasticity (CH). Cement content increased from Using Fly ash Mixtures ”, International Journal of Civil
0% to 25%. Author study showed that the liquid limit of soil Engineering Science and Innovative Technology, vol. 2,
decreases for cement content up to 6%, then increased as the pp 477-481.
cement content increases from 6% to10% after this the [5] Mehta, Ashish., Parate, Kanak.,Ruprai,B. S. (2013),
liquid limit becomes constant. The study also shows that “Stabilization of Black Cotton Soil by Fly ash”,
swelling potential of soil decreases for cement content up to International Journal of Application or Innovative in
4%, then increased as the cement content increased from 4% Engineering and Management.
to 6% after which the swelling potential may decrease or [6] Bhuvaneshwari, S., Robinson, R.G., Gandhi, S. R.
may becomes constant depending on the initial water (2005), “Stabilization of Expansive Soils Using Fly
content. The undrained shear strength increases with ash”, Fly Ash Utilization Programme , FAUP, TIFAC,
increase of cement content from 0% to 20%. The maximum DST, Vol. 8, pp 5.1-5.9.
rate of increase in undrained shear strength was observed [7] Robert M, Brooks. (2009), “Soil Stabilization with Fly
between 6 to 10% of cement content. ash and Rice Husk Ash”, International Journal of
Research and Reviews in Applied Sciences, Vol. 1, pp
d) Expanded polystyrene (EPS) Geofoam 209-217.
Shelke and Murty (2010) used EPS Geofoam to reduce the [8] Singhal,Anil kumar and Singh,Sudhanshu shekhar
swelling pressure of expansive soil. Black cotton soil from (2014), “Laboratory Study on Soil Stabilization Using
Ahmednagar district in Maharastra was taken for study. Fly ash and Rice Husk Ash”, International Journal of
According to USCS soil classification, soil has CH type. The Research in Engineering and Technology, Vol. 3, pp
Liquid limit, Plastic limit, plasticity index, O.M.C, M.D.D 348-351.
and free swell index of soil was 61%, 31%, 30%, 20%, [9] Shrivastava,Dilip., Singhai, A. k. and Yadav, R. K
16.2KN/m3 and 85.7% respectively. In his study, authors (2014), “Effect of Lime and Rice Husk Ash on
used two type of geofoam, viz. (1) 6mm thickness and (2) Engineering Properties of Black Cotton Soil” .
12mm thickness. Swelling of Black cotton soil reduces from International Journal of Engineering Research and
8.64%to 82.72% when EPS Geofom of 6mm and 12mm are Science Technology, Volume 3.
used. Swelling pressure of 6mm geofoam is reduced to [10] Yadu, Laxmikant and Tripathi, R. K (2013),
42.86% and for 12mm thickness swelling pressure is “Stabilization of Soft Soil with Granulated Blast
reduced about 90%. Furnance Slag and Fly ash”, International Journal of
Research in Engineering and Technology, vol. 2, pp
e) Waste Paper Sludge 115-119.
Waste paper sludge (WPS) is a waste material collected [11] Raut, J. M., Bajad, S.P., Khadeshwar. S. R (2014),
from the paper industry. Elias (2015) stabilized the soil “Stabilization of Expansive Soil Using Fly ash and
using waste paper sludge. Soil used in the study was clayey Murrum”, International Journal Innovative Research in
soil from kannadikadaves kundannoor of Ernakulam district. Science, Engineering and Technology, vol. 3, pp 14280-
Soil contains 74% silt , 26% clay, having Liquid limit 60%, 14284.
plastic limit 31%, shrinkage limit 23%, plasticity index 30%, [12] Singh, S. P andPani, A (2014), “Evaluation of Lime
specific gravity 2.59 M.D.D, 16.3 KN/m3, O.M.C 22%, UCS Stabilized Fly ash as a Highway Material” International
316.4KN/m2 and cohesion 158.2KN/m2. The waste paper Journal of Environmental Research and Development,
sludge sample was collected in plastic container from the Vol. 4, pp 281-286.
sludge drying bed of the Hindustan newsprint, Vellore, [13] Fikiri Fredrick Magafu, Wu Li (2010), “Utilization of
Kottayam. When soil treated with WPS M.D.D of soil was Local Available Materials to Stabilize Native Soil (earth
decreased and O.M.C was increased. The UCS for soil for roads) in Tanzania-Case Study Ngara”, SciRP, pp 516-
varying percentage such as 2%, 4%, 5%, 6%, 7% and 10% 519.
of WPS increased to better strength. The addition of WPS [14] Olugbenga, Oludolapo Amu. , Oluwole, Fakunle
increased the strength at 5% and it was found to be constant Bamisay and Iyiole, Akanmu Komolafe (2010), “The
and optimum value of strength to soil. Suitability and Lime Stabilization Requirement of Some
Lateritic Soil Samples as Pavement”, Int. J. Pure Appl.
References Sci. Technol., 2(1), PP 29-46.
[15] Malhotra. B. R and John. K. A, “Need for Construction
[1] IRC: SP: 89-2010,“Guidelines for Soil and Granular Equipment in Rural Roads- A Case Study” Ministry of
Material Stabilization Using Cement, Lime and Fly Rural Development, GOI, Government Of India.
ash”, Indian Road Congress, New Delhi. [16] Mudhgal,Ankur., Sarkar,Raju andSahu, A. K(2014),
[2] Karthik, S., Kumar, Ashok., Gowtham,P., Elango,G., “Effect of Lime and Stone Dust in the Geotechnical
Gokul,D., Thangaraj,S. (2014), “Soil Stabilization by Properties of Black cotton soil” Int. J. of GEOMATE,
Using Fly ash”, IOSR Journal of Civil and Mechanical Vol. 7,pp 1033-1039.
Engineering, IOSR-JMCE, Vol. 10, pp 20-26. [17] Oyediran, I. A andKalejaiye, M (2011), “Effect of
[3] Ahmed, Afaf Ghais Abadi (2014), “Fly ash Utilization Increasing Cement Content on Strength and
in Soil Stabilization”, International Conference on Civil, Compaction Parameters of Some Lateritic Soil from
South Western Nigeria”, EJGE, Vol. 16,pp 1501-1513.
Volume 5 Issue 6, June 2016
www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: NOV164184 http://dx.doi.org/10.21275/v5i6.NOV164184 548
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN (Online): 2319-7064
Index Copernicus Value (2013): 6.14 | Impact Factor (2015): 6.391
[18] Al-zoubi, Mohammed Shukri (2008), “Undrained Shear
Strength and Swelling Characteristic of Cement Treated
Soil”, Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 2,pp
53-61.
[19] Shelke, A.P and Murty, D.S (2010), “Reduction of
Swelling Pressure of Expansive Soils Using EPS
Geofoam” Indian Geotechnical Conference, GEO
trendz.
[20] Neva Elias(2015), “Strength Development of Soft Soil
Stabilize with Waste Paper Sludge”, International
Journal of Advanced Technology in Engineering and
Science, Vol. 3,pp 141-149.
[21] N.B.O (1962). “N.B.O 15- First Report On Building
Foundation in Shrinkable Soil (Second Edition)”,
National Buildings Organization, Ministry of works,
Housing & Supply, Govt. of India, New Delhi.

Volume 5 Issue 6, June 2016

www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: NOV164184 http://dx.doi.org/10.21275/v5i6.NOV164184 549