I nternational J ournal of Engineering Trends and Technology (I J ETT) Volume 4 I ssue 8- Sep 2013

ISSN: 2231-5381 http://www.ijettjournal.org Page 3790

Use of Additive Materials in Sub Grade for Road
Construction
Kishan khunt
#

#
Student of final year M. Tech Transportation System Engineering, BVM Engineering College, Vallabh vidyanagar, Anand,
Gujarat, India.

Abstract it is essential to constantly improve quality, strength
and durability of road. Conventionally bituminous roads have
worked well for long time. The main factor which generally
affect the bituminous roads are temperature, rainfall, traffic
load, land base, etc. & it cause cracks, potholes, rutting in road
surface. Sometimes failure of road also occurs. These failures can
be eliminated by using additive materials like Recron-3S, Fly
ash, Lime. These additives can be mixed with soil in various
proportions. It is also possible to increase strength of soil with the
use of additive materials. And the mixture of these additive
materials and soil can be used in sub-base and sub grade. With
different proportions of soil with additive materials California
Bearing Ratio value will be more compare to conventional
materials. And from that thickness of pavement can be
minimized to the certain extent.

Keywords Recron-3S, Lime, Fly ash, CBR, Black Cotton Soil
I. INTRODUCTION
Road is the basic & necessary requirement of transportation.
Generally there are two types of pavements used in the
construction of road named Flexible pavement & Rigid
pavement. In flexible pavements, wheel loads are transferred
by grain to grain contact of the aggregate through the granular
structure. The flexible pavement, having less flexural strength
of the pavement and the pavement act like rigid plate.
Additive materials are added in the sub grade and sub base
layer. Recron when mixed with soil and fly ash mixture gives
a wonderful result. Fibre absorbs everything and keeps the
road surface intact and many problems can be solved like
potholes, cracking & failure of pavement.
II. PROBLEMS IN FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT
Pavement failure is defined in terms of decreasing
serviceability caused by the development of cracks and ruts.
Failures of bituminous pavements are caused due to many
reasons or combination of reasons. Following are the various
reasons behind the failure of bituminous pavement.

Sudden increase in traffic loading especially on new
roads where the design is based on lesser traffic is a
major cause of cracking
Bleeding and Cracking in pavement due to rise in
temperature.
Provision of poor clayey sub grade results in
corrugation at the surface and increase in unevenness
Poor drainage conditions especially during rainy
season.
These are the reasons behind the failure pavement. These
problems can be eliminated to certain extent by using additive
materials with soil in sub grade and sub base layer.
III. ADDITIVE MATERIALS
Following are the additive materials which are used for the
improving strength of black cotton soil.
A. Black Cotton Soil
B. Fly Ash
C. Lime
D. Recron-3S

PROPERTIES OF BLACK COTTON SOIL:

CBR value: 2%
Specific Gravity: 2.14
Liquid Limit: 40%
Free Swell Index:>50%
Plastic Limit: 35 40%
Source: South Gujarat (Surat)

PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF FLY ASH:
Density: 2.17 gm/cm
3

Bulk Density: 1.26gm/cm
3

Moisture Content: 2%
Particle Shape: Spherical, Irregular
Colour: Grey
Source: Ukai Thermal Power Station

CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF FLY ASH
Sio
2
:30 - 60%
Al
2
O
3
: 11 - 19%
Fe
2
O
3
: 4 - 11%
MgO: 5 6%
CaO: 2 4%
Trace elements: Sodium, Potassium, Baron, etc.

PROPERTIES OF RECRON-3S:
Cut Length: 6mm or 12mm
Tensile Strength: 4000 6000kg/cm
2

I nternational J ournal of Engineering Trends and Technology (I J ETT) Volume 4 I ssue 8- Sep 2013

ISSN: 2231-5381 http://www.ijettjournal.org Page 3791

Melting Point: >250C
Colour: White
Source: Reliance Industries
IV. PROPORTIONS OF ADDITIVE MATERIALS WITH
BLACK COTTON SOIL

Firstly Standard Proctor Test is performed as per IS: 2720-7,
& IS: 2720-8 on different proportions of additive materials,
Fly ash, Lime, Recron-3S with Black cotton soil to get desire
and best result. Following are the various proportions by total
weight of mixture.

1. Soil (100%)
2. Soil (88%) + Fly ash (10%) + Lime (2%)
3. Soil (83%) + Fly ash (15%) + Lime (2%)
4. Soil (78%) + Fly ash (20%) + Lime (2%)
5. Soil (81%) + Fly ash (15%) + Lime (4%)
6. Soil (85%) + Fly ash (12%) + Lime (3%)
7. Soil (84%) + Fly ash (12%) + Lime (3%) + Recron-3S
(1%)
8. Soil (83%) + Fly ash (12%) + Lime (3%) + Recron-3S
(2%)

From above proportions MDD (Maximum Dry Density) &
OMC (Optimum Moisture Content) is calculated.
Following are the results of above proportions for standard
proctor test.

TABLE I
RESULT OF STANDARD PROCTOR TEST
Sr.
No.
Proportions MDD
(gm/cc)
OMC
(%)
1. Soil (100%) 1.07 23.85
2. Soil (100%) + Fly ash (10%) +
Lime (2%)
1.63 16.61
3. Soil (83%) + Fly ash (15%) +
Lime (2%)
1.61 14.51
4. Soil (78%) + Fly ash (20%) +
Lime (2%)
1.65 16.31
5. Soil (81%) + Fly ash (15%) +
Lime (4%)
1.67 16.12
6. Soil (85%) + Fly ash (12%) +
Lime (3%)
1.58 23.00
7. Soil (84%) + Fly ash (12%) +
Lime (3%) + Recron-3S (1%)
1.55 19.95
8. Soil (83%) + Fly ash (12%) +
Lime (3%) + Recron-3S (2%)
1.87 14.50

Result of standard proctor test is shown in TABLE-I, after
checking these results according to MDD & OMC. Best suited
proportions are selected which are listed below.
1. Soil (100%)
2. Soil (84%) + Fly ash (12%) + Lime (3%) + Recron-3S
(1%)
3. Soil (83%) + Fly ash (12%) + Lime (3%) + Recron-3S
(2%)

From the results of standard proctor test best proportions
are selected from their MDD & OMC. Now after
performing standard proctor test, California Bearing Ratio
test as per IS: 2720 part-16 is to be performed.

1. Soil (100%)

Result of standard proctor test is listed in table II and from
that data, graph is drawn which is shown in fig. 1

TABLE I
PROCTOR TEST RESULT FOR 100% SOIL
DATA SHEET FOR SOIL TEST
Soil (100%)
(Ref. std: IS 2720-7, IS: 2720-8) Volume of Mould: 1000cc
Water
in ml.
Water
of
Sampl
e in
(gms)
Moist
ure
Can
No.
M C +
Wet
Weigh
t
M C
+
Dry
Weig
ht
Moist
ure
Conte
nt (%)
Dry
Density
in gms/cc
150 1566 4 74.75 71.25 8.13 1.448
80 1668 611 62.37 58.76 11.30 1.489
80 1752 97 55.48 51.75 13.95 1.537
80 1832 69 58.87 53.89 17.32 1.562
80 1912 23 67.78 60.61 20.67 1.585
80 1996 2 80.28 70.37 24.20 1.607
80 1944 169 85.40 73.34 28.98 1.507
From Graph MDD: 1.608 gms/cc & OMC: 23.85%



Fig. 1 MDD Vs OMC Graph for 100% Soil Sample
I nternational J ournal of Engineering Trends and Technology (I J ETT) Volume 4 I ssue 8- Sep 2013

ISSN: 2231-5381 http://www.ijettjournal.org Page 3792


TABLE III
CBR TEST RESULT FOR 100% SOIL

DATA SHEET FOR CBR TEST
Ref. Std. IS:2720 part-16
Sample: Soil (100%)
Sample Condition: Remoulded at OMC & ODD
Type of Compaction: Light Compaction
Test Condition: Soaked. Soaking for 96 Hours
Penetration Rate: 1.25 mm/min Surcharge Weight: 5.0 kg
Penetration
(mm)
Time
(min)
Penetration
Resistance
Reading
0.0 0.00 0.00
0.5 0.24 0.06
1.0 0.48 0.13
1.5 1.12 0.16
2.0 1.36 0.18
2.5 2.00 0.19
4.0 3.12 0.32
5.0 4.00 0.41
7.5 6.00 0.52
10.0 8.00 0.57
12.5 10.0 0.63
From the Graph
Corrections if any -
CBR at 2.5 mm 1.4
CBR at 5.0 mm 2.0



Fig. 2 CBR Test for 100% soil Sample

2. Soil (84%) + Fly ash (12%) + Lime (3%) + Recron-
3S (1%)

Result of standard proctor test is listed in Table IV and
from that data, graph is drawn which is shown in fig. 3

TABLE IV
PROCTOR TEST RESULT FOR Soil (84%) + Fly ash
(12%) + Lime (3%) + Recron-3S (1%)

DATA SHEET FOR SOIL TEST
Soil (85%) + Fly Ash (12%) + lime (3%)
(Ref. std: IS 2720-7, IS: 2720-8) Volume of Mould: 1000cc
Water
in ml.
Water
of
Sampl
e in
(gms)
Moist
ure
Can
No.
M C +
Wet
Weigh
t
M C
+
Dry
Weig
ht
Moist
ure
Conte
nt (%)
Dry
Density
in gms/cc
140 1632 10 57.43 55.20 8.38 1.506
50 1666 2 78.14 73.75 9.90 1.516
50 1716 20 55.65 52.69 12.20 1.524
50 1748 278 53.73 50.48 17.13 1.532
50 1794 117 47.66 43.62 14.42 1.528
50 1820 688 60.76 55.44 18.74 1.533
50 1856 87 78.14 73.75 19.75 1.550
50 1839 611 60.32 54.40 41.45 1.529
From Graph MDD: 1.55 gms/cc & OMC: 19.94%



Fig. 3 MDD Vs OMC Graph for 84% Soil + 12% Fly ash + 3% Lime + !%
Recro-3S Sample

I nternational J ournal of Engineering Trends and Technology (I J ETT) Volume 4 I ssue 8- Sep 2013

ISSN: 2231-5381 http://www.ijettjournal.org Page 3793


TABLE V
CBR RESULT FOR Soil (84%) + Fly ash (12%) + Lime
(3%) + Recron-3S (1%)

DATA SHEET FOR CBR TEST
Ref. Std. IS:2720 part-16
Sample: Soil (84%) + FA(12%) + Lime(3%) + Recron-3S(1%)
Sample Condition: Remoulded at OMC & ODD
Type of Compaction: Light Compaction
Test Condition: Soaked. Soaking for 96 Hours
Penetration Rate: 1.25 mm/min Surcharge Weight: 5.0 kg
Penetration
(mm)
Time
(min)
Penetration
Resistance Reading
0.0 0.00 0.00
0.5 0.24 0.10
1.0 0.48 0.23
1.5 1.12 0.37
2.0 1.36 0.55
2.5 2.00 0.78
4.0 3.12 1.67
5.0 4.00 2.37
7.5 6.00 4.26
10.0 8.00 6.21
12.5 10.0 7.95
From the Graph
Corrections if any 1.74
CBR at 2.5 mm 13.7
CBR at 5.0 mm 18.3



Fig.4 CBR Test for 84% soil + 12% Fly ash + 3% Lime + 1% Recron-3S
Sample

3. Soil (83%) + Fly ash (12%) + Lime (3%) + Recron-
3S (2%)
Result of Standard Proctor Test is listed in Table VI
and from that data, graph is drawn which is shown in
fig. 5
TABLE VI
PROCTOR TEST RESULT FOR Soil (83%) + Fly
ash (12%) + Lime (3%) + Recron-3S (2%)

DATA SHEET FOR SOIL TEST
Soil (85%) + Fly Ash (12%) + lime (3%)
(Ref. std: IS 2720-7, IS: 2720-8) Volume of Mould:
1000cc
Wa
ter
in
ml.
Water
of
Sampl
e in
(gms)
Moist
ure
Can
No.
M C +
Wet
Weigh
t
M C
+
Dry
Weig
ht
Moist
ure
Conte
nt (%)
Dry
Density
in gms/cc
140 1508 1 44.81 43.84 6.50 1.416
50 1544 97 47.63 45.88 8.39 1.424
50 1578 669 46.13 43.57 10.21 1.432
50 1648 244 47.75 45.00 13.13 1.457
50 1698 246 47.23 44.45 14.26 1.486
50 1674 49 58.53 53.35 16.61 1.435
50 1742 686 63.72 57.22 19.88 1.453
50 1744 94 69.81 62.87 22.04 1.429
From Graph MDD: 1.487 gms/cc & OMC: 14.85%




I nternational J ournal of Engineering Trends and Technology (I J ETT) Volume 4 I ssue 8- Sep 2013

ISSN: 2231-5381 http://www.ijettjournal.org Page 3794

Fig. 5 MDD Vs OMC Fraph for 83% Soil + 12% Fly ash + 3% Lime
+ 2% Recron-3S

TABLE VII
CBR TEST RESULTFOR Soil (83%) + Fly ash (12%) +
Lime (3%) + Recron-3S (2%)

DATA SHEET FOR CBR TEST
Ref. Std. IS:2720 part-16
Sample: Soil (83%) + FA(12%) + Lime(3%) + Recron-3S(2%)
Sample Condition: Remoulded at OMC & ODD
Type of Compaction: Light Compaction
Test Condition: Soaked. Soaking for 96 Hours
Penetration Rate: 1.25 mm/min Surcharge Weight: 5.0 kg
Penetration
(mm)
Time
(min)
Penetration
Resistance Reading
0.0 0.00 0.00
0.5 0.24 0.09
1.0 0.48 0.18
1.5 1.12 0.29
2.0 1.36 0.42
2.5 2.00 0.57
4.0 3.12 1.11
5.0 4.00 1.55
7.5 6.00 2.77
10.0 8.00 4.00
12.5 10.0 5.21
From the Graph
Corrections if any 1.84
CBR at 2.5 mm 9.30
CBR at 5.0 mm 12.2




Fig. 6 CBR Test for 83% Soil + 12% Fly ash + 3% Lime + 2% Recron-3S
Sample
V. RESULTS
The calculation for the various proportions is listed in
above tables. The results of CBR value for the different
proportions are as follows

TABLE VIII
RESULTS
Sr.
No

Proportions

MDD
(gm/cc)

OMC
(%)
CBR (%)
2.5
mm
5
mm
1. Soil (100%) 1.07 23.85 1.40 2.0

2.
Soil (84%) + Fly Ash (12%) +
Lime (3%) + Recron-3S (1%)

1.55

19.95

13.7

18.3

3.
Soil (83%) + Fly Ash (12%) +
Lime (3%) + Recron-3S (2%)

1.87

14.50

9.30

12.2

From the table VIII, it can be conclude that best proportion is
when soil is 84%, fly ash is 12%, lime is 3% and recron-3S is
1% by total weight. By mixing this proportion of additive
materials CBR value is more compare to other proportion of
additive materials. If the design parameters of pavements are
known, then design can be carried by using IRC: 37-2001.
And from that design thickness of layer can be computed.

VI. CONCLUSION
Strength of soil can be increased to the certain extent by
using additive material in soil. Especially Recron-3S, when
mixed with soil and fly ash mixtures gives a wonderful result.
Fibre absorbs everything and keeps the road surface intact and
many problems can be solved like potholes, cracking & failure
of pavement. Strength of soil is determined by performing
California bearing ratio test. Materials can be easily available
from the market so it is economical. Problems can be
eliminated by using additive materials in the sub grade layer
of pavement. It can be also used in sub base layer. Fibre plays
an important role with soil. Recron helps to bind the soil under
the road.

ACKNOLEDGEMENT
The author owes a many thanks to all persons who helped
and guided throughout the project. Special thanks to Dr.
Rakesh kumar SVNIT, Surat., who supported and guided very
well till the end. Sense of gratitude to Mr. Hitesh Desai, who
allowed me to use his infrastructure in his UNIQUE
Engineering Testing & Advisory Services, Surat. Thanks and
appreciations to my friends Bhavin Parmar, Dhvani sonani
and Akash Tandel for their help and support.

I nternational J ournal of Engineering Trends and Technology (I J ETT) Volume 4 I ssue 8- Sep 2013

ISSN: 2231-5381 http://www.ijettjournal.org Page 3795




REFRENCES

[1] IRC, Use of Lime- Fly ash Concrete as pavement Base or Sub base
IRC: 60-1976, Indian Road Congress.
[2] IRC, Guidelines for the design of flexible pavements, IRC: 37-2001,
Indian Road Congress
[3] IS: 2720 part-16, Laboratory Determination of California Bearing
Ratio Standard
[4] IS: 2720 part-7, Light/Standard Compaction Test for Soil
[5] IS:2720 part-8, Light/Standard Compaction Test for soil
[6] Dr. Pravin Kumar & Shelendra Pratap Singh, Reinforced Fly ash Sub
base in rural Roads
[7] Kalpna VInesh Maheshwari, Ex Student, SVNIT, Surat.
[8] R. D. Gupta, Javed Alam, Mohd. Farooqi Effects on CBR values and
other Geotechnical Properties of Fly ash mixed with lime and non
woven geo fabrics


AUTHORSS BIOGRAPHY

Kishan Khunt received his Bachelor of engineering
degree in Civil Engineering from the Government
Engineering College, Surat, Gujarat Technological
University in 2012. At present he is final year student of
M. Tech Transportations System Engineering From Birla
Vishvkarma Mahavidyalaya, Gujarat Technological
University.