Comparative Study of Various Soils Upon Addition of Different Materials on the Basis of Hydraulic Conductivity Parameter

Comparative Study of Various Soils Upon Addition of Different Materials on the Basis of Hydraulic Conductivity Parameter

Rohit Maurya

M. Tech, CED KNIT Sultanpur

Anoopsingh Chandel

M.Tech, CED KNIT

Sultanpur

Umesh Kumar Assoc. Prof., CED KNIT

Sultanpur

Abstract: While selecting various additives for different soils in the process of stabilisation or reinforcement, one must also think upon the variations occurring in the permeability parameter because of the after-effect of addition of additives so as to ensure that well drainage function is being maintained within the soil mass. If not, the clogging of pores following the condition of water logging may result as the adverse effect of adding additives. In the present article, the change in hydraulic conductivity has been studied upon different type of soils with different additives.

Keywords: Hydraulic conductivity (HC), Permeability, Clayey Soil, Sandy Soil, Powdered Additives, Fibre Additives, Rice Husk Ash (RHA), Fly Ash (FA), Stone Dust, HDPE, PP.

1. INTRODUCTION

   Hydraulic conductivity is a decisive as well as crucial characteristic of soil when the talk is about the drainage function (fluid transmission) and change occurring within

   the soils. The other name commonly used to refer hydraulic conductivity is coefficient of permeability (K). Hydraulic conductivity is mainly dependent upon several factors such as the type of soil, its particle size distribution, chemical composition, and degree of saturation and the account of entire data of stress distribution within soil. Darcy (1856) first stated and derived the empirical formula to determine the hydraulic conductivity of soil which is referred commonly as Darcys law. Darcys law can be stated as under:

   Q = K i A

   Where, Q = flow rate (volume/time); K = hydraulic gradient or coefficient of permeability (length/time); i = hydraulic gradient (unit less); A = unit cross-sectional area (area) respectively. From past references, value for hydraulic conductivity of various soil can be shown in the tabular form as below:

   Table 1: Typical values of hydraulic conductivity for various soils based on past literatures

   Type of Soil	Hydraulic conductivity K (cm/sec)	Remarks
   Gravel	1.00E-01	Very High
   Coarse Sand, Fine Sand	1.00E-03 < K < 1.00E-01	High to Medium
   Silty Sand	1.00E-05 < K < 1.00E-03	Low
   Silt, Silty Clay	1.00E-07 < K < 1.00E-05	Very Low
   Clay	< 1.00E-07	Tends to Impermeable

   Various practices are performed to determine the hydraulic conductivity. Of which the most commonly adopted methods to determine the HC are Laboratory methods (Constant head and falling head method respectively). Various other methods to determine hydraulic conductivity can be tabulated in brief as below:

   Table-2 Hydraulic conductivity methods in various fields

   Hydraulic Conductivity Determination Methods	Hydraulic methods based on Darcys law (Experimental approach)	In-situ field methods	Large scale methods	At existing drains
   				At tube-wells (Pumping tests)
   			Small scale methods	Below water table	Augerhole
   					Piezometer
   					Guelph
   					Double tube
   					Pumped borehole
   				Above water table	Infiltrometer
   					Inversed augerhole
   		Laboratory methods	Constant head
   			Falling head
   	Correlation methods (Empirical approach)	Pore size distribution
   		Grain size distribution
   		Soil texture
   		Soil mapping unit

2. MATERIALS

   11 different types of soil were used for the study on the basis of grain size distribution. Based on the GSD, from coarser to finer, they are stated as below with different intrinsic properties:

   Table-3 Coarse grain Soil

   Soil	Type	G	LL	PL	Gravel	Sand	Silt-Clay	K(cm/s)
   Soil-1	SM-SC	–	17.00	10.90	27.46	49.42	23.11	1.54E-04
   Soil-0	SM-SC	–	36.42	20.70	24.77	35.61	39.62	9.80E-05
   Soil-4	Clayey-Sand	–	49.00	23.00	00.00	80.00	20.00	8.00E-05
   Soil-10	SW-ML	2.68	23.00	17.80	00.00	83.00	17.00	4.20E-06
   Soil-7	Sand	2.50	–	–	00.00	100.00	00.00	6.13E-07
   Soil-9	SM-SC	1.99	46.00	21.00	00.00	71.00	29.00	8.61E-10

   Table-4 Fine Grain Soil

   Soil	Type	G	LL	PL	Gravel	Sand	Silt-Clay	K(cm/s)
   Soil-2	CL	–	44.45	25.97	14.13	25.20	60.67	6.90E-05
   Soil-3	MH	–	53.59	32.13	03.20	20.42	78.38	5.60E-05
   Soil-5	A-7-6 (OH)	2.66	45.51	25.35	02.53	44.93	52.54	1.03E-05
   Soil-6	BCS	–	55.00	32.00	00.00	19.16	80.84	3.40E-07
   Soil-8	CH	2.61	60.00	32.00	00.00	20.45	79.55	5.13E-07

   These are the following wastes that are being used in the study which is divided into two tables as (table-5) for fine (powdered form) waste and (table-6) for fibre waste:

   Table-5 Properties and components of Fine Waste

   Sr.	Type	Materials	Components with specifications
   		SiO2	Al2O3	Fe2O3	CaO	MgO	Na2O	K2O
   Soil-0	SM-SC	RHA
   Soil-1	SM-SC		79.66	2.21	0.52	0.65	0.87	0.019	1.98
   Soil-2	CL		specific gravity -1.63, bulk density- 588.53
   Soil-3	MH
   Soil-5	A-7-6	RHA	Local rice millers by Oyetola and Abdullahi (2006).
   Soil-9	CL	RHA	72.24	4.2	3	4.12	1.7	S G-1.87, Lime R-34
   Soil-6	BCS	stone dust	70.74	20.67	2.28	–	1.57	–	–
   Soil-6	BCS	Lime	1.0-12	0.5-40	–	3.5-40	2.5-25	S03(0.2-3), Alkali (0-4)
   Soil-9	CL	Fly Ash	61	16.9	7.24	3.74	2.4	2.7	1.07
   Soil-10	SW-ML	Fly Ash	–	–	–	–	–	–	–

   Table-6 Properties of Plastic waste

   Sr.	Type	Materials	Components with specifications
   Soil-4	Clay	Fibre	10 mm to 25 mm
   Soil-6	BCS	Fibre	T S-(553-759 mpa), Ys M-3450 mpa, S G-0.9, M P-(0160-170 0C)
   Soil-7	Sand	PET	L (mm)-6, W(mm)-0.2, S G-1.33, T L(N)-350
   Soil-8	CH	PP	12 mm length, aspect ratio 300, S G was 0.91, M P was 1600 C

3. TEST METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURE

   This study methodology is totally based on hydraulic conductivity which is a very vital part in many engineering areas. Generally, laboratory methods are used for the determination of hydraulic conductivity viz. constant head test and falling head test respectively. IS 2720: Part 17 is referred to perform the constant head and falling head test as per Indian Standards. Other international codes referred to perform these experiments are ASTM D5856 [9] and ASTM D2434 [10]. Hydraulic conductivity depends upon these factors.

   1. Grain size distribution

   2. Pore size distribution

   3. Fluid viscosity

   4. Void ratio

   5. Degree of saturation

      The two methods used for the determination are explained as below:

      1. Constant Head Test

         This test is usually performed on coarser grain soil because of the rate of water flowing through permeameter is greater than 10-4 cm/sec i.e. we get the constant flow of water as the assumption said in case of laminar flow. The value of k is independent of hydraulic gradient i. Referring code of this test method is ASTM D2434 as well as IS 2720: Part- 17

      2. Falling Head Test

      Falling head test is used for both the types of soil namely coarse grain and fine grain soil. Functioning in this test is similar but the setup is different as soil do not give a constant flowing rate of water likewise the procedure is also varying from the constant head test. The methodology and procedures are well stated in IS 2720: Part-17.

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

   After the admixtures/additives were added into the coarse grained soils, following results were obtained and the change in permeability is shown as below with a result table and comparison graph:

   Table-7 Permeability effect on the coarse grain soils

   Sr.	Soil	Materials	Percentage used	Reference	Effect on Permeability
   Soil-1	SM-SC	RHA	(3%, 5%, 7%,	[1]	Permeability decrease with increase of RHA
   Soil-0			10%, 15%)
   Soil-4	Clayey Sand	natural fibre	(0.1%, 0.2%, 0.3%)	[2]	Permeability increase with fibre content and length increase
   			10 mm to 25 mm
   Soil-10	SW-ML	Fly Ash	20%,30%	[8]	permeability decreases with increase of fly ash in soil
   Soil-7	Sand	Plastic waste	(0.5%, 0.75%, 1%)	[6]	Permeability of sand decreases with an increase in 1% plastic
   Soil-9	CH	Fly Ash	(5%,10%,15%,20%,	[7]	Permeability of soil increased on admixing FA and RHA
   		RHA	25%, 30%, 35%)

   COMBINED GRAPH OF COARSE

   SOIL PERMEABILITY

   PERCENTAGE WASTE MIX

   COMBINED GRAPH OF COARSE

   SOIL PERMEABILITY

   PERCENTAGE WASTE MIX

   1.00E-03

   1.00E-03

   1.00E-04

   1.00E-04

   1.00E-08

   1.00E-08

   1.00E-09

   1.00E-09

   FA SM-SC FA SW ML RHA SM-SC RHA SM SC RHA SM SC 2

   Natural Fibre Clayey Sand

   FA SM-SC FA SW ML RHA SM-SC RHA SM SC RHA SM SC 2

   Natural Fibre Clayey Sand

   1.00E-05

   1.00E-05

   1.00E-06

   1.00E-06

   1.00E-07

   1.00E-07

   PERMEABIILITY

   PERMEABIILITY

   Fig-2 Coarse Grain Soils v/s permeability

   After the admixtures/additives were added into the fine grained soils, following results were obtained and the change in permeability is shown as below with a result table and comparison graph:

   Table-8 Permeability effect on fine grain soils

   Sr.	Soil	Material	Percentage	Reference	Permeability effect
   Soil-2	CL	RHA	(3%, 5%, 7%, 10%, 15%)	[1]	Permeability decrease with increase of RHA
   Soil-3	MH	RHA
   Soil-5	CH	RHA& Lime	(2%, 4%, 6%, 8%)	[3]	Permeability decrease with increase of 4 to 6% RHA
   Soil-6	BCS	HDPE waste fibres, Stone dust & LIME	(0.5, 1.0, 1.5)	[4]	Permeability decrease with increase of %stone dust & Lime
   			(5,10,15),
   			(3,6,9)
   Soil-8	CH	Polypropylene	0.5%,1.0%,1.5%,2.0%	[5]	hydraulic cnductivity goes on increasing with increase in % of PP fibre

   COMBINED GRAPH OF FINE SOIL

   PERMEABILITY

   COMBINED GRAPH OF FINE SOIL

   PERMEABILITY

   PERCENTAGE WASTE MIX

   PERCENTAGE WASTE MIX

   1.00E-05

   1.00E-05

   RHA CL RHA MH

   Fibre CH Fibre BCS Lime BCS Lime CH

   Stonedust BCS

   1.00E-06

   RHA CL RHA MH

   Fibre CH Fibre BCS Lime BCS Lime CH

   Stonedust BCS

   1.00E-06

   1.00E-07

   1.00E-07

5. CONCLUSIONS

Fig-3 Fine Grain Soils v/s permeability

PERMEABIILITY

PERMEABIILITY

c) Whereas in fig-2, we can see that when fibre or plastic

Through this paper, we can easily figure out that behaviour of the soil HC (permeability) is different with materials with respect to percentage and proportions of mixing. The after-effects of additives on various soils is briefed as below:

1. As in fig-1 and table-7 we have clearly seen that coarser soil with gradual increase in addition of ash content decreases the permeability of soil.

2. As in fig-1 and table-7 we observed that CH soil when mixed with lime results in decrease of hydraulic conductivity.

waste is mixed with various soil, hydraulic conductivity gets increased in the soil.

1. But addition of fibre in pure sand gives result otherwise. The hydraulic conductivity is significantly decreased.

2. For soil like BCS in fig-2 and table-8, we find that permeability decreases with lime at 4% and 8% and similar results were obtained for stone dust.

3. In fig-2 and table-8 we observed that with the use of RHA in soil CL, permeability got reduced to a considerable extent.

   REFERENCES

   1. Gbenga M. Ayininuola, Dr., Oluwatobi I. Olaosebikan Influence of Rice Husk Ash on Soil Permeability. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria , Transnational Journal of Science and Technology, TJST December 2013 edition vol.3, No.10 ISSN 1857-8047

   2. Amin Chegenizadep, Prof. Hamid Nikraz 2, Permeability Test on Reinforced Clayey Sand. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology 78 2011

   3. Musa Alhassan Permeability of Lateritic Soil Treated with Lime and Rice Husk Ash. Civil Engineering Department, Federal University of Technology Minna, Nigeria AU J.T. 12(2): 115-120 (Oct. 2008)

   4. ArunPatidar, Dr. H.K. Mahiyar, An Experimental Study on Stabilization of Black Cotton Soil Using HDPE Wastage Fibres, Stone Dust & Lime. International Journal of Advanced Scientific and Technical Research Issue 4 volume 6, Nov. Dec. 2014http://www.rspublication.com/ijst/index.html ISSN 2249-9954

   5. Laboratory shear strength studies of Soil admixed with Plastic waste. Final Project Report CiSTUPProf. G L SivakumarBabu Department of Civil Engineering Indian Institute of Science Bangalore 560012 12 July 2012

   6. K.GeethaManjari, G.Anoosha, Pawan Kumar, Sandeep Kumar Chouksey, G.L.SivakumarBabu, Compressibility and Permeability Behaviour of Plastic Waste Mixed Sand. Proceedings of Indian Geotechnical Conference December 15-17, 2011, Kochi (Paper No. L-074)

   7. Aditya Kumar Anupam, Praveen Kumar, G.D Ransinchung. R.N, Permeability Study on Fly Ash and Rice Husk Ash Admixes with Subgrade Soil for Pavement Construction. Proceedings of International Conference on Advances in Architecture and Civil Engineering (AARCV 2012), 21st 23rd June 2012 489 Paper ID TRA122, Vol. 1 ISBN 978-93-82338-01-7

   8. Somnath Shil1, Dr.Sujit Kumar Pal2, Permeability and Volume Change Behaviour of Soil Stabilized with Fly ash. International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT) ISSN: 2278-0181 IJERTV4IS020659 www.ijert.org(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.) Vol. 4 Issue 02, February-2015

   9. Falling Head Permeability Test (ASTM D5856-95(2007)

   10. Constant Head Permeability Test (ASTM D2434)

   11. Gopal Ranjan, A S R Rao,Basic and Applied Soil Mechanics . (Revised second edition) New age international publication.