Article no.

22

THE CIVIL ENGINEERING JOURNAL 4-2016

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES OF LATERITIC SOIL

STABILIZED WITH THE ASHES OF OIL PALM FRONDS

Emeka Nnochiri1 and Olufikayo Aderinlewo2

1 Federal University of Technology, School of Engineering and Engineering

Technology, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Akure, P.M.B. 704,
Nigeria; [email protected]

2 Federal University of Technology, School of Engineering and Engineering

Technology, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Akure, P.M.B. 704,
Nigeria; [email protected]

ABSTRACT
This study assesses the geotechnical properties of lateritic soil stabilized with the ashes of
oil palm fronds. These properties are then compared with those of the same soil stabilized with
cement to determine how well the ashes perform since cement is considered to be the best
stabilizer. Laboratory tests such as specific gravity, moisture content, Atterberg limits, particle size
distribution, compaction, unconfined compressive strength (UCS) and California bearing ratio
(CBR) tests were first carried out to determine the basic properties of the lateritic soil (without the
stabilizers). Based on the results of these tests, the soil was classified according to AASHTO soil
classification system as an A-7-5 soil which is a poor soil. Hence, the need for stabilization.
Thereafter, strength tests such as California bearing ratio (CBR), unconfined compressive strength
(UCS) and compaction tests were performed on the soil to which the ashes and cement were
added in percentages of 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 by weight of the lateritic soil. The compaction test
showed that the highest maximum dry densities (MDD) were recorded in the case of the oil palm
frond ash (OPFA) and cement at 4% (MDD = 2.02kg/m3) and 6% (MDD = 2.40kg/m3) respectively.
The highest CBR values obtained were 32.6% and 87.32% at 4% OPFA content and 6% cement
content respectively.The unconfined compressive strengths (UCS) of the soil were highest at 4%
OPFA content (234.86kN/m2) and 6% cement content (588.32kN/m2). The chemical tests
performed on the OPFA and the cement showed that the highest oxide component were SiO2
(33.67%) and CaO (60.83%) respectively.

KEYWORDS
Geotechnical, stabilized, Atterberg limits, California bearing ratio, unconfine compressive
strength, compaction.

INTRODUCTION
Laterites are soil types rich in iron and aluminum that are formed in tropical areas. Most
laterites are rusty-red because of the presence of iron oxides. They develop by intensive and long-
lasting weathering of the underlying parent rock. Tropical weathering (laterization) is a prolonged
process of chemical weathering which produces a wide variety in the thickness, grade, chemistry

https://doi.org/10.14311/CEJ.2016.04.0022 1
 Article no. 22

THE CIVIL ENGINEERING JOURNAL 4-2016

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

and ore mineralogy of the resulting soils. The initial products of weathering are essentially
kaolinized rocks called saprolites [1]. Lateritic soils are products of tropical weathering with red,
reddish- brown or dark brown colour, with or without nodules or concretions and generally (but not
exclusively) found below hardened ferruginous crusts [2]. Laterite formation factors include climate
(precipitation, leaching, capillary rise and temperature), topography (drainage), vegetation, parent
rock (iron rich rocks) and time of these primary factors. However, climate is considered to be the
most important factor.
Soil stabilization aims at improving soil strength, controlling dust and increasing resistance
to softening by water through bonding of the soil particles together thereby water proofing the
particles or a combination of the two [3, 4]. The simplest stabilization processes are compaction
and drainage (if water drains out of wet soil, it becomes stronger). The other process is by
improving the gradation of particle size and further improvement can be achieved by adding
binders to weak soils [5].
Soil stabilization can be accomplished by several methods, all these methods fall into two
broad categories namely mechanical and chemical stabilization. Mechanical Stabilization is a
physical process that involves altering the physical nature of native soil particles by either induced
vibrations or compaction or by incorporating other physical properties such as barriers and nailing.
Chemical Stabilization involves initiating chemical reactions between stabilizers (cementitious
material) and soil minerals (pozzolanic materials) to achieve the desired effect of improving the
chief properties of a soil that are of interest to engineers namely volume stability, strength,
compressibility, permeability and durability [3, 6, 7].

Alternatives to Cement
About 7% of CO2 is released into the atmosphere during the cement production [8]. This
has negative effects on the ecology and future of human beings one of which is global warming.
Research on alternatives to cement has so far centred on the partial replacement of cement with
different materials. In advanced countries, partial replacement of cement with pozzolans is well
documented.
Reasons for finding alternatives to cement include the following: high cost of production,
high energy demand and emission of CO2 (responsible for global warming). In the third world
countries, the most common and readily available materials that can partially replace cement
without economic implication are bio-based materials and agro-based wastes; notable ones are
Achahwok ash, Bambara groundnut shell ash, bone ash, groundnut husk ash, rice husk ash and
wood ash, dried banana leaves, bagass, bamboo leaves, some timber species and periwinkle shell
ash [8].

Need to Stabilize Laterites

Lateritic soils are generally used for road construction in Nigeria. Lateritic soils in its natural
state generally have low bearing capacity and low strength due to high clay content. The strength
and stability of lateritic soil containing large amounts of clay cannot be guaranteed under load in
the presence of moisture [9]. The use of lateritic soils consisting of high plastic clay content results
in cracks in and damage to pavement, roadways, foundations or any civil engineering construction.
The need to improve the strength and durability of lateritic soil in recent times has become
imperative, this has geared researchers towards using stabilizing materials that can be sourced

https://doi.org/10.14311/CEJ.2016.04.0022 2
 Article no. 22

THE CIVIL ENGINEERING JOURNAL 4-2016

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

locally at a very low cost [10]. These local materials can be classified as either agricultural or
industrial wastes [11]. In cases where sourcing for durable soil may prove economically unwise,
the viable option is to stabilize the available soil to meet the specified requirements of construction
[12, 13].
Cement Stabilization
The addition of cement to a material, in the presence of moisture, produces hydrated
calcium aluminate and silicate gels, which crystallize and bond the material particles together. Most
of the strength of a cement- stabilized material comes from the physical strength of the matrix of
hydrated cement. A chemical reaction also takes place between the material and lime which is
released as the cement hydrates, leading to increased soil strength. The solubilities of Silica and
Alumina are greatly increased in the stabilised clay soils to form calcium silicate gel which coats
and binds lumps of clay together and occupies the pores in the soil [14].

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The materials used for this research work were lateritic soil, oil palm fronds ash and
ordinary portland cement. The disturbed lateritic soil samples were collected from within the
campus of the Federal University of Technology, Akure (FUTA), Nigeria. The lateritic soil was
collected at depths representative of the soil stratum and not less than 1.2m below the natural
ground level. It was thereafter brought to the Geotechnical laboratory of the Federal University of
Technology, Akure (FUTA) and marked, indicating the soil description, sampling depth and date of
sampling. The lateritic soil was air-dried for two weeks to allow for partial elimination of natural
water which may affect the analysis, then sieved with sieve no 4(4.75mm opening) to obtain the
final soil samples for the tests. After the drying period, lumps in the samples were pulverised under
minimal pressure.
Fresh oil palm fronds were obtained from a large abandoned farmland at the phase II site of
the Federal University, Oye-Ekiti. The broom-stick part of the fronds were removed, the fronds
were spread on the ground and air-dried to facilitate easy burning. The fronds were burnt into
ashes and collected in polythene bags, stored under room temperature until used. Furthermore,
the ashes were sieved through BS Sieve 75µm and kept covered before and after use to prevent
moisture and contaminations from other materials. Figure 1 shows a sample of the oil palm frond
ash.

Figure 1 - Sample of the oil palm frond ash

https://doi.org/10.14311/CEJ.2016.04.0022 3
 Article no. 22

THE CIVIL ENGINEERING JOURNAL 4-2016

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The following tests namely particle size distribution, Atterberg limit, British Standard (BS)
compaction, unconfined compressive strength (UCS) and California bearing ratio (CBR) tests were
carried out on the unstabilised samples to obtain its basic properties. Thereafter, compaction,
unconfined compressive strength and California Bearing Ratio (CBR) tests were carried out on the
stabilized samples in accordance with British Standard Methods of testing soil for Civil Engineering
purposes [15, 16]. In addition, the chemical composition of the ordinary portland cement and the
ashes of the oil palm fronds were determined through chemical analysis. Chemical analysis of the
fine powdered ashes and cement was carried out at the central laboratory of the Federal University
of Technology, Akure using the x-ray diffraction and SEM techniques.

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
Chemical Analysis of the OPFA and OPC
The chemical analysis carried out on the oil palm frond ash (OPFA) and ordinary Portland
cement revealed the oxide components as shown in Table 1.

Table 1 - Chemical composition of the oil palm frond ashes (OPFA) and ordinary Portland
Cement (OPC)

Components (oxides) OPFA (%) OPC (%)

CaO 28.66 60.83
ZnO 0.89 NIL
MgO 3.97 3.02
P 2O 5 3.99 NIL
SiO3 5.59 NIL
Al2O3 14.79 6.47
Fe2O3 4.51 2.79
SiO2 33.67 20.05
K 2O 3.41 0.51
Na2O 0.52 O.48
SO3 NIL 0.35
TiO2 NIL 0.38

Table 1 shows that the OPC contains a high amount of CaO (60.83%) which aids in the
stabilization process and invariably makes cement a very effective stabilizer. On the addition of
water to cement, major cementitious products like calcium silicate hydrates and calcium aluminium
hydrates are produced which provide the bond between the soil particles. On the other hand, the
OPFA can be regarded as a pozzolana since it contains an appreciable amount of SiO2 (20.05%).
A pozzolana is a siliceous material which by itself does not possess cementitious properties but will
in finely divided form and in the presence of water react with calcium hydroxide, Ca(OH)2 to form

https://doi.org/10.14311/CEJ.2016.04.0022 4
 Article no. 22

THE CIVIL ENGINEERING JOURNAL 4-2016

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

cementitious compounds [17]. The OPFA aptly qualifies as a pozzolana since the percentage sum
of its SiO2, Al2O3 and Fe2O3 components (52.97%) exceeds the minimum requirement of 50% [18].

Preliminary tests on the unstabilized soil sample

The tests carried out on the lateritic soil sample without the additives gave its natural
moisture content as 13.4% and specific gravity as 2.40. The soil was classified as a silt-clay soil
since the percentage passing the sieve no. 200 was than 35%. Based on its liquid limit of 45.5%
and plasticity index 14.5%, the soil was further clasified as an A-7-5 “fair to poor soil“ [19] which
cannot be used in road construction without treatment. Hence, the need for stabilization. Table 2
shows a summary of the properties of the natural lateritic soil used in this study. Compaction test
on the soil gave a maximum dry density (MDD) of 1.94kg/m3 with corresponding optimum moisture
content (OMC) of 10.7%, while its California bearing ratio (CBR) and unconfine compressive
strength (UCS) were 10.42% and 209.18kN/m2 respectively.

Table 2 - Properties of the natural lateritic soil

Property Value
Natural moisture content 13.4%
Specific gravity 2.40
Liquid limit 45.5%
Plastic limit 31.0%
Plasticity index 14.5%
AASHTO classification A-7-5
Soil type Silt-Clay
Maximum dry density (MDD) 1.94kg/m3
Optimum moisture content (OMC) 10.7%
California bearing ratio (CBR) 10.42%
unconfine compressive strength (UCS) 209.18kN/m2

Compaction test on the lateritic soil containing the additives

Table 3 shows the compaction properties of the soil containing the additives. In the case of
the soil with OPFA, the MDD improved from the initial value of 1.94kg/m3 for the natural soil to
1.98kg/m3 at 2% OPFA content and this further increases to 2.02kg/m3 (the highest value) when
the OPFA content was increased to 4%. Thereafter, the MDD drops all through up to 10% OPFA
content. This drop can be attributed to the fact that the specific gravity of the soil had been lowered
on addition of the OPFA.
In the case of the lateritic soil containing the ordinary Portland cement (OPC), the MDD
initially drops from the original value of 1.94 for the natural soil to 1.85 at 2% cement content after
which it increases to 1.91 at 4% cement content (which is still lower than that of the natural soil).

https://doi.org/10.14311/CEJ.2016.04.0022 5
 Article no. 22

THE CIVIL ENGINEERING JOURNAL 4-2016

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The highest MDD (2.40) is reached at 6% cement content after which it drops at 8% and 10%
cement contents.
Table 3 - Compaction properties of the lateritic soil containing the additives
Additives Soil with OPFA Soil with OPC
(%)
MDD (kg/m3) OMC (%) MDD (kg/m3) OMC (%)
2 1.98 11.3 1.85 18.6
4 2.02 11.2 1.91 17.3
6 1.99 13.4 2.40 15.7
8 1.87 14.15 1.96 17.9
10 1.86 16.60 2.30 19.1

California bearing ratio (CBR) test on the lateritic soil containing the additives
Table 4 shows the unsoaked CBR of the soil containing the additives. In the case of the soil
containing OPFA, the CBR increases from 10.42% for the natural soil to 31.06% at 2% OPFA
content and to the highest value of 32.6% at 4% OPFA content. Thereafter, the CBR falls
throughout up to 10% OPFA content.
In the case of the soil containing the OPC, the CBR increases from 10.42% for the natural
soil to 57.62% at 2% OPC content, drops to 45.74% at 4% cement content, increases again to the
highest value of 87.32% at 6% cement content, drops again to 78.32% at 8% cement content and
finally increases to 80.41% at 10% cement content.

Table 4 - CBR (unsoaked) of the lateritic soil containing the additives

% of additives unsoaked CBR (%) values
Soil with OPFA Soil with OPC
2 31.06 57.62
4 32.6 45.74
6 21.19 87.32
8 19.29 78.32
10 9.52 80.41

Table 5 shows the soaked CBR of the soil containing the additives. In the case of the soil
containing OPFA, the CBR increases from 10.42% for the natural soil to 15.41% at 2% OPFA
content and to the highest value of 17.33% at 4% OPFA content. Thereafter, the CBR falls
throughout up to 10% OPFA content.
In the case of the soil containing the OPC, the CBR increases from 10.42% for the natural
soil to 42.63% at 2% OPC content, drops to 33.78% at 4% cement content, increases again to the

https://doi.org/10.14311/CEJ.2016.04.0022 6
 Article no. 22

THE CIVIL ENGINEERING JOURNAL 4-2016

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

highest value of 74.62% at 6% cement content, drops again to 64.35% at 8% cement content and
finally increases to 69.48% at 10% cement content.
Table 5 - CBR (soaked) of the lateritic soil containing the additives
% of additives soaked CBR (%) values
Soil with OPFA Soil with OPC
2 15.41 42.63
4 17.33 33.78
6 13.26 74.62
8 8.12 64.35
10 6.44 69.48

Unconfined compressive strength (UCS) test on the lateritic soil containing the
additives
Table 6 shows the UCS of the soil containing the additives. In the case of the soil
containing OPFA, the UCS increases from 209.18kN/m2 for the natural soil to 226.73kN/m2 at 2%
OPFA content and further on to the highest value of 234.86kN/m2 at 4% OPFA content.
Thereafter, the UCS drops to 216.32kN/m2 at 6% OPFA content, increases again to 227.85kN/m2
at 8% OPFA content and finally drops to 198.44 at 10% OPFA content..
In the case of the soil containing the OPC, the UCS increases from 209.18kN/m2 for the
natural soil to 542.52kN/m2 at 2% OPC content, drops to 430.86 kN/m2 at 4% OPC content ,
increases again to 588.32kN/m2 at 6% OPC content, drops again to 574.46kN/m2 at 8% OPC
content and finally increases to 575.22kN/m2 at 10% OPC content.

Table 6 - UCS of the lateritic soil containing the additives

% of additives Unconfirmed compressive strength (kN/m2)
Soil with OPFA Soil with OPC
2% 226.73 542.52
4% 234.86 430.86
6% 216.32 588.32
8% 227.85 574.46
10% 198.44 575.22

https://doi.org/10.14311/CEJ.2016.04.0022 7
 Article no. 22

THE CIVIL ENGINEERING JOURNAL 4-2016

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONCLUSION
Based on the chemical test, the oil palm frond ash can be classified as a pozzolanic
material because the percentage sum of its SiO2, Al2O3 and Fe2O3 components (52.97%) exceeds
the minimum requirement of 50%.
The compaction, California bearing ratio (CBR) and unconfined compressive strength tests
indicated that the highest values were obtained at 4% OPFA and at 6% OPC content. These
represent the optimum values for the OPFA and OPC to be used as stabilizers in the lateritic soil.
It can be inferred from the tests that even though cement proved to be a better stabilizer,
the OPFA could be used as an alternative if added in the right quantity. The oil palm fronds provide
a readily available, easily sourced and affordable material that can be used to produce the OPFA
stabilizer.

REFERENCES
[1] Dalvi A.D., Bacon W.G., Osborne R.C., 2004. The Past and the Future of Nickel Laterites. PDAC 2004
International Convention, Trade Show and Investors Exchange. Retrieved 2010.
[2] Ola S.A. Geotechnical Properties and Behaviour of some Nigerian Lateritic Soils. In: Tropical Soils of
Nigeria in Engineering Practice. Rotterdam: A. A. Balkema;1978, p. 61-84.
[3] Sherwood P., 1993. Soil Stabilization with Cement and Lime. State of the Art Review. Transport
Research Laboratory HMSO, London.
[4] Amu O.O., Adetuberu A.A., 2010. Characteristics of Bamboo Leaf Ash Stabilization on Lateritic Soil in
Highway Construction. International Journal of Engineering and Technology, vol. 2, no. 4: 212-219.
[5] Rogers C.D.F., Glendinnings S., 1993. Modification of Clay Soils using Lime. In: Proceedings of the
Seminar held at Loughborough University on Lime Stabilization,edited by C.A. Rogers, 99-114.
[6] Ingles O.G., Metcalf J.B., 1972. Soil Stabilization: Principles and Practice. Sydney: Butterworths,
p.374.
[7] EuroSoilStab, 2002. Development of Design and Construction Methods to Stabilise Soft Organic Soils:
Design Guide for Soft Soil Stabilization. European Commission, Industrial and Materials Technologies
Programme CT97-0351.
[8] Aribisala O.A., 1989. Sourcing of Local Raw materials and Investment Opportunity in Building/
Construction Industrial Sector. In: Proceedings of the National Workshop held at Central Hotel, Kano,
23 – 37.
[9] Alhassan M., 2008. Potential of Rice Husk Ash for Soil Stabilization. AU Journal of Technology, vol.
71, no. 4: 246-250.
[10] Bello A.A., Ige J.A., Hammed A., 2015. Stabilization of Lateritic Soil with Cassava Peels Ash. British
Journal of Applied Science and Technology, vol. 7, no. 6: 642-650.
[11] Amu O.O., Basiru N.T., Coker A.A., 2011. Effects of Forage Ash as Stabilizing Agent in Lateritic Soil
For Road. Innovations in Science and Engineering, vol. 1: 1-8.
[12] Mustapha M.A., 2005. Effect of Bagasse Ash on Cement Stabilized Laterites. Seminar Paper
presented in the Department of Civil Engineering, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria.
[13] Osinubi K. J., 1999. Evaluation of Admixture Stabilization of Nigeria Black Cotton Soil. Nigerian
Society of Engineers Technical Transaction, vol. 34, no. 3: 88-96.

https://doi.org/10.14311/CEJ.2016.04.0022 8
 Article no. 22

THE CIVIL ENGINEERING JOURNAL 4-2016

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[14] Amu O.O., Faluyi S.O., 2005. Effects of Lime Stabilization and the pH values of Lateritic Soils in Ado-
Ekiti, Nigeria. Journal of Applied Sciences, vol. 5: 192-194.
[15] British Standard Institution, 1990. Methods of Test for Soils for Civil Engineering Properties (BS 1377).
London: British Standard Institution, p.143.
nd
[16] Head K.H., 1992. Manual of Soil Laboratory Testing. Soil Specification and Compaction Tests. 2
Edition, vol. 1; London: Pentech Press.
[17] Kadyali L.R., Lal N.B., 2008. Principles and Practices of Highway Engineering. 5th Edition; Delhi:
Khanna Publishers.
[18] Rochigo C.K., Kleber F.P., Mariana O.G.P., Marcelle M.B., 2013. Banana Leaves Ashes as Pozzolans
for Concrete and Mortar of Portland Cement. Construction and Building Materials, vol. 54: 460- 465.
[19] AASHTO, 1991. Standard Specification for Classification of Soils and Soil-Aggregate Mixtures for
Highway Construction Purposes, AASHTO M 145.

https://doi.org/10.14311/CEJ.2016.04.0022 9