Geoderma 285 (2017) 270279

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Geoderma

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/geoderma

Treatment of dispersive clay soil by ZELIAC

Amir Hossein Vakili a,b, Mohamad Razip bin Selamat a,, Hamidi Bin Abdul Aziz a, Amin Mojiri c,
Zakiah Ahmad c, Marjan Safarzadeh d
a
School of Civil Engineering, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 14300 Nibong Tebal, Penang, Malaysia
b
Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Zand Institute of Higher Education, Shiraz, Iran
c
Institute for Infrastructure Engineering and Sustainable Management (IIESM), Universiti Teknologi Mara, 40450 Shah Alam, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia
d
School of Materials and Mineral Resources Engineering, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 14300 Nibong Tebal, Penang, Malaysia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Dispersive clays are prone to erosion and could cause signicant problems in geotechnical and geo-environmen-
Received 23 February 2016 tal projects. In this research, a new additive - the ZELIAC was investigated for treating a Malaysian dispersive
Received in revised form 1 September 2016 clay soil where an appreciable decrease in dispersivity was achieved due to treatment with 8% ZELIAC. The curing
Accepted 11 October 2016
time was found to be signicant that after 28 days, the initially dispersive samples became non-dispersive. Fur-
Available online 18 October 2016
thermore, due to the treatment, the samples had increased unconned compressive strength (UCS), permeabil-
Keywords:
ity, and optimum moisture content; and decreased nes content, plasticity index, maximum dry density, and
Soil stabilization compressibility index. The UCS increased nearly 7.3 times for sample treated with 8% ZELIAC and cured for
Dispersive clay 90 days. The X-ray uorescence (XRF) results showed a cementitious structure with calcium content 10.8
Geotechnical properties times more in the treated sample than in the untreated one, reecting the constructive cation exchange reaction
ZELIAC taking place during the curing process. The sodium ion was noticeably replaced by calcium ion which resulted in
Curing time a decreased thickness of the diffused double layer and the subsequent reduction in the dispersivity of the sample.
These results were also reected by the lower peak intensity as measured by the X-ray diffraction test (XRD) for
the treated sample, as compared to the higher peak intensity for the un-treated sample. Finally, the SEM images
indicate that the occulated structures of the treated dispersive clay were surrounded by the ZELIAC particles.
Thus, the ZELIAC was proven to be effective in improving the studied Malaysian dispersive clay.
2016 Published by Elsevier B.V.

1. Introduction
The existence of dispersive clay soils in construction projects has led
to failure incidents throughout the world affecting earth dams, embank-
ments, irrigation canals, roads, township infrastructures, and other geo-
technical and geo-environmental structures (Goodarzi and Salimi,
2015; Savas, 2015; Vakili et al., 2015b; Vakili and Selamat, 2014;
Ouhadi and Goodarzi, 2006; Gutierrez et al., 2003; Indraratna et al.,
1991, 2012; Paige-Green, 2008; Nevels, 1993). In dispersive clays,
under saturated conditions, the repulsive forces are greater than the at-
tractive forces which cause the individual soil particles to segregate and
detach from a soil mass and move in suspension, thus causing weak-
nesses in the bonds (Umesh et al., 2011; Paige-Green, 2008; Burns and
Ghataora, 2007; Nevels, 1993; Arulanandan and Heinzen, 1977). The re-
pulsive forces are associated with the thick diffused double layers of the
clay, which in turn was brought by the low electrolyte concentration
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: amirhoseinvakili@gmail.com (A.H. Vakili), cemrs@eng.usm.my
(M.R. Selamat), cehamidi@eng.usm.my (H.B.A. Aziz), amin.mojiri@gmail.com (A. Mojiri),
zakiah@salam.uitm.edu.my (Z. Ahmad), marsa440@gmail.com (M. Safarzadeh).
and valence of the absorbed ions. Reducing the thickness of the diffuse
double layers could lower the repulsive forces through increase in elec-
trolyte concentration and thus increase in valence of the absorbed ions
(Ouhadi et al., 2012; Fell et al., 2010; Ouhadi and Goodarzi, 2006).
Specic verication tests for dispersivity such as the pinhole test, the
crumb test, the double hydrometer test, and certain chemical tests are
carried out in order to determine the laboratory and eld properties, be-
fore any treatment can be prescribed (Umesh et al., 2011; Burns and
Ghataora, 2007). The geotechnical properties of a soil in a project can
generally be improved by adding chemical stabilizer such as lime, ce-
ment, alum, y ash, sarooj, and wood ash (Vakili et al., 2013a, 2013b,
2013c, 2015a; Pakbaz and Alipour, 2012; Seco et al., 2011; Horpibulsuk
et al., 2011; Okagbue, 2007; Al-Rawas et al., 2005; Indraratna et al.,
1991, 1995). The geotechnical improvements that have been achieved
by means of the above additives were associated with the more granular
structures, the lower plasticity, the higher permeability, the lower expan-
sivity, and the greater compressive strength of the resulting product
(Seco et al., 2011; Yong and Ouhadi, 2007). Furthermore, the curing
time has been found to be a signicant factor where better results have
been achieved with its increase (Tan et al., 2002). The geotechnical char-
acteristics of stabilized soils were also inuenced by the soil-additive and
the water-additive ratios (Lee et al., 2005a). The chemical stabilization

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2016.10.009
0016-7061/ 2016 Published by Elsevier B.V.
 A.H. Vakili et al. / Geoderma 285 (2017) 270279 271

methods solve the mechanical problems as well as the dispersivity prob-
lems of the dispersive soil (Vakili et al., 2015a; Vinod et al., 2010).
In any soil stabilization project, the sustainability and non-hazard-
ous nature of the additive have to be ensured (Indraratna et al., 2012;
Vinod et al., 2010; Karol, 2003; Shulga et al., 2001). In this regard, the
ZELIAC should be qualied as it is a non-hazardous composite material
produced using naturally existing low-cost ingredients such as zeolite,
activated carbon, and calcium carbonate. These materials improve the
cementing properties and have been used to reduce the cement content
in a composite (Mojiri et al., 2014a, 2014b). ZELIAC as a treatment ma-
terial has also been found effective in removing heavy metals and or-
ganic pollutants from landll leachate and waste water (Mojiri et al.,
2014a, 2014b, 2016). In addition to the environmental advantage, the
ZELIAC is also a stabilizer that does not require further preparation
after the factory production phase.
Although the potential of ZELIAC in treating the wastewater and
landll leachates has been well documented, its applicability in treating
problematic soils has not been proclaimed. Thus in this research, the
ZELIAC was introduced as the new soil stabilizer with the above-
mentioned advantages. In addition, the raw ZELIAC ingredients are be-
lieved to be abundantly available throughout the world that applying
them would be economical and sensible. Thus, the main aim of this
study was to evaluate the change in the fundamental geotechnical prop-
erties of the ZELIAC treated, Malaysian dispersive soil.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Dispersive clay sample
The dispersive clay sample was obtained from Batu Gajah, Malaysia.
The particle size distribution (PSD) of Fig. 1a shows that the soil consists
of 13% sand, 42% silt, and 45% clay. The liquid limit, plastic limit, and
plasticity index were determined as 63%, 29%, and 34%, respectively. Ac-
cording to the Unied Soil Classication System (USCS), the soil was
high plasticity clay or CH. Based on the double hydrometer test (DHT)
results, the soil was considered as belonging to the high dispersivity cat-
egory, as given in Fig. 1a. Based on the pinhole test results, the soil was
classied as D1 on the dispersivity scale of the ASTM D 4647 (2000c),

a b

c d

e
b) Sample treated with ZELIAC

a) Sample cured with distilled water

Fig. 1. a: PSD and DHT curves of the untreated dispersive clay sample. b: Deviator stress against axial strain of the untreated dispersive clay sample. c: Void ratio against applied pressure of
the untreated dispersive clay sample. d: Micro-features of the untreated dispersive clay sample. e: XRD analysis of dispersive clay sample a) cured with distilled water and b) treated with
8% ZELIAC.
272 A.H. Vakili et al. / Geoderma 285 (2017) 270279

reecting the high dispersivity potential of the soil samples. Its maxi- Table 2
mum dry density and optimum moisture content were 1.7 g/cm3 and Chemical compositions of the ZELIAC.

20%, respectively. Its UCS based on tests on reconstituted sample
compacted to the maximum dry density was 124.3 kPa; the related
axial strain versus deviator stress is given in Fig. 1b. Its permeability co-
efcient, determined from a consolidation test was 7.6 109 cm/s; the
related compression curve is given in Fig. 1c. The low permeability and
the low initial void ratio of 0.87 determined from the tests were in line
with the high dispersivity nature of the sample (Ouhadi and Goodarzi,
2006; Raine and Loch, 2003; Rengasamy et al., 1984). The specic grav-
ity (Gs) of the soil was 2.81.
The chemical compositions of the untreated clay sample were mea-
sured based on the X-ray uorescence (XRF) test and are given in Table
1. The sample was predominated by silica at 40% and alumina at 48%,
matching its high clay content (Castro-Fresno et al., 2011). The Na con-
tent was signicant at 4.84% reecting the highly dispersive nature of
the sample; dispersive soils are clayey soils with sodium ions control-
ling (Umesh et al., 2011; Zorluer et al., 2010). Therefore, the dispersive
clay soil had the proper potential to produce the pozzolanic reactions
when mixed with materials with calcium content such as the ZELIAC.
The SEM test result of the dispersive clay sample is given in Fig. 1d.
The XRD test result of the dispersive clay sample cured with distilled
water is given in Fig. 1e.
2.2. ZELIAC
The ZELIAC is considered a new stabilizer in treating dispersive clay
although it has been used to treat soils in general. It consists of zeolite,
activated carbon, limestone, rice husk ash, and Portland cement
(Mojiri et al., 2014a). The chemical compositions of the ZELIAC prepared
for this study based on the XRF analysis are given in Table 2 where its
main metallic oxides are Ca, Si, and Al. Generally, this stabilizer is con-
sidered as non-hazardous and environmental friendly, thus qualifying
the rst test of a suitable additive.
To prepare the ZELIAC, zeolite, activated carbon, limestone, rice husk
ash, and Portland cement were pulverized, passed through the 300 m
mesh sieve and then thoroughly mixed with each other. After the addi-
tion of water, the homogeneous mixture was then poured into the
mould. After 24 h, the chunk was taken out and soaked in water for
three days for the curing process. After allowing the material to dry
for two days, it was crushed and passed through a sieve (Mojiri et al.,
2014a).
Note that the ZELIAC additive has been used for quite some time al-
ready in stabilizing landll leachate and treating wastewater. In addi-
tion, ZELIAC, which is a composite adsorbent has also been found
capable of removing metals of a polluted site (Mojiri et al., 2014a,
2014b, 2016). Generally, the properties of a composite adsorbent are
Compounds/elements Composition (%)
C 14.350
CaO 32.401
SiO2 42.002
Al2O3 7.300
Fe2O3 1.502
K2O 1.005
MgO 1.000
Na2O 0.100
P2O5 0.030
SO3 0.030
Others 0.280
reected by the properties of the ingredients; the specic surface area
of a composite adsorbent is normally greater than of a single material.
Therefore, due to having the properties of multiple materials, the ZELIAC
should be considered superior in performance. Portland cement pro-
vides the necessary binder to hold together the various components in
ZELIAC; carbon increases the specic surface area of a particle; lime-
stone and zeolite enhance adherence and cohesion. ZELIAC is non-haz-
ardous and environmental friendly which renders it preferable over
other stabilizers such as lime or cement. ZELIAC removes organic pollut-
ants thus remedies polluted soils. Finally, the ingredients are mostly
low-cost.
A photo of the material is given in Fig. 2a while its micro-features
given in Fig. 2b. Its morphological and structural properties were ob-
tained from the SEM test. In the procedure leading to the clay soil treat-
ment, the ZELIAC was ground into powder and then passed through
sieve No. 100. This process was done to obtain adequate ne grained
particles required for the appropriate reactions with the clays. The GS
of the ZELIAC was 2.41.
2.3. Sample preparation and methodology
The dispersive clay specimens were initially oven dried for 24 h,
ground into powder, let passed through the 2 mm sieve, and for each
batch, thoroughly mixed with the prescribed amount of ZELIAC. Water
was added and the ingredients were brought to a uniform mix. The
test amounts of the ZELIAC were 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10% of the soil dry
mass. The test curing times were 1, 3, 7, 14, 28, and 90 days. All samples
were prepared based on the compaction test manual on natural disper-
sive soil of the ASTM D 698-91 (2000d). During curing the samples were
kept in plastic containers to prevent loss of moisture. An un-stabilized
and uncured clay sample was also prepared as control. In each case,
the water contents were varied around 20% of the total mass of soil

Table 1
Chemical compositions of the untreated dispersive sample collected for the current study and the dispersive sample treated with 8% ZELIAC.

Formula Concentration (treated sample) Concentration (untreated sample) Formula Concentration (treated sample) Concentration (untreated sample)

Al 52.54% 42.90% Al2O3 48.55% 48.38%

Si 25.39% 40.28% SiO2 41.06% 40.35%
Ca 6.38% 0.59% CaO 2.94% 0.30%
Fe 6.88% 5.30% Fe2O3 2.60% 2.59%
Na 1.27% 4.84% Na2O 0.97% 4.65%
Ti 3.16% 2.70% TiO2 1.63% 1.65%
K 1.94% 1.48% K2O 0.78% 0.69%
Mg 0.77% 0.56% MgO 0.64% 0.57%
P 0.29% 0.23% P2O5 0.21% 0.21%
Cl 0.10% 0.21% Cl 0.03% 0.09%
S 0.14% 0.04% SO3 0.12% 0.05%
Ce 0.12% 0.16% CeO2 0.09% 0.07%
Zr 0.20% 0.16% ZrO2 0.07% 0.07%
V 0.07% 0.07% V2O5 0.05% 0.06%
Mn 0.09% 0.06% MnO 0.03% 0.03%
Pb 0.08% 0.06% PbO 0.02% 0.02%
Zn 0.07% 0.06% ZnO 0.02% 0.02%
 A.H. Vakili et al. / Geoderma 285 (2017) 270279
Fig. 2. a: Photos of the ZELIAC used in the study. b: Micro-features of the ZELIAC used in the
study.
plus ZELIAC, which was the optimum water content corresponding to
the maximum dry density when no ZELIAC was used.
The geotechnical tests or analyses carried out on the mixed speci-
mens were the PSD according to ASTM D 422 (2000a), the double hy-
drometer according to ASTM D 4221 (2000b), the pinhole according
to ASTM D 4647 (2000c), the Atterberg limits according to ASTM D
4318 (2000f), the standard compaction according to ASTM D 698
(2000d), the unconned compression according to ASTM D 2166
(2000e), and the consolidation according to BS 1377 (2000).
The PSD and the Atterberg limits of a soil together are required in the
procedure of classifying soil (Ouhadi and Goodarzi, 2006). On the other
hand, the behaviour of the ne grained soil is governed more by its plas-
ticity from the Atterberg limits only (Mitchell, 1993). For the ZELIAC
treated samples, the plasticity of the soil could provide appropriate in-
formation in terms of its workability, resistance, and permeability.
In accordance with ASTM D 698-91 (2000d), the compaction tests
were performed to determine the effect of ZELIAC on the maximum
dry density of the treated soil and the optimum moisture content. To
come up with the compaction results of the treated soil, the compaction
curve was generated with at least ve compaction points. Furthermore,
consolidation tests were also performed on the mixes with the opti-
mum moisture content in order to evaluate the compressibility and de-
termine the permeability of the samples. From the consolidation test
results, the compression curve was plotted and thereafter the compres-
sion index was determined for each soil sample.
To determine the dispersivity of the collected samples before and
during the stabilization process the double hydrometer tests were car-
ried out in accordance with ASTM D 4221-99 (2000b). Thereafter, the
dispersion percent of each prepared sample was determined and the
dispersivity category was appointed based on the criteria of Sherard
and Decker (1977). To further evaluate the stabilization process, the
pinhole test was carried out for each curing time. The pinhole test is
273
more reliable than other dispersive soil verication tests since it simu-
lates directly the concentration leakage and the dispersivity of a clay
soil as water ows through a small hole through the specimen
(Richards and Reddy, 2007; Zorluer et al., 2010). The pinhole test was
carried out according to method A of ASTM D 4647 (2000c). Three
criteria were carefully evaluated in the procedure, i.e., pinhole erosion
rate, cloudiness and turbidity of ow, and nal ow rate. Consequently,
each soil was categorized as one out of six possible appointments on the
dispersivity scale. Classes D1 and D2 are for soils that are dispersive and
susceptible to erosion. Classes ND1 and ND2 are for soils that are non-
dispersive and therefore not susceptible to erosion. Soils of moderate
dispersivity are classied as either ND3 or ND4.
The effects of various ZELIAC contents and curing times on the me-
chanical behaviour of dispersive clays were investigated by performing
the UCS tests. In preparing the specimens for the UCS tests, samples that
were stabilized with various ZELIAC contents were each wrapped with a
plastic sheet and kept in a container for 24 h to allow reactions to take
place in the mixtures. Prior to the compaction, each sample was
mixed again thoroughly and placed in a cylindrical mould of 37 mm di-
ameter and 75 mm height. Note that the prepared samples were
compacted inside the cylindrical mould in 3 layers and the compaction
effort used for each layer was as much as the required energy to achieve
the maximum dry density of the samples at their optimum moisture
contents. The maximum dry density and the optimum moisture content
for each mix were determined from the water content versus dry den-
sity curve of the standard proctor test. After extracting a sample from
the mould, to prevent loss of moisture content, it was wrapped in air-
tight high quality plastic bags and cured for a specied period such as
1 day, 3 days, 7 days, 28 days, and 90 days. In determining the UCS,
for each curing time and given percentage of ZELIAC, three samples
were prepared using the optimum moisture content determined from
the prior compaction tests, and the UCS test was repeated three times
under the same conditions to investigate the repeatability and validity
of the obtained results. The average value of each group of three samples
was considered the UCS. The results for the three samples were found
generally reproducible and the standard deviation was low enough.
The applied axial deformation rate in the UCS tests was 1 mm/min.
To evaluate the microstructure due to the stabilization, the SEM test
results were examined and in this case, the results obtained for the un-
stabilized and stabilized samples were compared against each other. Fi-
nally, changes in the mineralogical and chemical compositions of the
treated samples were determined by the results of the XRF and XRD
tests.
3. Results and discussions
3.1. Effect of ZELIAC on dispersivity of soil samples
The dispersivity of treated samples with various ZELIAC contents by
dry mass of the soil and curing times are given in Fig. 3a. The dispersivity
decreased signicantly with increasing ZELIAC content up to the 8%
mark; thereafter the trend reversed with the dispersivity increased
with increasing ZELIAC content. The dispersivity also decreased signi-
cantly with increasing curing time and there was no optimum number
of curing days up to the 90 day mark. The sample had a dispersion po-
tential of 23% when treated with 8% ZELIAC and cured for 28 days, and
11% when cured for 90 days, indicating a signicant reduction in
dispersivity. For any curing time, the maximum reduction in
dispersivity was achieved with 8% ZELIAC, therefore this is the ZELIAC
xation point. Table 3a presents the dispersivity classication of the
treated soil based on the Sherard and Decker (1977) criteria. The initial-
ly dispersive samples became non-dispersive due to the addition of 6 or
8% ZELIAC and 28 days of curing. On the other hand, a 2% ZELIAC was in-
sufcient in improving the erosion resistance of the soil. In addition, it
can be concluded that the samples have become non-dispersive when
there was a sufcient curing time given in the treatment.
274 A.H. Vakili et al. / Geoderma 285 (2017) 270279

Table 3b
Classication based on the pinhole test results of dispersive samples treated with various
ZELIAC contents.

Curing times (day)

Additive 1 3 7 14 28 90

Z 2% D2 D2 ND3 ND3 ND3 ND3

Z 4% D2 D2 ND3 ND3 ND3 ND2
Z 6% ND4 ND3 ND3 ND3 ND3 ND2
Z 8% ND3 ND3 ND3 ND3 ND2 ND1
Z 10% ND3 ND3 ND3 ND3 ND2 ND1

Note: Z = ZELIAC; D1, D2 = dispersive; ND3, ND4 = intermediate; ND1, ND2 = non-
dispersive.

reduction in the thickness of the double layers that the additive has
brought.

3.2. Effect of ZELIAC on PSD of soil samples

The nes content generally decreased due to the ZELIAC treatment,

Fig. 3. a: Variation of percent dispersion of the dispersive clay treated with various ZELIAC
contents against different curing times. b: Variation of nal ow rate of the dispersive clay
treated with various ZELIAC contents against different curing times.
In the pinhole tests, the results were recorded in terms of cloudiness
of ow, nal ow rate, and erosion rate of the hole created in samples,
with given hydraulic head. The summary of results and categorization
of treated specimens are given in Table 3b. The use of 4% ZELIAC with
90 days of curing time has changed the designation of sample from D1
to ND2. The use of 8% ZELIAC with 28 days of curing time has changed
the designation of sample from D1 to ND2, and with 90 days of curing
the designation has changed to ND1. The results of pinhole tests carried
out on samples stabilized with ZELIAC, in terms of nal ow rates, with
various curing times are given in Fig. 3b. As indicated in Fig. 3b, the op-
timum ZELIAC contents corresponding to the lowest ow rates were 8%.
However, the optimum curing time for the optimum ZELIAC content
was 28 days. The ow rates, however, decreased further with increasing
curing time. Thus, the results of pinhole test clearly demonstrate that
even 4% ZELIAC was sufcient to improve the dispersivity characteristic
and erosion resistance but the process required 90 days of curing.
Generally speaking, the ZELIAC caused a change in soil fabric from a
de-occulated structure to a more occulated one. The reduction in
dispersivity of the treated soil by the ZELIAC could be attributed to the
as given in Fig. 4. The nes content also decreased with additional curing
time, but the decrease was only slightly when the curing time went be-
yond the 28-day mark. The change in PSD due to agglomeration of soil
particles brought by the additives in the cases of lime, cement, and var-
ious types of ashes has been reported by many researchers
(Horpibulsuk et al., 2011; Osula, 1991; Ola, 1977, 1978; Akoto and
Singh, 1981). In other words, a reduction in the nes content could be
attributed to the coagulation phenomenon, which causes the agglomer-
ation of the soil particles (Okagbue, 2007). The cation exchange, occu-
lation, and agglomeration are the most important reactions that take
place between a chemical additive and a clay soil, as stated by Mallela
et al. (2004). By analogy with other chemical additive-clay systems, it
could be that the same reactions were responsible for the reduction of
the ne particles of the dispersive clay due to ZELIAC treatment.
Generally, by cation exchange reaction; the lower valence cations
such as Na+, are replaced by higher valence cations such as Si2 +,
Ca2 +, and Al3 + (Mallela et al., 2004). A decrease in the thickness of
the diffused double layers of the clay is a signicant consequent of cat-
ion exchange (Okagbue, 2007). Thereby, by reduction in the size of a
double layer, the clay particles are allowed to approach closely with
each other, or occulate and agglomerate. Ultimately, the gradation of
the clay is altered by the reactions because by agglomeration of the par-
ticles, the structure and the texture of the clay are changed and the oc-
culation forms the larger- sized aggregates when particles clump
together (Terrel et al., 1979).
3.3. Effect of ZELIAC on plasticity of samples
Fig. 5 shows the change in plasticity index of treated samples with
varying ZELIAC content and curing time. The plasticity indexes (PI) of

Table 3a
Classication based on the double hydrometer test results of dispersive samples treated
with various ZELIAC contents.

Curing times (day)

Additive 1 3 7 14 28 90

Z 2% D D D D D I
Z 4% D D D D I ND
Z 6% D D I I ND ND
Z 8% D D I I ND ND
Z 10% D D I I ND ND
Fig. 4. Variation of nes content of the dispersive clay treated with various ZELIAC contents
Note: Z = ZELIAC; D = dispersive; I = intermediate; ND = non-dispersive. against different curing times.
 A.H. Vakili et al. / Geoderma 285 (2017) 270279
Fig. 5. Variation of plasticity index of the dispersive clay treated with various ZELIAC
contents against different curing times.
the treated samples reduced signicantly with increasing ZELIAC con-
tent as well as curing time. The PI decreased with increasing ZELIAC con-
tent up to the 8% mark, thereafter, it remained constant or changed only
slightly, implying that the maximum adsorption capacity of the Si++,
Ca++, or Al+++ by the dispersive clay occurs at 8% ZELIAC.
The decreasing PI caused by the chemical treatment is a benecial
and desirable change for the treated clay which could lead to improved
workability due to the soil becoming more friable (Okagbue, 2007;
Mallela et al., 2004). Note that the cation exchange, occulation, ag-
glomeration, and pozzolanic reactions are all bringing improvement to
the engineering properties of the treated soil. The benet of having a de-
creased plasticity with increasing cation valence or electrolyte concen-
tration has been described by various authors (Falamaki et al., 2008;
Lee et al., 2005b; Mallela et al., 2004).
The plasticity index is highly affected by the inter-particle forces al-
though it cannot identify the dispersivity characteristics due to lack of
uniqueness it has shown in the presence of dispersive soils (Gutierrez
et al., 2003; Sherard et al., 1976). Anyway, a decrease of the plasticity
should be a good indicator in identifying the reduction in dispersivity
of the clays in the stabilization periods. By following this conception,
the addition of ZELIAC to the dispersive soil might have altered the
forces between particles during the curing time in such a way that
with any change of soil property from being dispersive to being non-dis-
persive, the repulsive forces decrease and in turn the attractive forces
increase; the result is thus an increase in resistance between surfaces,
and a decrease in plasticity index.
Furthermore, the addition of cementing agent to the clay soils might
have caused particle aggregation, thus reducing the associated surface
areas, and a reduction of the plasticity of the soils, as described by Rao
et al. (1989). Similar descriptions have been given by researchers in
evaluating the results of mixing soils with lime, cement, or wood ash
(Okagbue, 2007; Bell, 1989, 2002; Muntohar and Hantoro, 2000).
3.4. Effect of ZELIAC on compaction characteristics of treated samples
The change in maximum dry density (MDD) and optimum moisture
content (OMC) with various ZELIAC contents and curing times respec-
tively are given in Fig. 6a and b. The MDD decreased with increasing
ZELIAC content and curing time, up to the 28 day mark, after which
the change became negligible. Also, the OMC increased with increasing
ZELIAC content up to the 8% mark. These trends - decrease in the MDD
and increase in the OMC - were similar to other reports on clayey soils
treated with cement or lime (Horpibulsuk et al., 2011; Mallela et al.,
2004).
The decrease in the MDD can be associated with the lower specic
gravity of solid (Gs) of the ZELIAC, at 2.41, in comparison to the Gs of
soil, at 2.81, where some soil was replaced by ZELIAC for a given volume.
275
Fig. 6. a: Variation of MDD of the dispersive clay treated with various ZELIAC contents
against different curing times. b: Variation of OMC of the dispersive clay treated with
various ZELIAC contents against different curing times.
For the soil treated with 8% ZELIAC, the Gs after 7 days of curing, at 2.66,
is quite reasonable.
3.5. Effect of ZELIAC on compression characteristics of treated samples
The ZELIAC treatment has improved the compressibility characteris-
tics of the dispersive soil. The compressibility index (Cc) reduced signif-
icantly with increasing ZELIAC content, again up to the 8% mark, as
given in Fig. 7a. The reduced Cc indicates the tendency to resist com-
pression. The improved resistance to compression could be attributed
to the occulation and agglomeration of the treated clay particles. In ad-
dition, the cation exchange reaction played a substantial role in this case
by which more occulated fabric was produced with the replacement of
sodium content by calcium content (Nalbantoglu and Tuncer, 2001).
The effect of ZELIAC in improving the compressibility of the soils is com-
parable to the behaviour of lime-stabilized clays (Rao and Shivananda,
2005; Nalbantoglu and Tuncer, 2001). The results could also be veried
by the previous discussion whereby the addition of ZELIAC was said to
have induced the desirable reduction in soil plasticity.
The permeability coefcients were calculated based on the results
obtained from the compression tests described above. As given in Fig.
7b, under the same applied pressure, the permeability increased with
increasing ZELIAC content up to the 8% mark. The soil permeability is
governed by the physico-chemical properties of both soil and soil pore
water (Ouhadi and Goodarzi, 2006). The occulation and agglomeration
of the treated clay particles may explain the increase in permeability co-
efcient by which the soil becomes more granular and in turn a more
open fabric is created, resulting in increased ow of water through it.
This implication is in agreement with the earlier comments made on
the effect of treatment to the PSD whereby the ne fraction of the treat-
ed sample decreased with increasing ZELIAC content and curing time.
The increase in permeability of the treated soil samples could be corre-
lated to the change in soil structure from being dispersed to being
276 A.H. Vakili et al. / Geoderma 285 (2017) 270279
Fig. 7. a: Variation of compression index of the treated dispersive clay against different
ZELIAC contents. b: Variation of permeability coefcient of the treated dispersive clay
against different ZELIAC contents.
occulated; the clay was changed from being dispersive to being non-
dispersive due to the treatment.
3.6. Effect of ZELIAC treatment on the unconned compressive strength
The effects of treatment with various ZELIAC contents and curing
times were examined by carrying out the unconned compressive
strength (UCS) tests the results of which are given in Fig. 8. The 8%
ZELIAC treatment enhanced the UCS value from 124 kPa initially to
405 kPa after 28 days of curing, and 910 kPa after 90 days of curing.
For any given curing time, the strengths of samples treated with differ-
ent ZELIAC contents did not differ much although the ones with more
additives were higher in resistance. The strength development against
curing time can be divided into three zones or phases. Between zero
and 14 days, the gradual increase in strength can be related to the hy-
dration reaction which increased sample resistance in short term
(Tastan et al., 2011). Between 14 and 28 days, the total and daily
Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3
Fig. 8. Variation of UCS of the dispersive clay treated with various ZELIAC contents against
different curing times.
increase in strength was relatively low. Between 28 and 90 days, the in-
crease in UCS was signicant which might have been caused by the long
term pozzolanic reactions (Tastan et al., 2011; Okagbue, 2007). In gen-
eral, the rate of strength increment was more related to the curing
time than to the ZELIAC content. Eqs. (1) and (2) show that the im-
provement in mechanical properties of soil treated with chemical addi-
tives is due to the formation of calcium silicate hydrates (CSH) and
calcium aluminate hydrates (CAH) as the cementing compounds com-
ing from the pozzolanic reactions (Seco et al., 2011; Yong and Ouhadi,
2007).
Ca2 2OH SiO2 CSH 1
Ca2 2OH Al2 O3 CAH 2
Furthermore, the above Equations show that the pozzolanic reac-
tions could continue as long as there are adequate sources of silica
(SiO2), alumina (Al2O3), and calcium content in the soil-additive envi-
ronment (Vakili et al., 2013b; Mallela et al., 2004). It is worthy to note
that, to provide the solubility of the silica and alumina, the system re-
quires a high pH value and the pozzolanic reactions will continue as
long as the pH of the system is sufciently high (Okagbue, 2007; Little,
1987). In this study, the X-ray uorescence (XRF) test results revealed
that the silica and the alumina contents of the untreated dispersive
soil were 40.35% and 48.38%, respectively, while the calcium content
of the ZELIAC was 32.40%. Therefore, the dispersive soil had the proper
potential to produce the cementitious material coming from the pozzo-
lanic reactions when mixed with sources of calcium content such as the
ZELIAC.
Irrespective of the dispersivity, the results of Fig. 8 clearly show that
the highest mechanical strength was achieved through the use of 8 or
10% ZELIAC content with 90 days of curing time. However, the results
of Fig. 3 clearly demonstrate that the dispersivity is a signicant factor
in terms of selecting the optimum ZELIAC content which was 8%. Conse-
quently, it becomes necessary to consider both, the resistance to erosion
and the mechanical strength, in choosing the optimum additive content
in a treatment.
The curing methods were found to have considerable effects on UCS
of treated soils (Rao and Shivananda, 2005). Soaking is known to cause a
dramatic decrease in strength of soils (Umesh et al., 2009). In other
words, dispersive soils are clayey soils which rapidly de-occulate in
water and thus possess very low strength when submerged (Umesh
et al., 2009; Paige-Green, 2008). To investigate the capability of ZELIAC
in retaining the strength of dispersive clay soil, samples treated with
ZELIAC were soaked in water for 1, 3, and 7 days, thereafter were sub-
jected to UCS tests. The results were compared with those of the un-
treated soils, as given in Fig. 9. The untreated dispersive samples were
found to have very low strengths even after 1 day of soaking. For all
samples provided, the UCS decreased with increasing soaking time.
The 2% ZELIAC treatments were also found showing very little effects
in the results. However, for the samples treated with 8% ZELIAC, the
Fig. 9. Variation of UCS of the dispersive clay treated with various ZELIAC contents against
soaking times.
 A.H. Vakili et al. / Geoderma 285 (2017) 270279
strength after 1 day of soaking was 2.71 times the strength of the un-
treated sample, and after 7 days of soaking, the strength increased to
3.12 times. Thus, the effect of having optimum ZELIAC content was con-
siderable in retaining the strength of the dispersive clay. These results
again verify that the 8% ZELIAC treatment can be considered as good
as any that could be offered by other stabilizers, and for dispersive
soils, these current results are particularly outstanding.
3.7. Effect of ZELIAC on micro-features and chemical compositions of soil
samples
The behaviour of a soil is signicantly inuenced by its mineralogical
composition (Incl et al., 2003). The chemical compositions of the disper-
sive clay sample treated by 8% ZELIAC are as given in Table 1. The ZELIAC
has caused a substantial decrease in Na content of the dispersive clay.
The 1.27% Na content of the treated clay sample was 3.8 times lesser
than that of the untreated clay. The Ca content of the treated sample
was 10.8 times higher than that of the untreated clay, reecting the con-
structive cation exchange reaction by which the Na+ was noticeably re-
placed by Ca2+ resulting in the decrease in the thickness of the diffuse
double layer and the subsequent reduction in dispersivity of the soil
sample. The results indicate the strong effect ZELIAC has had in modify-
ing the dispersive clay.
The erosion resistance and the mechanical strength of the clay treat-
ed by ZELIAC should have increased as indicated by the formation of ag-
gregates. Previous researchers demonstrated that silica could act
effectively as a soil cementing agent (Meneses et al., 2007). Silica parti-
cles cover clay particles, resulting in aggregation of clay particles
(Castro-Fresno et al., 2011). Thus, the XRF test results strongly support
the ndings of the current research regarding the application of ZELIAC
in improving dispersive clays bound for geotechnical construction sites.
As illustrated in Fig. 10, the occulated structure was recorded from
SEM test carried out on the ZELIAC-stabilized dispersive clay whereby
the clay particles have been surrounded by ZELIAC particles. When the
dispersive clay was mixed with ZELIAC, the calcium cation was released
and the clay particles coagulated. Subsequently, pozzolanic reactions
took place and caused an increase in the strength of the treated soils
(Castro-Fresno et al., 2011; Boardman et al., 2001). As a consequence,
the pozzolanic links strengthened the attraction forces between clay
particles (Godsey et al., 2007). Finally, the thickness of the diffused dou-
ble layer was reduced and the dispersivity behaviour of the clay parti-
cles decreased.
The above discussions and ndings were in agreement with the
measured peak intensity coming out of the X-ray diffraction test. As
shown in Fig. 1e, a decrease in peak intensity was recorded due to addi-
tion of 8% ZELIAC to dispersive clay sample. This result is consistent with
Fig. 10. Micro-features of the dispersive clay sample treated with 8% ZELIAC.
277
the fact that the peak intensity decreased with decreasing dispersivity
and thickness of the double layer (Ouhadi et al., 2012). In other words,
this result could be seen as parallel to the fact that the highest peak in-
tensity occurs at the highest turbidity as well as at the highest
dispersivity (Ouhadi et al., 2007, 2012). Thus, due to the reduction in
the thickness of a double layer, the occulated structure generated by
a decrease in repulsive forces usually shows low peak intensity
(Ouhadi et al., 2012). Subsequently, soil aggregation took place through
the formation of occulated structures.
The dispersivity behaviour of a dispersive soil is known to be attrib-
uted to the mineral and total dissolved salts content of the eroding
water and the pore water (Goodarzi and Salimi, 2015; Premkumar et
al., 2015; Vakili et al., 2013c; Ouhadi et al., 2012; Sherard and Decker,
1977; Penner and Lagaly, 2001). These soils are signicantly rich in so-
dium ions and as a consequence the internal structures making up the
soils are quite unstable (Umesh et al., 2011; Zorluer et al., 2010). Disper-
sive clay minerals have signicant amounts of exchangeable sodium
ions (Zorluer et al., 2010; Arulanandan and Heinzen, 1977) and the dis-
persion and cracking potentials get enhanced in a Na-rich environment
(Gutierrez et al., 2003). Clays containing sodium montmorillonite have
the highest dispersivity when compared with other soils containing ka-
olinite or halloysite (Fell et al., 2010; Nevels, 1993).
It can be said that the dispersivity of the ZELIAC-stabilized samples
was reduced due to the formation of more stable particle clusters
through electrostatic, occulation, and agglomeration reactions. In an
electrostatic reaction, the negative charges of the surface of a clay min-
eral reduce, nevertheless the ionic bonding between the clay and the
positively charged ZELIAC particles remains strong. In other words, the
stabilization factors have brought about a signicant increase in attrac-
tive forces and a decrease in repulsive forces between the individual
clay particles, resulting in a signicant reduction in the thickness of dif-
fused double layer and thus the dispersivity potential of the soil
samples.
Furthermore, the results described above were achieved based on
sample preparations carried out at laboratory temperature ranging be-
tween 25 C to 30 C, approximately. In the eld, the temperatures
could vary more than the given range, thus the reactions could be decel-
erated in lower temperatures or accelerated in higher temperatures.
Nevertheless, the results obtained in this study should be taken as to
correspond to the stated laboratory temperatures.
4. Conclusions
Dispersive soils could bring signicant problems in construction.
However, in this study, the dispersivity properties of a clay soil were
successfully treated using the economical additive ZELIAC. The soil sam-
ple was initially classied as having a high dispersivity classication and
thus was considered inferior base material. Due to the interaction be-
tween the ZELIAC and the dispersive clay particles however, the disper-
sive properties were sufciently altered and the clay became an
acceptable ll material. The dispersive clay had a remarkable erosion re-
sistance as well as a signicant mechanical resistance after treatment.
The decrease in dispersivity was likely due to the cation exchange, oc-
culation, and agglomeration reaction where the soil fabric was altered
from a de-occulated state to the occulated one. Along with the re-
duced dispersivity, the soil also had a decreased amount of nes, maxi-
mum dry density, plasticity, and compressibility, and increased
optimum moisture content, permeability coefcient, and unconned
compressive strength. The curing method and time were found to be
signicant parameters of the stabilization process. The ZELIAC was
found not only capable of improving the properties of the dispersive
clay, but also non-hazardous in nature. The maximum reduction in
dispersivity, compressibility, and plasticity occurred at 8% ZELIAC con-
tent by mass; therefore, this was the xation point, where the maxi-
mum absorption capacity of the Ca2 + content by clay particles took
place. The results also demonstrate that, other than the mechanical
278 A.H. Vakili et al. / Geoderma 285 (2017) 270279
strength, the dispersivity properties, which are inuenced by the clay
mineralogy and total dissolved salts content of the eroding water and
the pore water, could be used as indicator in selecting the optimum
amount of additives for a treatment. Consequently, it becomes neces-
sary to consider both, the resistance to erosion and the mechanical
strength in evaluating the effect of treatment by a chemical additive.
The following results are also noticeable:
1- The percent dispersion of sample stabilized by 8% ZELIAC after
28 days of curing was 23%, reecting the major change in the classi-
cation from being dispersive to being non-dispersive. Also, based
on the pinhole test results, the sample stabilized with 8% ZELIAC
was shifted in its designation from D1 class to ND2 class after
28 days and to ND1 class after 90 days of curing.
2- The use of 8% ZELIAC in soil samples after 90 days of curing has
caused a 730% increase in unconned compressive strength i.e.
from 124.3 (kPa) to the new 910 (kPa). The optimum percentage
of 8% ZELIAC in the samples was found to have a good potential in
retaining the strength of dispersive soils while submerged in
water. The strength of treated sample with 8% ZELIAC after 7 days
of curing was 3.12 times as much as the strength of untreated sam-
ple after cured for the same period.
3- The sodium (Na+) content of the soil sample treated with 8% ZELIAC
decreased by 3.8 times and the calcium (Ca2+) content increased by
10.8 times, demonstrating the desirable cation exchange reaction
that has taken place by which the sodium (Na+) was noticeably re-
placed by calcium (Ca2+) resulting in a decrease in the thickness of
diffuse double layers and subsequent reduction in dispersivity of
the soil samples. These results were also conrmed based on the
measured peak intensity coming out of the X-ray diffraction test,
where the lower peak intensity was found for the sample stabilized
with 8% ZELIAC in comparison to the measured peak intensity of the
un-stabilized sample.
Acknowledgements
This study was partly funded by the postgraduate research grant no.
1001/PAWAM/814217 of Universiti Sains Malaysia.
References
Akoto, B., Singh, G., 1981. Some geotechnical properties of a lime-stabilized laterite con-
taining a high proportion of aluminium oxide. Eng. Geol. 17, 185199.
Al-Rawas, A.A., Hago, A., Al-Sarmi, H., 2005. Effect of lime, cement and Sarooj (articial
pozzolan) on the swelling potential of an expansive soil from Oman. Build. Environ.
40, 681687.
Arulanandan, K., Heinzen, R., 1977. Factors inuencing erosion in dispersive clays and
methods of identication. Int. Assoc. Sci. Hydrol. Publ. 122, 7581.
ASTM, 2000a. D 422-63: Standard Test Method for Particle Size Analysis of Soils. ASTM
Intenational, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM, 2000b. D 4221-99: Standard Test Method for Dispersive Characteristics of Clay Soil
by Double Hydrometer. ASTM Intenational, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM, 2000c. D 4647-93: Standard Test Method for Identication and Classication of
Dispersive Clay Soils by the Pinhole Test. ASTM Intenational, West Conshohocken,
PA, USA.
ASTM, 2000d. D 698-91: Standard Test Method for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics
of Soils Using Standard Effort. ASTM Intenational, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM, 2000e. D 2166-98a: Standard Test Method for Unconned Compressive Strength
of Cohesive Soil. ASTM Intenational, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM, 2000f. D 4318-98: Standard Test Method for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plastic-
ity Index of Soils. ASTM Intenational, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
Bell, F., 1989. Lime stabilisation of clay soils. Bull. Int. Assoc. Eng. Geol. 39, 6774.
Bell, F., 2002. Engineering Treatment of Soils. Taylor & Francis.
Boardman, D., Glendinning, S., Rogers, C., 2001. Development of stabilisation and solidi-
cation in limeclay mixes. Geotechnique 51, 533543.
BS, 2000. Methods of test for soils for civil engineering purposes 1377(1990). British Stan-
dards Institution 2 Park Street London WIA2BS.
Burns, B., Ghataora, G., 2007. Internal erosion of kaolin. Problematic Soils and Rocks and In
Situ Characterization. ASCE, pp. 18.
Castro-Fresno, D., Movilla-Quesada, D., Vega-Zamanillo, ., Calzada-Perez, M.A., 2011.
Lime stabilization of bentonite sludge from tunnel boring. Appl. Clay Sci. 51, 250257.
Falamaki, A., Shariatmadari, N., Noorzad, A., 2008. Strength properties of hexametaphosphate
treated soils. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. 134, 12151218.
Fell, R., Macgregor, P., Stapledon, D., Bell, G., 2010. Geotechnical Engineering of Dams. CRC
Press.
Godsey, C.B., Pierzynski, G.M., Mengel, D.B., Lamond, R.E., 2007. Evaluation of common
lime requirement methods. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 71, 843850.
Goodarzi, A., Salimi, M., 2015. Stabilization treatment of a dispersive clayey soil using
granulated blast furnace slag and basic oxygen furnace slag. Appl. Clay Sci. 108,
6169.
Gutierrez, F., Desir, G., Gutierrez, M., 2003. Causes of the catastrophic failure of an earth
dam built on gypsiferous alluvium and dispersive clays (Altorricn, Huesca Province,
NE Spain). Environ. Geol. 43, 842851.
Horpibulsuk, S., Phetchuay, C., Chinkulkijniwat, A., 2011. Soil stabilization by calcium car-
bide residue and y ash. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 24, 184193.
Incl, G., Yesiller, N., Kagawa, T., 2003. Experimental investigation of dynamic response of
compacted clayey soils. Geotech. Test. J. 26, 125.
Indraratna, B., Nutalaya, P., Kuganenthira, N., 1991. Stabilization of a dispersive soil by
blending with y ash. Q. J. Eng. Geol. Hydrogeol. 24, 275290.
Indraratna, A., Balasubramanian, A., Khan, M., 1995. Effect of y ash with lime and cement
on the behavior of a soft clay. Q. J. Eng. Geol. Hydrogeol. 28, 131142.
Indraratna, B., Athukorala, R., Vinod, J., 2012. Estimating the rate of erosion of a silty sand
treated with lignosulfonate. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. 139 (5), 701714.
Karol, R.H., 2003. Chemical Grouting and Soil Stabilization. CRC Press.
Lee, F.-H., Lee, Y., Chew, S.-H., Yong, K.-Y., 2005a. Strength and modulus of marine clay-ce-
ment mixes. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. 131, 178186.
Lee, J.-M., Shackelford, C.D., Benson, C.H., Jo, H.-Y., Edil, T.B., 2005b. Correlating index
properties and hydraulic conductivity of geosynthetic clay liners. J. Geotech.
Geoenviron. 131, 13191329.
Little, D.N., 1987. Fundamentals of the Stabilization of Soil With Lime. National Lime
Association.
Mallela, J., Harold Von Quintus, P., Smith, K.L., Consultants, E., 2004. Consideration of
Lime-Stabilized Layers in Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design. The National
Lime Association.
Meneses, M., Chaves, J.M., Mancilla, P., Rodriguez-Paez, J., 2007. Caracterizacin
sicoqumica de arcillas del municipio de Guapicosta Pacca Caucana (Colombia).
Rev. Acad. Colomb. Cienc. 31, 537544.
Mitchell, J., 1993. Fundamentals of Soil Behavior. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.
Mojiri, A., Aziz, H.A., Zaman, N.Q., Aziz, S.Q., Zahed, M.A., 2014a. Powdered ZELIAC aug-
mented sequencing batch reactors (SBR) process for co-treatment of landll leachate
and domestic wastewater. J. Environ. Manag. 139, 114.
Mojiri, A., Aziz, H.A., Zaman, N.Q., Aziz, S.Q., Zahed, M.A., 2014b. Metals removal from mu-
nicipal landll leachate and wastewater using adsorbents combined with biological
method. Desalin. Water Treat. 57 (6), 28192833.
Mojiri, A., Ziyang, L., Tajuddin, R.M., Farraji, H., Alifar, N., 2016. Co-treatment of landll
leachate and municipal wastewater using the ZELIAC/zeolite constructed wetland
system. J. Environ. Manag. 166, 124130.
Muntohar, A.S., Hantoro, G., 2000. Inuence of rice husk ash and lime on engineering
properties of a clayey subgrade. Electron. J. Geotech. Eng. 5, 19.
Nalbantoglu, Z., Tuncer, E.R., 2001. Compressibility and hydraulic conductivity of a chem-
ically treated expansive clay. Can. Geotech. J. 38, 154160.
Nevels Jr., J., 1993. Dispersive clay embankment erosion: a case history. Transp. Res. Rec.
Okagbue, C.O., 2007. Stabilization of clay using woodash. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 19, 1418.
Ola, S.A., 1977. The potentials of lime stabilization of lateritic soils. Eng. Geol. 11, 305317.
Ola, S., 1978. Geotechnical properties and behaviour of some stabilized Nigerian lateritic
soils. Q. J. Eng. Geol. Hydrogeol. 11, 145160.
Osula, D.O., 1991. Lime modication of problem laterite. Eng. Geol. 30, 141154.
Ouhadi, V., Goodarzi, A., 2006. Assessment of the stability of a dispersive soil treated by
alum. Eng. Geol. 85, 91101.
Ouhadi, V., Yong, R., Bayesteh, H., Goodarzi, A., 2007. Inuence of potential determining
ions on the microstructural performance and contaminant adsorption of a homoionic
illitic clay. Water Air Soil Pollut. 181, 7793.
Ouhadi, V., Bayesteh, H., Pasdarpour, M., 2012. Analysis of dispersivity behavior of clay
minerals by fuzzy computational system and experimental methods. J. Dispers. Sci.
Technol. 33, 420428.
Paige-Green, P., 2008. Dispersive and Erodible Soils-Fundamental Differences.
Pakbaz, M.S., Alipour, R., 2012. Inuence of cement addition on the geotechnical proper-
ties of an Iranian clay. Appl. Clay Sci. 67, 14.
Penner, D., Lagaly, G., 2001. Inuence of anions on the rheological properties of clay min-
eral dispersions. Appl. Clay Sci. 19, 131142.
Premkumar, S., Piratheepan, J., Arulrajah, A., Disfani, M., Rajeev, P., 2015. Experimental
study on contact erosion failure in pavement embankment with dispersive clay.
J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 04015179.
Raine, S.R., Loch, R.J., 2003. What is a sodic soil? Identication and management options
for construction sites and disturbed lands. Workshop on Soils in Rural Queensland,
2003, Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia.
Rao, S.M., Shivananda, P., 2005. Compressibility behaviour of lime-stabilized clay.
Geotech. Geol. Eng. 23, 309319.
Rao, S., Sridharan, A., Chandrakaran, S., 1989. Inuence of drying on the liquid limit be-
havior of a marine clay. Geotechnique 39.
Rengasamy, P., Greene, R., Ford, G., Mehanni, A., 1984. Identication of dispersive behav-
iour and the management of red-brown earths. Soil Res. 22, 413431.
Richards, K.S., Reddy, K.R., 2007. Critical appraisal of piping phenomena in earth dams.
Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. 66, 381402.
Savas, H., 2015. Consolidation and swell characteristics of dispersive soils stabilized with
lime and natural zeolite. Sci. Eng. Compos. Mater. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/secm-
2014-0202.
Seco, A., Ramirez, F., Miqueleiz, L., Garcia, B., 2011. Stabilization of expansive soils for use
in construction. Appl. Clay Sci. 51, 348352.
 A.H. Vakili et al. / Geoderma 285 (2017) 270279
Sherard, J.L., Decker, R.S., 1977. Dispersive Clays, Related Piping, and Erosion in Geotech-
nical Projects. ASTM special technical publication.
Sherard, J.L., Steele, E.F., Decker, R.S., Dunnigan, L.P., 1976. Pinhole test for identifying dis-
persive soils. J. Geotech. Eng. Div. 102, 6985.
Shulga, G., Rekner, F., Varslavan, J., 2001. SWsoil and water: lignin-based interpolymer
complexes as a novel adhesive for protection against erosion of sandy soil. J. Agric.
Eng. Res. 78, 309316.
Tan, T.-S., Goh, T.-L., Yong, K.-Y., 2002. Properties of Singapore marine clays improved by
cement mixing. ASTM Geotech. Test. J. 25, 422433.
Tastan, E.O., Edil, T.B., Benson, C.H., Aydiliek, A.H., 2011. Stabilization of organic soils with
y ash. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. 137, 819833.
Terrel, R.L., Epps, J.A., Barenberg, E., Mitchell, J., Thompson, M., 1979. Soil Stabilization in
Pavement Structures-A User's Manual Volume 2: Mixture Design Considerations.
Umesh, T., Dinesh, S., Sivapullaiah, H.P., 2009. Control of dispersivity of soil using lime and
cement. Int. J. Geol. 3, 816.
Umesh, T., Dinesh, S., Sivapullaiah, P.V., 2011. Characterization of dispersive soils. Mater.
Sci. Appl. 2, 629633.
Vakili, A.H., Selamat, M.R., 2014. An assessment of veracity of lter criteria for earth dams.
Proc. ICE-Geotech. Eng. 167 (6), 574584.
279
Vakili, A., Selamat, M., Moayedi, H., 2013a. Effects of using pozzolan and Portland cement
in the treatment of dispersive clay. Sci. World J.
Vakili, A., Selamat, M.R., Moayedi, H., 2013b. An assessment of physical and mechanical
properties of dispersive clay treated with lime. Caspian J. Appl. Sci. Res. 197204.
Vakili, A., Selamat, M., Moayedi, H., Amani, H., 2013c. Stabilization of dispersive soils by
pozzolan. Forensic Engineering 2012. ASCE, pp. 726735.
Vakili, A.H., Davoodi, S., Arab, A., Selamat, M.R., 2015a. Use of articial neural network in
predicting permeability of dispersive clay treated with lime and pozzolan. Int. J. Sci.
Res. Environ. Sci. 3 (1), 2337.
Vakili, A., Selamat, M.R., Abdul Aziz, H., 2015b. Filtration of broadly graded cohesive dis-
persive base soils. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 141 (5), 04015004.
Vinod, J., Indraratna, B., Mahamud, M.A., 2010. Stabilisation of an erodible soil using a
chemical admixture. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Ground Improv. 163, 4351.
Yong, R.N., Ouhadi, V.R., 2007. Experimental study on instability of bases on natural and
lime/cement-stabilized clayey soils. Appl. Clay Sci. 35, 238249.
Zorluer, I., Icaga, Y., Yurtcu, S., Tosun, H., 2010. Application of a fuzzy rule-based method
for the determination of clay dispersibility. Geoderma 160, 189196.