UNIVERSITY OF ILORIN

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

A TECHNICAL REPORT ON SOIL STABILIZATION

SUBMITTED BY

GROUP 6
DEPARTMENT: WATER RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL
ENGINEERING
SOIL STABILIZATION
COURSE CODE: WEE 481
DATE OF EXPERIMENT: TUESDAY, 2024
DATE OF SUBMISSION: TUESDAY, 3rd December 2024
SESSION: 2024/2025.
NAME OF INSTRUCTOR: Engr.

LIST OF GROUP 6 MEMBERS

 MATRIC
S/N NAME SIGNATURE
NUMBER

1 20/30GQ048

2 20/30GQ0

3 20/30GQ0

4 I 20/30GQ0

5 20/30GQ0

6 20/30GQ0

7 20/30GQ0

8 OLADEHINDE WASIU AKOLADE 20/30GQ058

9 OLAYIWOLA IBRAHIM MUFTAU 20/30GQ061

10 OMOLAYE PAUL OLAOTAN 20/30GQ063

11 ONIPEDE ISAAC OREOLUWA 20/30GQ064

TABLE OF CONTENT

1
 1. TITLE
2. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
3. APPARATUS USED
4. MATERIALS USED
5. THEORY
6. PROCEDURE
7. DATA AND RESULTS
8. OBSERVATIONS
9. PRECAUTIONS
10. ERRORS
11. CONCLUSION

TITLE
2
SOIL STABILIZATION TEST

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

3
 The aim of the Soil Stabilization test is to determine the effectiveness of
various stabilization methods in improving the engineering properties of a soil,
such as its strength, durability, and resistance to erosion or deformation.

APPARATUS USED

4
 Weighing balance
 Head Pans
 Hand trowel
 Metal Rammer (2.5Kg)
 Compaction Mould and detachable base-plate
 Extension collar
 Measuring cylinder
 Moisture can
 Drying Oven

Figure 1. Weighing Balance Figure 2. Moisture Can

Figure 3. Hand Trowel

Figure 4. Compaction Mould + Extension

Collar + Detachable base-plate

5
Figure 5. Drying Oven Figure 6. Rammer

Figure 7. Head/Mixing Pan Figure 8. Measuring

Cylinder

6
 MATERIALS USED
 Lateritic soil (2760g )
 Lime 240(g)
 Water

Figure 9. Sample lateritic soil

Lime

7
THEORY

8
 PROCEDURE


9
 DATA AND RESULTS
Weight of Dry Soil sample = 3000g
Weight of Water = 120ml
Weight of Empty Mould = 2084.5g
Volume of Mould = 1000cm3
Number of Blows = 25

Weight of Mould + Wet Weight Density

S/N Weight of Wet Soil (g)
Soil (g) (g/cm3)
1. 4551 2466.5 2.4665
2. 4602 2517.5 2.5175
3. 4833 2748.5 2.7485
4. 4899 2814.5 2.8145
5. 4868 2783.5 2.7835

Weight of Wet Soil = (Weight of Mould + Wet Soil) – (Weight of Empty Mould)

W.W.S1 = 4551 – 2085.5 = 2466.5

W.W.S2 = 4602 – 2085.5 = 2517.5
W.W.S3 = 4833 – 2085.5 = 2748.5
W.W.S4 = 4899 – 2085.5 = 2814.5
W.W.S5 = 4868 – 2085.5 = 2783.5
( Weight of Mould +Wet Soil )−(Weight of Mould )
Wet Density =
Volume of Mould
2466.5
WD1 = = 2.4665
1000
2517.5
WD2 = = 2.5175
1000
2748.5
WD3 = = 2.7485
1000
2814.5
WD4 = = 2.8145
1000

10
 2783.5
WD5 = = 2.7835
1000

WEIGHT
OF VOLUME
WEIGHT WEIGHT WEIGHT
WATER WEIGHT OF MOISTURE
CAN OF OF CAN OF CAN
SPECIMEN PRESENT OF DRY WATER CONTENT
LABEL EMPTY + WET + DRY
IN THE SOIL (g) USED (%)
CAN (g) SOIL (g) SOIL (g)
SOIL (ml)
(ml)
SPECIMEN K22 24.50 81.00 79.00 2.00 54.50 3.67
120
1 A6 24.50 97.00 94.00 3.00 69.50 4.32
SPECIMEN CK8 26.00 79.00 76.00 3.00 50.00 6.00
240
2 K21 24.50 61.00 58.00 3.00 33.50 8.96
SPECIMEN A3 24.50 71.00 66.00 5.00 41.50 12.05
360
3 K6 24.50 69.00 64.00 5.00 39.50 12.65
SPECIMEN K1 24.00 97.00 88.00 9.00 64.00 14.06
480
4 CK38 25.50 104.00 92.00 12.00 66.50 18.04
SPECIMEN A8 27.00 165.00 142.00 23.00 115.00 20.00
600
5 W 24.50 109.00 94.00 15.00 69.50 21.58

Weight of Water present in the Soil = (Weight of Can + Wet Soil) – (Weight of Can + Dry Soil)

Weight of Dry Soil = (Weight of Can + Dry Soil) – (Weight of Empty Can)

Weight of Water present ∈the Soil

Moisture Content (%) = × 100
Weight of Dry Soil

AVERAGE MOISTURE CONTENT PER

SPECIMEN DRY DENSITY (g/cm3)
SPECIMEN
SPECIMEN 1 3.995 2.37
SPECIMEN 2 7.48 2.34
SPECIMEN 3 12.35 2.56
SPECIMEN 4 16.05 2.43
SPECIMEN 5 20.79 2.3

Wet density ×100

Dry Density =
100+ Average Moisture content per specimen

11
 2.6

2.55

2.5

2.45
DRY DENSITY (g/cm3)

2.4

2.35
dd
2.3

2.25

2.2

2.15
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
AVERAGE MOISTURE CONTENT (%)

Maximum Dry Dendity (M.D.D ) = 2.625g/cm3

Optimum Moisture Content (O.M.C ) = 12.5%

12
 OBSERVATIONS
During the laboratory experiment, it was observed that:
 As water was added to the sample soil, it became more easily
compacted together.
 As the soil was compacted with the rammer, the air voids reduced and
hence there was increase in the density.
 As more water was added, the soil particles became more apart and the
soil became too loose thereby making the soil difficult to compact.

13
 PRECAUTIONS
 We ensured uniform compaction of the soil sample with the rammer
 We made sure the number of blows does not exceed 25 blows.
 We ensure water was mixed uniformly with the soil using the hand
trowel before compaction was done
 We made sure the rammer slid down and dropped freely at a regular
height for each of the blows

14
 ERRORS
1. Error due to changes in the physical condition of
the equipment used i.e., weigh balance.
2. Error due to limitation of the human senses.
3. Error due to environmental factors.

15
 CONCLUSION

Recommendation:

16