UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 1

PAGE

Comparative Study on effectiveness of RHA-

Polypropylene Plastic Fibers vs. Hydrated Lime-
Polypropylene Plastic Fibers as Soil stabilizers on
contaminated soil from Sta.Cruz, Zambales

A Research
Presented to the
Senior High School
University of Santo Tomas

In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements of the Course
Practical Research 3

by
Daniella T. Patajo
Patricia G. Presillas
Argel Joseph D. Rafael
Darlyn C. Sarmiento
Kristofferson F. Sipagan
Clea Ann P. Soria
12-STEM22
April 2019
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 2
PAGE

ABSTRACT

This study determined the suitable percentage of PPF in the Hydrated Lime-PPF
and RHA-PPF mixtures that would improve the physical properties of the soil in
terms of particle size, moisture content and plasticity index. Collected samples
from Sta. Cruz, Zambales were mixed with soil additive mixtures, namely RHA-
PPF, Hydrated Lime-PPF, and PPF itself as the controlled variable. Various tests
such as Atterberg Limits, Sieve analysis, and USCS have been done with 10
samples with different percentages as a whole. In sieve analysis, results showed
highest positive correlation with all the soil additive mixture at 35% PPF
concentration. In terms of lowering the plasticity index, soil additive mixtures
determined as the most effective are RHA-PPF and Hydrated Lime-PPF at 25%
PPF concentration. Soil stabilizers used in the study has shown the expected
correlational effects to the properties tested except for the soil’s moisture
content which showed incomparable results.

Key words: Rice Husk Ash (RHA), Polypropylene Plastic Fibers (PPF), Hydrated
Lime, Unified Soil Classification System (USCS), soil stabilization, soil stabilizer
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 3
PAGE

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

1.0 Introduction 4
1.1 Background of the study 4
1.2 Statement of the Problem 5
1.3 Objectives of the study 6
1.4 Significance of the study 6
1.5 Scope and Limitations 6

2.0 Review of Related Literature

2.1 Mining Activities in the Philippines 9

2.2 Mining as a source of contamination 9

2.3 Condition of soils near mining areas in the Philippines 9
2.4 Soil Stabilization 10

3.0 Methodology 24

3.1 Research Design: Experimental 26

3.2 Subjects and Study Site 30
3.3 Data Measure/ (or Instrument) 31
3.4 Data Gathering Procedure 32
3.5 Ethical Considerations 33
3.6 Data Analysis 34

References 40

Appendix I: Timetable for Research 61

Appendix II: Budget Proposal 62
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 4
PAGE

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

According to the Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement (2010), the

Philippines has been a country rich in minerals. The total value of minerals that
the country had, then, in its vicinity adds up to USD 1 Trillion. Minerals such as
Gold (Ag), Copper (Cu), Nickel (Ni) and Chromite (Cr) were always one of the
most abundant in the Philippines. This served as a catalyst to the exploration,
establishment, and accomplishment of different industries in the country that
includes its mining industry (Castillo, J. & Yu, K., 2014).

One of the cities in the Philippines, Zambales City, has had a long history
of mining activity within its province, particularly in the town of Sta. Cruz. Its
mining industry started from 1935 and with the discovery of many smaller
mineral deposits, more companies were drawn to Zambales City to begin their
harvest of various minerals. However, according to a case study by Kurita (2015),
the scale of the operations was not at a level where the various companies would
be able to create mining towns. The results of the mining operations of the town
have created a multitude of problems for the local populace. Furthermore, in the
research of Magahud (2015), it was found out that the soil in Sta. Cruz contains
high levels of Nickel and Chromium, making it contaminated. Mining sustains
plans of progress and development of an area, but it has become damaging not
just to the natives of an area but also to the environment, particularly the soil
from where the minerals are mined.

Soil contamination due to mining alters the physical environment such as

land disturbance and poor soil strength which leads to a decrease in the quality
of its components, making the soil unstable (Lechner et al., 2014). This poses a
threat to people residing in areas where this type of soil is found, for it can
collapse anytime, it can no longer repel the shear stress applied onto it (Brooks,
2009). Stabilization of these contaminated soils must then occur. Some indicators
of soils already stabilized are reduction in plasticity index (Jawad & Tahas, 2014),
and sensitivity of soil strength to moisture. Furthermore, according to Alrubaye,
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 5
PAGE
Hasan & Fattah (2016), there must be a significant decrease in compression index
with increasing pre-consolidation stress and coefficient of consolidation. Soils
that are already highly-stabilized must not run off or disintegrate when
catastrophic forces are applied onto it (Olinic, E. & Olinic T., 2016).

Stabilization of soils can be done by using different additives. Past

researches contributed to the knowledge that there was a substantial
improvement in the compressibility of clay soils when chemical additives were
incorporated in it (Rajasekaran & Rao, 2002). Some of these additives were Rice
Husk Ash (RHA), Hydrated Lime, and Polypropylene plastic fibers (PPF).

Rice paddy, also known as Rice Husk, a by-product of milling which is

seventy-five percent organic volatile matter, has been used in the burning
process of milling which then produced RHA (Fattah, Rahil, & Al-Soudany, 2013).
Oyetola & Abdullahi (2006) classified RHA as a pozzolana that, according to
different researches, increased Unconfined Compression Strength (UCS),
California Bearing Ratio (CBR), and optimum moisture content, and decreased
the plasticity index, liquid limit and maximum dry unit of the soil it stabilized
which was known by determining the soil’s Atterberg’s limits. Hydrated lime, on
the other hand, also underwent pozzolanic reactions wherein calcium aluminates
and calcium silicate formed from it reacted with the aluminates and silicates
from the soil. Lime, therefore, improved the soil’s stability, durability and shear
strength, reduced plasticity, swelling and moisture-holding capacity (Negi et al.,
2013). Lastly, Polypropylene Plastic Fibers (PPF) was accumulated from plastic
wastes, particularly from plastic chairs and bottles (Pal, 2015). This soil additive
lessened the plasticity index and increased the compactibility of soil, allowing the
soil to be more solidified.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

This is a comparative study that aims to identify which soil additive
mixture will stabilize the soil in Brgy. Naulo, Sta. Cruz, Zambales better.
Specifically, the study aims to answer the following questions:
1) What is the ratio of Hydrated Lime to Polypropylene plastic fibers
that works best as a soil stabilizer in terms of particle size, liquid
limit, plastic limit, and moisture content?
2) What is the ratio of Rice Husk Ash to Polypropylene plastic fibers
that works best as a soil stabilizer in terms of particle size, liquid
limit, plastic limit, and moisture content?
How do the two mixtures, RHA-PPF mixture and Hydrated Lime-PPF mixture,
differ from each other in terms of the mixtures’ effects to the soil’s particle
size, plasticity index, and moisture content?
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 6
PAGE

1.3 Objectives of the Study

The researchers aim to compare the effectiveness of RHA-
Polypropylene Plastic Fibers vs Lime-Polypropylene Plastic Fibers as soil
stabilizers in the affected area of Sta. Cruz, Zambales.
The study specifically aims to:
1) Determine the suitable amount of hydrated lime and polypropylene
plastic fibers in a mixture that could decrease the soil’s plasticity
index (through testing atterberg limits) and moisture content, and
increase soil’s particle size.
2) Determine the suitable amount of rice husk ash and polypropylene
plastic fibers in a mixture that could decrease the soil’s plasticity
index (through testing atterberg limits) and moisture content, and
increase soil’s particle size.
3) Determine the different effects of the soil additive mixtures to soil in
terms of atterberg limit, moisture content and particle size.

1.4 Significance of the Study

We are concerned on contributing possible solution to the hazards
posed by mining activities, specifically in Sta. Cruz, Zambales by testing
the effectiveness of soil additive mixtures, RHA-PPF mixture and Hydrated
Lime-PPF mixture, on weak soils. Since soils in the agricultural farm in
Santa Cruz, Zambales, particularly in Barangay Naulo are contaminated
by the river that serves as the farmers’ source for run-offs in the farms, this
study aims to contribute by stabilizing the soil of the farms to improve the
physical properties of the soil such as particle size distribution, moisture
content and plasticity index. By then, the study may also help farmers to
be informed of the soil characteristics to be sustained.

1.5 Scope and Limitations

This study is focused on accumulating soil samples from Brgy.
Naulo, Sta. Cruz, Zambales, one of the location wherein prevalent mining
has happened and is still happening. The acquired soil is then pre-
assessed to know its original moisture content, soil particle size and
plasticity index. At the same time, we also collected the needed soil
additives involved in this study, particularly Rice Husk Ash (RHA),
Hydrated Lime and Plastic polypropylene fibers (PPF) are mixed with the
soil collected from Sta. Cruz, Zambales. After successfully curing the
mixtures for twenty eight (28) days, different laboratory tests from Astec
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 7
PAGE
Materials Testing Corporation in Quezon city are done to assess the
USCS (Universal Soil Classification System), moisture content, sieve
analysis and plasticity index of the cured soils.

Findings of the study is exclusively applicable only to the soil in

Brgy. Naulo, Sta. Cruz, Zambales and the soil mixtures’ effectiveness on
soils on other areas is not guaranteed. This is due to the fact that the soil
found in the sampling site might not be of the exact same type of soil
found on other areas. Furthermore, the main purpose of the study is
limited only in identifying the best percentage among different tests on the
two mixtures for the soil to be stabilized in which there should be a
decrease on the soil’s plasticity index, increase in the moisture content in
RHA-PPF mixture, decrease in the moisture content in Hydrated Lime-
PPF mixture, and increase in the particle size in order to stabilize the soil
so as to lessen the hazards caused by mining in the area. Moreover, the
study does not promote usage of the already been stabilized soil around
the area for construction nor farming, that could negatively affect nature
and the area.
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 8
PAGE
CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 Mining activities in the Philippines

In relation to resources being mined and being the cause of
destabilization of soils, the Philippines was a country rich with minerals that,
according to the Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement during the year
2010, the total value of minerals that the country has in its vicinity adds up to
USD 1 Trillion. Gold, Copper, Nickel and Chromite were some of the most
abundant minerals in the Philippines (Philippine Rural Reconstruction
Movement, 2010). The said minerals served as catalysts to the exploration,
establishment, and accomplishment of different industries in the country that
included the mining industry (Castillo & Yu, 2014).

According to the Mines and Geosciences Bureau, there were a total of

109 mines in operation and over 3000 small scale quarries in the Philippines as of
2018. It was just recently that some were closed down due to evidence of illegal
operations and mismanagement that lead to serious environmental damage to
the surroundings. One of the main factors being affected by mining is the
structure of soils on the mining areas. Mining disorients the biophysical make up
of soils, making it unstable and more likely to erode. (Lechner et al., 2014).

2.2 Mining as a Source of Soil Contamination

Mining, in contemporary definition, is the excavation and utilization of
different minerals in order to sustain and provide the needs of the people living
in a particular area. It continues to be a great factor and contributor to the
economic progress of a country for it also dispenses the required materials for
development such as building infrastructures (Dubinski, 2013). Although mining
sustains plans of progress and development of an area, it has become damaging
to the environment, particularly to the soil from where the minerals are being
mined from. These soils are rapidly degrading due to massive expansion of
mining areas.

Many researchers have tested, investigated, and conducted studies

relating to mining and its effects to the environment. In the study of Adamcová et
al., (2016), phytotoxicity test was used to assess the ecotoxicity in landfill soils.
The study focused on the adverse effect of contamination on soils caused by
human activities in order to acquire information and assessment on land
pollution. It was then concluded in the study that the examined soils show high
levels of Copper (Cu), Nickel (Ni), and Chromium (Cr) that exceeded the limits.
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 9
PAGE
Both electrothermal atomic-absorption spectrometer and atomic-absorption
spectrometer were used in the study to determine the value of the elements.
According to the researchers, phytotoxicity can be used to determine the soil
components and levels of possible contamination.

On the other hand, researchers Angelovicova and Fazekasova (2016)

heavily focused on water and soil samples in former mining area of Rudňany,
Slovakia. In the study, results showed extremely high-level of heavy metals,
particularly Mercury (Hg) and Copper (Cu) in former mining areas which caused
the soils to be contaminated. The researchers used the index of geoaccumulation
to calculate and identify the value of the concentration. The study presented the
effects of former mining area in the soils’ characteristics. This showed that soil
contamination by heavy metals is a significant problem, which leads to the
changes of soil characteristics such as losing its strength, and limiting productivity
and environmental functions. The expanding industrialization of mining areas can
result to toxic substances that may pose a risk in soils.

2.3 Conditions of soils near mining areas in the Philippines

Mining areas in Benguet, Negros Occidental and Zambales, Philippines are
still operational. Benguet, Cordillera, Sipalay City, Negros Occidental and Sta.
Cruz, Zambales are in a geographical location full of mountains where both
agricultural and mining activities are conducted.

2.3.1 Soil from Benguet, Cordillera

In Mankayan, Benguet due to the presence of the Lepanto copper-
gold deposit, enriched levels of Copper (Cu) and Arsenic (Ar)
concentrations were present in the soil after the processing of Copper
ores resulting in Arsenic toxicity and rendering the soil toxic to most
plants (Claveria et al., 2010). Thus, if the soil is toxic and plants are unable
to grow, plant cover is not present. Plant cover is essential to prevent
erosion and runoff of soil in elevated areas (Roose, 1996).

2.3.2 Soil from Sipalay City, Negros Occidental

Sipalay City, Negros Occidental was another area which was
affected by mine tailing deposits which resulted in having soil with loam
texture yet having a plow layer, the upper layer of the soil usually
overturned by plowing, with a very low clay content (Magahud et al.,
2016). Sipalay also had a copper mine which was closed down and
deemed an environmental hazard to livelihood of the population by the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Landslides and
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 10
PAGE
erosion further expanded the scope of the damage brought to the
environment of Sipalay resulting in the loss of farms and areas of
agricultural activities. It has been reported by Delilan (2006) that there
were repeated landslide occurrences on this area.

2.3.3 Soil from Sta. Cruz, Zambales

Sta. Cruz, Zambales, on the other hand is the chosen location for
experimentation in this study. In line with the research of Velez (2016), it
has been found out that the Zambales Province is filled with natural
resource deposit which credit some of the richest deposits in their
respective regions.

Furthermore, this municipality was one of the area of study

conducted by Magahud (2015) wherein the heavy metal concentration
and source/s of the most irrigated rice areas in the Philippines were
studied. It was found out that the soil in Sta. Cruz was containing high
levels of Nickel and Chromium. It contained 2624.1 mg/kg of Nickel,
which was 26 times more than the Netherland’s maximum Ni content in
soils. On the other hand, it was found out that Chromium content was
1126.5 mg/kg, which was 10 times more than the limit. Nickel and
Chromium were two of the three metals that create serpentinite soils.
(Brooks, 1987; Brooks et al., 1992; Gambi, 1992; Gough et al., 1989; Oze
et al., 2004a, b; Rabenhorst et al., 1982; Schwertmann and Latham, 1986;
Lago Vila et al., 2015). This type of soil is most susceptible to erosion and
weathering for it has low levels of macronutrients and a low water-
holding capacity. (Asensio et al., 2013; Lago Vila et al., 2015).

2.4 Soil Stabilization

2.4.1 Classification of a Stabilized soil
Prevalent minings have caused soil erosion and contamination,
resulting to an unstable type of soil. Soil contamination due to mining
alters the biophysical environment such as land disturbance and poor soil
strength which leads to a decrease in the quality of its components
(Lechner et al., 2014). Many researchers tried to solve the problems
developed from mining, resorting to soil stabilization which enhances the
soil properties to improve its strength and workability.

In the study of Jawad and Tahas (2014), soil stabilization resulted

to a reduction in plasticity index, which marked an improvement on soil’s
strength. The sensitivity of soil strength to moisture was also reduced,
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 11
PAGE
thus, converted soil into a more workable material. Beubauer and
Thompson (1972) stated that this plasticity reduction prompted to an
instant strength gain of up to 60%. According to the researchers, using
soil stabilizers yielded a significant increase in soil cohesion and a slight
improvement of the internal friction angle.

The compression index significantly decreased with the increase in

pre-consolidation stress and coefficient of consolidation. The bond
formation between the soil particles caused the soil to recover further
(Alrubaye, Hasan & Fattah, 2016). Non-dispersive soils or high stabilized
soils resisted disintegration when disruptive forces like water and wind
erosion were applied. Soil stability happens when it resists disruption
when exposed to rapid wetting. These physical properties of a compacted
soil and high-strength soil can later on result to an improvement in its
workability and protect the soil’s pores and fissures. (Olinic, E. & Olinic T.,
2016)

2.4.2 Soil stabilizers

2.4.2.1 Rice husk ash
Soil, particularly clay soil, that is not stabilized poses a
threat to people residing in the vicinity of areas where this type of
soil is found. Clay soil is low in shear strength and it continues to
lose shear strength as it accumulates water. This is the reason why
clay soils are hazardous for it can collapse anytime it cannot longer
repel the shear stress applied onto it (Brooks, 2009). It is also
crucial to stabilize it using different additives. There was a
substantial improvement in the compressibility of clay soils when
chemical additives were incorporated (Rajasekaran & Rao, 2002),
some of these additives were Rice Husk Ash (RHA), Hydrated Lime,
and Polypropylene plastic fibers (PPF).

Rice still not milled are made up of the grain itself, and a
padding or husk that comes off as by-product after the rice grains
are already milled. More often than not, rice husk is being used by
farmers in milling their grains. It is first used as fuel for the
machines to operate and proceed to the boiling process of milling.
Given that rice husk is composed of 75% organic volatile matter, in
the second phase of milling, also called as the firing process, rice
husk was then converted into rice husk ash (Fattah, Rahil, & Al-
Soudany, 2013). RHA comes off as a waste by-product and it
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 12
PAGE
pushed geotechnical engineers to find a use for it. Later on,
studies on it being used as clay soil stabilizer for construction
arose.
Many researchers have explored and are still exploring the
effectiveness and as well as the limits of RHA as a soil stabilizer.
RHA was already classified as a pozzolana (Oyetola & Abdullahi,
2006). Pozzolanas are the kind of substances, be it natural or
artificial, that stiffen when it comes in contact with calcium
hydroxide (Massazza, 1998). However, chemical compositions
such as liquid limit, plastic limit, specific gravity, maximum dry
density, optimum moisture content and California bearing ratio of
different rice husk ashes may vary from one another for
conditions such as type of paddy, crop year, climate and
geographical compositions that affect it (Oyetola & Abdullahi,
2006; Chandrasekhar and Pramada, 2003; Habeeb, 2009).

Furthermore, it has been found out that RHA cannot be

added alone to soils because it doesn’t contain enough stabilizing
compounds (Sabat & Nanda, 2011; Haji et al., 1992). But other
researchers opposed to this and proved that RHA could be utilized
to make improvements to the soil stability without it being mixed
with any other additive. Nonetheless, most researchers and even
geotechnical engineers tried to incorporate other soil stabilizers
with RHA to know which would be a better mix to produce the
most stabilized soil from different areas.

RHA alone was used by Fattah, Rahil, and Al-Soudany

(2013) in their study. RHA that contained 85%-90% amorphous
silica was integrated with clay soils from cities in South Iraq. Just
like Brooks’ research, Unconfined Compression Stress Test (UCS) in
accordance with ASTM D 1557 and Consolidation Test ASTM D
2435 were used in this study. Moreover, Atterberg limits was used
to examine and characterize the soil and the effectiveness of RHA
as a soil stabilizer. It has been known that both the plastic limit
and moisture content of the soil had a positive correlation with
the amount of RHA. However, the maximum dry unit, liquid limit,
specific gravity and plasticity index, showed a negative correlation
with the RHA amount.
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 13
PAGE
RHA with 90.2% silica content, on the other hand was
incorporated with class C fly ash and was used to stabilize CH soil
of the tri-state, areas of Pennsylvania, Delaware and New Jersey,
of Philadelphia. In 2009, Dr. Brooks used different types of tests to
assess the soil cured for 28 days, and these tests were as follow:
California Bearing Test (CBR) in line with ASTM D 1883,
Consolidation Test of ASTM D 2435, and Unconfined Compression
Stress Test (UCS) based on ASTM 2166. These tests showed that
there was a positive correlation between the amount of RHA and
the UCS if the RHA content ranges from 1%-12%, but when RHA
content exceeds the maximum amount, the UCS started to
decrease. Fly ash reacted satisfactorily with the pozzolanic
materials (manufactured by the reaction of RHA’s silicon dioxide
with calcium), and decreased the soil swelling. (Brooks, 2009).

Other additives such as lime and gypsum were mixed in

with RHA to test whether it would be an effective and a possibly
better soil stabilizer. Mtallib and Bankole (2011) conducted a study
wherein the researchers tried to improve the already lime-
stabilized soil by adding RHA in it. The researchers then discovered
the same results—RHA was able to increase optimum moisture
content and decrease the plasticity of the soil. Many other
additives were combined with RHA and were tested with different
types of soil from different locations around the globe. It was true
that the amounts of RHA and the other additives differ from one
another and the results were also distinct from each other.

The type of soil being tested on with the soil stabilizers

were also physically and chemically different, thus, one result of a
study had a possibility of not being identical with the same study
performed on a different location. However, what remained
constant from the results was that RHA increased UCS, CBR and
decreased the plasticity index, liquid limit and maximum dry unit
of the soil. This proved that RHA made clay soils sturdier and more
compact. It also made the soil more resistant to shearing, thus,
making it less likely to collapse.

2.4.2.2 Lime
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 14
PAGE

Lime is a very effective soil modifier and stabilizer, as it has

components compatible with the necessities of soil. According to
the National Lime Association (2001), soils, particularly those with
significant levels of silt or clay, have the tendency to swell and
become plastic when mixed in water, it shrinks when dry, and
spreads out with the presence of frost (which is not common here
in the Philippines).

Cations from clay mineral soils exchange with calcium

cations present in lime, then it produces cementitious forms.
Lime, when added to a reactive soil, develops through a
pozzolanic reaction wherein the calcium aluminates and calcium
silicate formed from lime reacts with the aluminates and silicates
from the soil. According to Negi et al. (2013), these properties of
lime improved the soil’s stability, durability and shear strength,
reduced in plasticity, swelling and moisture-holding capacity.
In the research conducted by Umesha et al. (2013), an
investigation on the improvement of the strength of contaminated
soil, particularly by acid, was done. The researchers were from
geotechnical engineering department and were concerned on the
impacts of soil contamination resulted from geotechnical
behavior. The researchers took samples of Suddha soil from a
canal zone in Karnataka, India.

The proponents combined hydrochloric, sulphuric, and

phosphoric acid with 2.5, 5, 10 and 15 percent concentrations on
the soil sample. Atterberg’s limit was used to determine the limits
of water content so as to descry the soil’s state or consistency. By
contaminating the soil with acid concentrations, the liquid limit
and cohesion decreased, the plastic limit increased up to 2.5% in
pore concentration, and the plasticity index decreased for 2.5%.

Decrease in the optimum water content and maximum dry

unit, and optimum moisture content lessened the water’s
absorption capacity. This resulted to a weaker unconfined
compressive strength of the soil. The researchers then mixed the
samples with 3% lime in dry condition, and was cured for 14 days
in desiccators. The samples were divided into two sets, one
soaked in water and the other soaked in acid. Both sets showed
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 15
PAGE
no amelioration, with the hypothesis of the samples lacking
reactive silica.

Then, the soil samples were neutralized by lime and had

different requirements of lime concentrations. There was an
improvement in the strength characteristics of uncontaminated
soils after being neutralized. It was proven that the presence of
silica gives positive results in the experiment.

In order to classify the soil, sieve analysis method can be

used (Ogundipe, 2013). Moisture content and Atterberg’s limits
were also tested to determine the efficiency of lime to stabilize as
a subgrade material in the study. Samples of soil with hydrated
lime were simply brought to the laboratory for these tests. It was
discussed in the study that the soil used for samples was identified
to be clay. In terms of the moisture content, the effect of lime
increased which can also mean that it shows high water
absorption capability of the soil.

Right amount of hydrated lime added to the soil resulted

to reduction in liquid limit in constant concentration. But, when it
was added with more concentration, 8-10 %, the liquid limit also
increased. The plastic limit then increased and the shrinkage limit
decreased with the addition of lime to the soil. Final test done was
compaction test and there were improvements in the samples.

There was another research study done by Balagoudra et

al. (2017), wherein the researchers examined lime and
polypropylene fiber combined as soil stabilizers. Fiber material
and lime were mixed into air dried soil. It was done in
augmentation, and water was added on the latter part. Tests were
conducted to determine the specific gravity of soil, liquid limit by
Casagrande’s apparatus, plastic limit, particle size distribution by
sieve analysis, proctor compaction test, unconfined compression
test, direct shear test, and California bearing ratio test with fiber
reinforcement of 0, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75 and 1 percent, and lime
constant of 4%. The optimum moisture content decreased up to
0.75% with lime and polypropylene fibers. The maximum dry
density, compression strength, shear strength, and California
bearing ratio value increased up to 0.75%.
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 16
PAGE

Lime and RHA were more commonly used in engineering

such as in creating foundation of structures, and construction of
roads, compared to polypropylene plastic fibers. A study
administered by Muntohar (2009), presented the conflation of
lime and RHA as soil stabilizers with polypropylene plastic fibers. A
soil sample containing high clay particles from a railway project in
Indonesia was stabilized by RHA and 12% of lime. Lengths of
10mm, 20mm and 40mm fibers was then included in the stabilized
soil in percentages of 0.1, 0.2, 0.4 and 0.8 in dry weight.

In a Los Angeles machine, the RHA was said to be

grounded for 3 hours straight resulting to a suitable fineness.
Hydrated lime and RHA were kept in separate airtight containers
and lime was left to de-carbonate. Polypropylene plastic bags
were used as fibers with a tensile strength of 62.85 kN/m². The
samples underwent unconventional compression test and split
tensile test in an indirect method. Then again, results showed
increase in strength capacity, and with the addition of fibers in the
stabilized soil, tension cracks were prevented from becoming
larger. These research studies validated that gain in strength is
influenced by the amount or length of additive added and the
duration of curing.

2.4.2.3 Polypropylene plastic fibers

According to Pal (2015), plastic wastes are rapidly

increasing all around the world due to economic growth, changing
consumption and production patterns.

The polypropylene plastic fibers used in the study of Pal

(2015) came from a mixture of collected plastic chairs and bottles.
The plain soil and another soil was mixed with plastic fibers in
varying lengths of 10mm, 20mm and 30mm, and at different
percentages of 0.15%, 0.25%, and 0.35%. On the other hand, in
the research conducted by Akinmushuru (2013), 50 kg of soil at a
depth of 2.5 m was collected, mixed with a small proportion of
plastic fibers at percentages of 0.5%, 1.0%, 1.5%, and 2.0%.
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 17
PAGE
Both studies focused on the compressibility, direct shear
strength parameters, and unconfined compressive strength of the
soil that was being tested. Although of the same goal, the results
of the experiments were different from one another due to the
varying amounts and lengths of polypropylene plastic fibers used.
However, the result showed that according to Atterberg’s limit,
both soils became less plastic and the plasticity index of it
reduced. The compatibility of soils increased, which made the
soils denser and harder. This then proved that polypropylene
plastic fiber is a promising soil stabilizer for it showed positive
results in re-stabilizing soils.

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

3.1 Research Design: Experimental Research

In this study, we used experimental research with a quantitative

approach. There were two experimental setups, the RHA-PPF mixture and

Hydrated Lime-PPF mixture and a controlled variable, the PPF alone. We wanted

to know the suitable percentage of PPF in the Hydrated Lime-PPF and RHA-PPF

mixtures that would improve the physical properties of the soil in terms of

particle size, moisture content and plasticity index

 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 18
PAGE
3.2 Subjects and Study Site

We collected twenty kilograms of clay soil from Bragy. Naulo, Santa Cruz,

Zambales where permission for soil collection was granted. The collected

samples were kept in a sack for storage.

3.2.2 Additives
3.2.2.1 Rice husk ash
We ordered three hundred grams of Rice Husk from a farm
in Nueva Ecija that uses Rice Husk as machine fuel. We
incorporated RHA of forty-five grams in mass per soil sample.

3.2.2.2 Hydrated Lime

Hydrated lime of two hundred grams in mass was procured
from a construction supplier. We added hydrated lime of twenty
grams in mass per soil sample.

3.2.2.3 Polypropylene plastic fiber

We prepared one hundred grams of Polypropylene Plastic
Fibers (PPF), ten millimeters in length and allocated zero point
seventy-five grams for the zero point fifteen percent
concentration, one point twenty-five grams for the zero point
twenty-five percent concentration, and one point seventy-five
grams for zero point thirty-five percent concentration. We
purchased the PPF from Tertex International Philippines
Incorporated.

3.3 Research Instrument (Data Measure)

3.3.1 Atterberg Limit

According to Humboldt Mgf. Co. (n.), soils behave
depending on the degree of moisture content it is being put
through. Other soils, when wet, don’t get affected while some
absorb and expand. This test is done to determine the structural
make-up of soils, including its shear strength. In this study, to
determine the plasticity index of the soil, the liquid limit and
plastic limit of the soil samples are needed to be known.
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 19
PAGE

According to ASTM D-4318, the liquid limit tests the

amount or level of moisture content at which there is a shift in
behavior of the soil from being plastic to being liquid. The liquid
limit is determined through the use of Casagrande cup method.

The plastic limit, according to the same ASTM, is

determined through testing at which level of moisture content
would the soil break apart at the diameter of three point two
millimeters (3.2 mm) when it is rolled out on a flat, non-porous
surface.

3.3.2 Sieve Analysis

In this study, an increase in soil particle size is one of the
basis in concluding that there is a stabilization that occurred in the
soil samples using the soil additive mixtures. In order to obtain
this kind of data, Sieve Analysis is needed to be done. According to
ASTM D-422, soil particle size distribution is test by sieving that
determines the soil particles in its accurate size that can pass
through sieves of different size, particularly particles that are
larger than the No. 200 sieve that measures seventy five
micrometer (75 μm) in diameter. As for the soil particles that are
greater than seventy five micrometer, sedimentation is being
used.

3.3.3 USCS
Unified soil classification system is a procedure that is
focused on determining the particle size and organic matter
concentration of soils. As explained by Das (2009), through UCSC,
soils are classified into two categories. Soils can either be the
coarse-grained soils or the fine-grained soils. Coarse-grained soils
are gravelly and sandy in nature with less than 50% particles
passing through the No. 200 sieve. On the other hand, the fine-
grained soils are with 50% or more particles passing through the
No. 200 sieve. Furthermore, determining the percentage of gravel,
sand, silt and clay, soil uniformity coefficient and, soil coefficient of
gradation contributes to the proper classification of soils being
tested.
3.4 Preliminary laboratory testing of gathered soil
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 20
PAGE
We went to ASTEC Material Testing Center where tests were done to
determine the moisture content, particle size, plastic, shrinkage, and liquid limits
through the Atterberg Limits of the soil we gathered from Santa Cruz, Zambales.
The particle size of the soil was determined using an ASTM D-422 of varying
sizes. Data taken from the sieve analysis is compared to the Universal Soil
Classification System (USCS), based on ASTM D-328, to determine the soil type.
ASTM D-4318 was the basis for the procedure in classifying the Atterberg Limits
of the soil samples we turned over.

3.5 Preparation of soil stabilizer mixtures

After the collection of materials, the researchers made two soil mixtures
using different soil additives. One mixture was composed of RHA with PPF and
the other one was composed of Hydrated lime with PPF. Amount of soil on
different mixtures was added first with certain concentrations of RHA and
Hydrated Lime. Based on the study done by Brooks (2009), one to twelve percent
RHA content is the ideal concentration of the said additive, thus, we mixed forty-
five grams (nine percent concentration) of RHA in each sample to produce the
RHA-PPF mixture (Mixture A). A constant four percent (4%) concentration of
Hydrated lime, on the other hand, is its optimum content to be added to PPF
(Jose and Rajamane, 2018). Therefore, we mixed twenty grams (20 g) of
Hydrated lime in each soil sample to yield Lime-PPF mixture (Mixture B). Both
Mixtures A and B, had three samples containing different PPF concentrations—
zero point seventy-five grams (0.75 g) of PPF for the zero point fifteen percent
(0.15%) concentration, one point twenty-five grams (1.25 g) of PPF for the one
point twenty-five (1.25%) percent concentration, and one point seventy-five
grams (1.75 g) of PPF for the zero point thirty-five (0.35%) percent concentration.

3.6 Stabilization and Observation Period

ASTEC laboratory workers removed any stones or rocks that were present
in the collected soil samples were using a sieve. Based on the study conducted by
Brooks (2009), the soil samples were divided into six samples but in this research,
we added three more samples to be the controlled variable. Each sample had
five hundred grams (500 g) of soil per concentration values of soil stabilizer
additives. In alignment to Muntohar (2000), we mixed the specimens with little
amount of water that would act as the medium for reaction process. Each
specimen was subjected to 28 days of curing and observation for it is the
recommended length of time recommended for soil mixtures to be stabilized. A
cool, dry area was utilized as storage to avoid moisture build-up in the
specimens.

3.7 Post laboratory testing of stabilized soil

 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 21
PAGE
After the twenty-eight-day curing and observation period, we proceeded
at ASTEC Material Testing Corporation. The ASTEC laboratory operators examined
the effects of the additives on the soil sample. The soil samples were evaluated
on the following tests
· Atterberg Limit
· Sieve Analysis
· Unified Soil Classification System (USCS)

3.8 Data Analysis

We, then, gathered and compared the results of the soil before and after
it was cured with the soil additive mixtures. To determine which soil additive
mixture performed better, the best result from the three different PPF
concentrations of the same soil additive mixture were compared to each other.
Then, the best soil stabilizer is concluded.

CHAPTER 4
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 22
PAGE
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Figure 1. Soil particles from different soil samples passing through sieve
no. 10 before and after being cured

Figure 1. shows that less soil particles passed through sieve no. 10
when soils were mixed with soil stabilization additives. There are best
results in each of the different subunits, both in RHA-PPF and Hydrated
Lime-PPF mixture, the 35% PPF concentration showed the best result,
enabling only 2% less soil particles to pass through the sieve. Meanwhile,
in the controlled PPF soil mixture, results were similar in the three different
PPF concentrations, allowing only 1% less soil particles to pass through
the no. 10 sieve.
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 23
PAGE

Figure 2. Soil particles from different soil samples passing through sieve
no. 40 before and after being cured.

Figure 2 shows that when the sieve size opening decreased, less
soil particles were able to pass through the sieve in all of the cured soil
samples. In the RHA-PPF soil mixture, least amount of soil particles
passed through in the 35% PPF concentration, allowing only 4% less of
the soil particles. For the other two soil mixtures, the Hydrated Lim-PPF
soil mixture and the controlled PPF soil mixture, results showed the same
data, wherein least amount of soil particles passed through the sieve no.
40 at 35% PPF concentration.
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 24
PAGE

Figure 3. Soil particles from different soil samples passing through sieve
no. 200 before and after being cured
Figure 3 exhibits that less soil particles pass through the sieve no.
200, even in the pre-laboratory soil. The Hydrated Lime-PPF soil mixture
and controlled PPF soil mixtures have the same results, being the soil
mixtures at 35% PPF concentration the best result. For the RHA-PPF soil
mixture, all soil samples showed that 9%-11% less soil particles were not
able to pass through the sieve, having the RHA-PPF soil mixture at 35%
PPF concentration the best result.
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 25
PAGE

Figure 4. Moisture content of different soil samples before and after being
cured
Figure 4 displays that all of the soil mixtures increased the moisture
content of the soil samples from Sta. Cruz, Zambales, having the
Hydrated Lime-PPF mixture as the most reactive one, resulting to four to
six-unit (4-6 unit) increase from the pre-laboratory soil sample. In the
RHA-PPF soil mixture, the 15% PPF concentration had increased the
moisture content the most, same goes to the controlled PPF soil mixture.
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 26
PAGE

Figure 5. Plasticity index of different soil samples before and after being
cured
Figure 5 shows that there is a significant effect of the soil
stabilization additives to the soil’s plasticity index, specifically in terms of
lowering it down. In the RHA-PPF soil mixture, all soil samples except the
15% PPF concentration decreased the soil’s plasticity index, having the
sample with 25% PPF concentration as the most effective one. In the
Hydrated lime-PPF soil mixture, the one in 15% PPF concentration was
the one that showed the greatest improvement in lowering the plasticity
index from 24 to 16. Meanwhile, both RHA-PPF and Hydrated lime-PPF
soil mixtures did not lower down the plasticity index as greatly as the
controlled PPF mixture at 15% PPF concentration did.

4.2 Discussion
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 27
PAGE
Based on past researches, different substances or soil additives
have distinct effects on soil’s physical properties and make-up. However,
all the soil stabilization additives we used in this study, namely, RHA,
Hydrated lime, and PPF, have common expected effects on soil’s moisture
content, plasticity index, and particle size. The expected results were
attained except for the effect of the soil additives to soil’s moisture content.
In terms of soil’s particle size, the soil stabilizers we used were
expected to lower down the percentage of soil particles that pass through
the sieves as its diameter decreases. It was tested in the pre-laboratory
assessment of the soil that as the sieve’s diameter decreases, less soil
particles were able to pass through. Thus, it is expected that the soil
additives would have lower result than the one obtained from the pre-
laboratory test.
Focusing on the results of the RHA-PPF soil additive mixture, it has
been proven that the soil additive mixture, in 15%, 25%, and 35%
concentration have made the soil particles bigger, lessening the
percentage of passage of the said specimen through the three used
sieves from 99% to 95%, 96%, and 93% respectively. Having this been
said, we can now conclude that in terms of increasing the soil’s particle
size, RHA-PPF in 35% concentration is the most effective RHA-PPF
mixture.
Meanwhile, based on Fig. 1, Fig. 2, and Fig. 3, it can be seen that
Hydrated Lime-PPF additive soil mixture in 15%, 25%, and 35%
concentration increase soil particle size for it have also lowered down the
percentage of passage of the said specimen, decreasing it for 99% to
98%, 98%, and 97% respectively. It has been proven that Hydrated-Lime
additive soil mixture in 35% concentration is the most effective mixture in
increasing the soil particle size.
However, looking at the controlled PPF soil mixture, the result
obtained for Sieve Analysis is the same as the one obtained from the
Sieve Analysis result of the Hydrated-Lime-PPF soil additive mixtures.
Therefore, we could conclude that the increase of soil particles is greatly
affected by the PPF and not by the Hydrated Lime, for if not, the result of
the Sieve Analysis of the Hydrated Lime-PPF soil additive mixtures would
have been lower than the results obtained from the controlled PPF.
As for the soil’s plasticity index, on Fig. 5, all the soil stabilizers
were proven to lower it down except for the RHA-PPF soil additive mixture
in 15% concentration. RHA-PPF soil additive mixture in 25% concentration
is the most effective RHA-PPF mixture in terms of lowering down the soil’s
plasticity index from 24 to 17. Meanwhile, the Hydrated Lime-PPF soil
additive mixture in 15% concentration has the best result, lowering the
soil’s plasticity index from 24 to 16. Comparing the results to that of the
controlled PPF soil mixture, we have proven that both RHA and Hydrated
Lime work well with PPF in lowering the soil’s plasticity index if the PPF
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 28
PAGE
concentration is at 25% because at other PPF concentrations, RHA and
PPF don’t react accordingly, raising the soil plasticity index or not making
any changes in the soil’s plasticity index at all.
On the other hand, in terms of the soil’s moisture content, the
results from Fig. 4 were not the expected ones. We expected that all of the
soil additive mixtures would decrease the soil’s moisture content but the
result was the opposite. It can be seen that the controlled PPF soil mixture
raised the soil’s moisture content alone and when the RHA and Hydrated
Lime was added to the mixture, soil’s moisture content got even higher.
However, RHA increased the soil’s moisture content less than how much
the Hydrated Lime did. We think, this is due to the fact that _______.

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In conclusion, from this study, we can see significant changes done by the
different soil stabilizers, and it is clear that it has improved the quality of the soil.
All of the samples went through a curing period of 28 days to establish bonds
between the soil and the chosen additives.
In each sample, it was found that the value of the plasticity index had a
significant decrease resulting in the soil becoming less muddy. In this area
mixtures with Polypropylene Plastic Fibers (PPF) concentrations of 15%-25% were
the ones with the most significant results
In moisture content, a decrease was found in the Control group and the
PPF-Lime mixture, while in the samples with RHA-PPF mixtures an increase was
recorded, which is the predicted outcome since past researches involving RHA
recorded an increase in the moisture content.
And lastly, soil particle size of the samples have become bigger in all different
stabilizers used which leads the soil to become more compact even more than
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 29
PAGE
what was tested in the pre-laboratory tests. Due to its size after mixing in the
different soil stabilizers the soil became more ideal for farming which is aligned
to where we have sourced our soil.
To have more compelling results and comparisons, we recommend the
future researchers to conduct the California Bearing Ratio (CBR) and Unified
Compressive Strength (UCS) tests. The CBR test will measure the maximum
bearing capacity and the cohesive strength of the soil while the UCS test will help
determine the maximum load per unit area the soil can withstand. These tests
will be of great help in observing the mechanical strength of soil and then further
determine the soil behavior under an applied force.
However, future researchers must keep in mind that in order to conduct
these tests, they need to collect at least 20 kilograms of soil per sample. So they
should be well-equipped during the collection and transportation of soil samples.
The laboratory testing must be done ahead of time in order to check if some
errors occur during the experimentation. The area where the soil samples are to
be collected is also an important factor, we recommend to examine first the
probable locations and areas that are affected by mining activities. Furthermore
it is recommended to conduct field test after laboratory tests to ensure accurate
and applicable results. Field test may include shaping the soil into a suitable
shape that can hold weight. A considerable amount of time must also be invested
into the project.

REFERENCES
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 30
PAGE
Arrange all literature actually cited in chapters 1 to 3, arrange them

ALPHABETICALLY (NOT NUMBERED) and strictly use APA style entries. Sample

entries for books, journals, book edition and internet source are shown below

in that order;
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 31
PAGE
Appendix I Timetable for Research

(Example)

Research Objectives 2010 2011

Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May

1. Writing of Proposal
2. Collection of Algal
Materials
3. Fractionation of
Polysaccharides
4. Collection of Blood and
Isolation of PBMCs
5. Cell Viability Assay
6. ELISA Assay for Cytokines
7. MRNA extraction
8. Chemopreventive assays
9. Data Collation/Analysis
10. Final Defense
 UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL 32
PAGE

Appendix II Budgetary Requirements

(Example)
SOURCES OF EXPENSES Quantity Amount
(PhP)
Collection …….

Isolation of ….

Tissue Culture Reagents

Total