Japanese Geotechnical Society Special Publication

Stabilization of expansive soil for highway embankment: a critical review

Venkateshwara Reddy K L i) and Satyanarayana Murty Dasaka ii)

i) Ph.D. Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai 400-076, India.
ii) Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai 400-076, India.

ABSTRACT

Road transportation is the most common and economical mode of transportation because of its easy accessibility.
Hence, a stable road network plays a key role in the country’s development. However, we frequently observe a lot of
failures in pavement such as cracking, rutting, heaving, and differential settlement of pavement panels. One of the
major reasons for the above failures is lack of stability in embankments. Thus, selection of suitable embankment soil
is very much essential. Due to increasing cost and demand, there is a lack of suitable soil. The selection of weak and
problematic soils leads to a series of problems because of their low shear strength, low permeability, low bearing
capacity, high swelling, high compressibility, etc. Further their behavior under dynamic loading conditions such as
traffic, earthquake, and dynamic liquefaction is questionable. Expansive soil is a widely available problematic soil all
over the earth. Hence stabilization of embankments is required with the usage of expansive soil. Currently, expansive
soil is stabilized with cement, lime, fly ash, enzymes, slag, geosynthetics, polymers, industrial waste, etc. In this
review, existing stabilization methods on expansive soil are described and the need for further research is discussed.

Keywords: expansive soil, stabilization, dynamic characteristics, embankment

1 INTRODUCTION
2 MATERIALS
Embankments are built above the original ground level
primarily to keep the pavement above high flood level 2.1 Soil
and maintain its designed vertical alignment. Gradation, The type of soil considered in this review study is
density, permeability, shear strength, bearing capacity, expansive soil. Expansive soil is basically clay with high
compressibility and swelling are the main parameters swelling minerals such as montmorillonite which is
involved while selecting a suitable embankment soil. prone to high swelling during wetting and excessive
However, the availability of soil fulfilling all the shrinkage during drying. Low shear strength, low
forementioned parameters is limited which necessitates permeability, low bearing capacity, high swelling, high
the usage of available soil which is weak and compressibility, etc. are some of the properties of
problematic in nature such as expansive soil, posing the expansive soil. Black cotton soil, bentonite, marine clay
requirement for stabilization. Highway embankments etc., are some of the commonly available expansive
are exposed to a variety of natural forces and soils.
environmental factors that can degrade their stability.
2.2 Stabilizers
These factors include temperature fluctuations, freeze-
The stabilizers considered in this review study are
thaw cycles, seismic activity, and floods. Over time,
given in Table 1.
these can lead to soil erosion, landslides, subsidence, and
other forms of instability that disturb the integrity of the Table 1. Types of stabilizers considered in this review.
road network. To address these challenges, highway
embankment stabilization is needed. The primary goal of Type of
Type of Stabilizer Stabilizers
Stabilization
embankment stabilization on highways is to mitigate the
Cement
risks of slope failure, erosion, and settlement, which can Traditional Stabilizer Fly ash
lead to high maintenance costs, and safety hazards for Lime
vehicles. Chemical Biomass bottom ash
Most of the existing review papers on stabilization of Stabilization Copper slag
Non-Traditional
expansive soil are focused on a particular stabilization Stabilizer
Eko soil enzyme
method. This paper focuses on various existing Ground granulated blast
stabilization methods on expansive soil. furnace slag

https://doi.org/10.3208/jgssp.v10.OS-30-06 1554
 Ionic soil stabilizer 2500 dynamic characteristics of ES. Results showed both
Steel slag dynamic shear modulus and damping ratio increased
Terrazyme with an increase in confining pressure, frequency, and
Biopolymer
consolidation ratio. Lu et al. (2020) added lime to study
Coir fiber
Soil Reinforcement Geosynthetics
dynamic resilient modulus of ES. Dynamic resilient
Jute fiber modulus was reduced with an increase in moisture
Polypropylene fiber content. Dynamic resilient modulus decreases with
Bagasse ash increasing dynamic stress amplitude. Further, dynamic
Coir pith resilient modulus increases with increase in confining
Mechanical
Stabilization
Construction-demolition pressure. Ganja et al. (2011) studied on addition of fly
waste ash. 20% fly ash gave optimum CBR value. Nalbantoğlu
Glass waste (2004) added Class C fly ash as a stabilizer. Results
Industrial waste
Lignin
showed both plasticity and swell pressure reduced with
Plastic waste
Red mud addition of Class C fly ash at higher curing periods.
Rubber tire Punthutaecha et al. (2006) conducted a similar study by
Stone dust adding fly ash and bottom ash to observe volume change
behavior of ES. Treatment with fly ash and bottom ash
3 REVIEW OF RESEARCH PAPER improved the soil by reducing plasticity, swelling and
shrinkage characteristics. Further, Phani Kumar &
3.1 Chemical stabilization Sharma (2004) showed an increase in undrained
3.1.1 Traditional stabilizers cohesion with an increase in fly ash content.
Many studies exist on stabilizing expansive soil with Chakravarthy & Chamberlin (2023) investigated the
traditional stabilizers such as cement, lime, and fly ash. effect of addition of fly ash (5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30%) and
Oza & Gundaliya (2013) studied the inclusion of cement bagasse ash (10, 20, 30, 40%). It was concluded that a
dust (1% to 9%) and lime powder (1% to 9%) to stabilize blend of 20% fly ash and 30% bagasse ash was an
expansive soil (ES). Plasticity index improved with the optimal mix with soaked CBR value of 12.5%, unsoaked
addition of above stabilizing agents. 7% of cement dust CBR value of 14.5% and UCS value of 23.5 t/m2.
and 9% of lime powder gave optimal results.
Compressive strength tests concluded cement dust as a
reliable stabilizer. Ifediniru & Ekeocha (2022) stabilized
ES with Portland cement (6% and 10%) to observe FoS
against the shear failure of embankment. FoS of
stabilized embankment showed improvement for
embankments of various heights (4, 5, 6 and 7 m) by
increasing the cohesion value. Wu et al. (2021)
performed freeze-thaw cycles with addition of cement.
The samples were subjected to different curing
temperatures (-5°C, -10°C and -15°C) and unconfined
compressive strength (UCS) test was performed. UCS
increased with curing time, while it decreased with
freeze-thaw cycles. Results concluded that addition of
cement improved durability of ES. Daraei et al. (2019)
added cement (3, 6, 9%) and quicklime (3, 6, 9%) to
problematic soil to reduce collapsibility index. Results
showed addition of 6% quicklime reduced collapsibility
index by 2.92% on an average by increasing the bond
between soil grains. Munirwansyah & Munirwan (2017)
studied on inclusion of lime (3, 6, 9, 12%). The addition Fig. 1. Variation of California bearing ratio (A) unsoaked
of lime improved the soil by reducing free swell and condition and (B) soaked condition of black cotton soil–lime
swelling pressure. 12% lime was concluded as optimal mixtures with iron ore tailings content (after Etim et al., 2017).
mix by reducing both free swell from 1.14% to 0.23%
and swelling pressure from 23.18 kPa to 9.79 kPa. Etim 3.1.2 Non-Traditional stabilizers
et al. (2017) added lime (2, 4, 6, 8%) and iron ore tailings Ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS), steel
(2, 4, 6, 8, 10%) to study the behavior of UCS and CBR slag, eko soil enzyme, copper slag, bottom ash,
values. Both UCS and CBR values were maximum at 8% Terrazyme and ionic soil stabilizer 2500 are the most
lime content and 8% iron ore tailings. Wang et al. (2012) common non-traditional stabilizers. Mujtaba et al.
added lime (1%) to simulate field conditions and to study (2018) studied the addition of GGBS as a stabilizer to
ES. Addition of 50% GGBS reduced liquid limit,

1555
plasticity index, swelling potential, swell pressure and days curing period. It was concluded that enzyme treated
increased MDD by about 8 – 9.5%. Further, the addition soil showed similar performance as lime treated soil.
of 25% GGBS increased CBR to 7% making it suitable Alhassan & Olaniyi (2013) added Ionic soil stabilizer
as a subgrade soil. Sharma & Sivapullaiah (2016) added 2500 (ISS 2500) with dosages of 1-ml, 2-ml, and 3-ml.
binder (mix of fly ash and GGBS in the ratio of 7:3) as a Results showed no significant improvement on plasticity
stabilizing agent. Addition of binder reduced liquid index. However, CBR increased by 34.2% with ISS 2500
limit, plasticity index and OMC while MDD increased. dosage of 3-ml making it suitable as subbase material.
20% binder was concluded as an optimal mix from UCS
results. Wu et al. (2019) studied on inclusion of steel slag
with ES. Results showed addition of steel slag reduced
plasticity index and swelling potential while UCS and
CBR values were enhanced. Further it was concluded
that 5-7% addition of steel slag makes ES suitable as a
subbase material. Wu et al. (2021) performed freeze-
thaw cycles with addition of steel slag powder. The
samples were subjected to different curing temperatures
(-5°C, -10°C and -15°C) and unconfined compressive
strength (UCS) test was performed. UCS increased with
curing time, while it decreased with freeze-thaw cycles.
The volume change rate of improved samples stabilized
after eight freeze-thaw cycles. Results concluded that
addition of steel slag powder improved durability of ES.
Pooni et al. (2019) performed a detailed study by adding
eko soil enzyme to ES. Addition of eko soil enzyme
increased unsoaked and soaked CBR values by 48% and
58% respectively, while UCS values were increased by
42% and 768% at residual and optimum moisture
content respectively. Water permeability resistance was
increased by about 6 times. Addition of eko soil enzyme
reduced swelling potential and increased durability.
Kushwaha et al. (2018) performed a similar study by Fig. 2. Variation of (a) Dynamic modulus and (b) Damping ratio
adding eko soil enzyme (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6%) to ES. with cycle number (after Wang et al., 2012).
Plasticity index reduced with addition of eko soil
enzyme. MDD was achieved at 4% eko soil. Further, 3.2 Mechanical stabilization
UCS and CBR values were increased by 334% and 347% 3.2.1 Soil reinforcement
respectively at 4% eko soil concluding it to be the Geosynthetics, jute fiber, coir fiber, polypropylene
optimal mix for embankment usage. Qureshi et al. fiber and biopolymer are some of the common stabilizers
(2015) added copper slag (10, 20, 30, 40%) to improve which induce reinforcing effect when added to soil. Sai
geotechnical properties of ES. Addition of copper slag et al. (2020) studied on reinforcing the ES using geogrid.
reduced plasticity index and cohesion, while angle of Addition of geogrid reduces swelling and shrinkage
internal friction and CBR were increased. The mix of properties of the soil, thereby minimizing the lateral
40% copper slag + 60% ES was recommended as a deformation. CBR of ES increased by 77.62% with
suitable subgrade material in pavements. Galvín et al. inclusion of a single layer geogrid, thereby increasing the
(2021) showed that addition of biomass bottom ash bearing capacity. Miao et al. (2017) studied on
reduced plasticity index and free swelling. Addition of enhancing the strength of ES by geopolymerization
3% cement further reduced the swelling of ES. Addition using alkalis of Ca(OH)2 and KOH. Addition of volcanic
of 16% biomass bottom ash increased CBR to 8% ash with the alkalis to ES combinedly reduced plasticity
making it suitable as a subgrade material for light-traffic index from 34.8% to 14.2%. The swelling percentage
roads. Divya & Asha (2020) investigated the effect of was reduced from 15.7% to 2.3-4.2%. UCS increased
addition of Terrazyme in two different dosages (150 with increase in curing time, reaching a peak of 16.55
ml/m3 and 250 ml/m3) to ES. Results showed significant MPa for a curing period of 90 days. Vessely & Wu (2002)
increment in MDD with increase in Terrazyme dosage, studied swelling characteristics of ES by embedding a
where in no significant change in OMC. The influence horizontal sheet of geosynthetic at mid height of soil
of curing period was significant compared to that of sample. It resulted in reducing the lateral swelling by 30-
Terrazyme dosage in terms of UCS value. Further, 40%, without affecting the swelling in vertical direction.
results indicated that treated soil with 28 days curing The study recommended the usage of wick drain with
period showed higher UCS values compared to that of 7 geosynthetic filter to be an effective method in reducing

1556
the swelling in vertical direction. Yang et al. (2021) 8, 12%) and crushed glass waste (4, 8, 12%) as an
analyzed the dynamic behavior of geosynthetic- additive. Plasticity index and cohesion decreased while
reinforced ES under freeze-thaw cycles. Dynamic shear MDD, CBR and angle of internal friction values
modulus and damping ratio improved with increased with the addition of additives. Javed &
reinforcement. Reinforced ES inhibited axial Chakraborty (2020) added waste glass powder (2, 4, 6, 8,
compression and axial expansion at a confining pressure 10%) to improve weak subgrade soil. The study
of 50 kPa and 10 kPa respectively. Thus, the study concluded 8% to be optimal mix which reduced
concluded that this reinforced ES could restrain the plasticity index, increased MDD by 10.9%, UCS by
deformation due to frost heave during freezing process, 211%, unsoaked and soaked CBR by 676% and 570%
thereby causing a delay in structural damage effect, and respectively, cohesion and angle of internal friction by
reducing the rate of change of dynamic shear modulus 230% and 150% respectively. Blayi et al. (2020)
and damping ratio with the freeze-thaw cycles. Further, performed a similar study by adding waste glass powder
the study recommended the usage of this method for (2.5, 5, 10, 15, 25%). Plasticity index and free swelling
roadbeds in colder regions. Viswanadham et al. (2009) decreased, while MDD increased by 11.5%, UCS
studied swelling behavior of ES by adding increased by 75.6%, CBR increased by 171%, cohesion
polypropylene fibers (0.25, 0.5%) of different aspect decreased by 5.1% and angle of internal friction
ratios (15, 30, 45). Reduction in heave and swelling increased by 45% with 8% of waste glass powder as
pressure was more effective at lower aspect ratio optimal mix. Further, the study concluded that with this
compared to that of higher. Swelling decreased with an improvement the thickness of sub-base layer could be
increase in fiber content for all aspect ratios. Hamza et decreased by 37.5%. Seda et al. (2007) studied the
al. (2022) performed a similar study by adding addition of waste rubber tire (20%) to ES. This resulted
polypropylene fibers (0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8%) to ES. MDD in decreasing compressibility, while both free swell and
marginally increased, whereas UCS, CBR and elastic swelling pressure decreased, which helps in reducing the
modulus improved significantly. 0.4% was heave of expansive soil during field applications. Yang
recommended as an optimal dosage as UCS was et al. (2023) studied dynamic properties of ES by adding
increased by 67% and unsoaked and soaked CBR were waste rubber (5, 8, 10, 20%) of different sizes (0.425,
increased by 66% and 57% respectively. Further at 0.25. 0.178, 0.1 mm). Result concluded 10% waste
dosage of 0.4% the consolidation properties (Cc and Cs) rubber of 0.25 mm gave the best dynamic performance.
were reduced. Wang et al. (2017) observed similar Lv et al. (2022) added waste rubber tires in powder form.
results wherein jute fibers improved the strength Both dynamic shear modulus and dynamic ratio reaches
properties of ES. Tiwari & Satyam (2020) studied the a peak value at 10% rubber content. Dang et al. (2021)
performance of coir geotextile treated with lime and concluded addition of bagasse ash with lime to ES
silica fume on ES. UCS was increased by 52.19% and increased compressive strength and CBR by 815% and
81.89% with inclusion of single-layer and double-layer 920%, reduced swelling potential and compressibility
of coir geotextile respectively. CBR was increased by properties by 100% and 83% respectively. Osinubi et al.
399% and 435% with inclusion of single-layer and (2009) concluded blend of 8% lime + 4% bagasse ash
double-layer of coir geotextile respectively. Cohesion reduced plasticity index by about 70%, however no
and frictional angle were significantly improved. significant increment in UCS value. Goud et al. (2018)
Sivakumar et al. (2008) used coir fibers in improving the added coir pith (1, 2, 3%) and lime (2, 3, 4%). UCS
engineering properties of ES and observed similar values increased significantly. CBR increased from
results. Latifi et al. (2017) stabilized ES using xanthan 1.04% to 9% making it suitable as a subgrade material.
gum biopolymer. UCS test results showed 1-1.5% as an Sarker et al. (2021) added lignin (5, 10, 15%) to stabilize
optimum dosage for effective results. UCS and shear ES. Plasticity index and swelling index decreased with
strength values increased with increase in curing period. addition of lignin with 10% lignin as optimal mix. Dixit
Further, the stiffness of soil samples was increased. & Patil (2016) used stone dust (10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60%)
and concluded plasticity index reduced, MDD and CBR
3.2.2 Industrial waste
increased with stone dust content. Parik & Patra (2020)
Plastic waste, glass waste, rubber tire waste, bagasse
utilized red mud (5, 10, 15, 20%) as a stabilizer with 10%
ash, coir waste, lignin, stone dust, red mud, and
as optimum. Coefficient of compression and swelling
construction-demolition waste have been used in
pressure reduced by 10.17% and 27.51% respectively.
stabilizing ES. Kumar et al. (2022) utilized plastic strips
UCS, unsoaked and soaked CBR increased by 55%,
(1 x 1cm, 2 x 2 cm, 3 x 3 cm) cut from polyethylene bags
27.3% and 18.5% respectively. Dynamic shear modulus
in different dosages (0.1, 0.4, 0.7, 1%) to stabilize the
increased, and degradation index reduced with red mud.
soil. Plastic strip of 3 x 3 cm with 0.4% dosage was found
Sharma & Sharma (2019) used crushed construction and
to be optimal by increasing MDD by about 5%,
demolition waste (CCDW) to study its effect on ES.
unsoaked and soaked CBR by 32% and 223%
Plasticity index and volumetric strain decreased while
respectively, cohesion by 50% and angle of internal
peak deviatoric stress, strength ratio, and stiffness
friction by 60%. Fauzi et al. (2016) used plastic waste (4,

1557
increased with CCDW concluding 24% CCDW as much on the dynamic properties and durability of
optimum. embankment, as it is subjected to different climatic
conditions throughout its design life. Finally, the
4 FUTURE RESEARCH NEEDS stabilization of ES with industrial waste is recommended
over other methods as it is economical and prevents
Most of the existing studies on stabilization of
environmental pollution by solving the disposal problem
expansive soil focused much on static properties such as
of industrial waste.
plasticity index, swelling, OMC-MDD, UCS, CBR,
angle of internal friction and cohesion. The dynamic
REFERENCES
properties of stabilized expansive soil such as dynamic
shear modulus, damping ratio and resilient modulus 1) Alhassan, H. M., & Olaniyi, L. F. (2013). Effect of' Ionic Soil
which are critical for pavement materials are neglected Stabilizer 2500'on the Properties of Black Cotton Soil. British
posing a question on the embankment stability when Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 3(3), 406.
subjected to dynamic loading conditions such as traffic, 2) Blayi, R. A., Sherwani, A. F. H., Ibrahim, H. H., Faraj, R. H.,
& Daraei, A. (2020). Strength improvement of expansive soil
earthquake, and dynamic liquefaction. Further, the
by utilizing waste glass powder. Case Studies in Construction
embankments are subjected to different climatic
Materials, 13, e00427.
conditions such as rainfall and temperature variations. 3) Chakravarthy, T., & Chamberlin, K. S. (2023). Fly ash and
Hence, a detailed study on durability of embankments bagasse ash embankment in flexible pavements for the
constructed with expansive soil is required. This raises a analysis and strengthening of black cotton soil’s strength
need for further research focusing on the above- stabilized properties. In E3S Web of Conferences (Vol. 391, p.
mentioned dynamic properties and durability of 01005). EDP Sciences.
embankments with stabilized expansive soil based on 4) Dang, L. C., Khabbaz, H., & Ni, B. J. (2021). Improving
cyclic triaxial and resilient modulus testing. engineering characteristics of expansive soils using industry
waste as a sustainable application for reuse of bagasse
5 CONCLUSIONS ash. Transportation Geotechnics, 31, 100637.
5) Daraei, A., Sherwani, A. F. H., Faraj, R. H., Mohammad, S.,
This study intends to review the existing Kurdo, S., Zare, S., & Mahmoodzadeh, A. (2019).
embankment stabilization methods on expansive soil. Stabilization of problematic soil by utilizing cementitious
Existing studies have concluded that stabilization of materials. Innovative Infrastructure Solutions, 4, 1-11.
expansive soil improves the stability of embankments, 6) Divya, V., & Asha, M. N. (2020, October). Evaluation of
reducing maintenance costs. Further, it is economical as sustainable methods for embankment stabilization. In IOP
the subgrade thickness can be reduced with enhanced Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol.
CBR strength. 573, No. 1, p. 012008). IOP Publishing.
7) Dixit, M. S., & Patil, K. A. (2016). Utilization of stone dust to
• Use of traditional stabilizers is effective in
improve the properties of expansive soil. International
improving the geotechnical properties of ES. Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), 7(4),
However, traditional stabilizers are not 440-447.
environmentally friendly and their continuous 8) Etim, R. K., Eberemu, A. O., & Osinubi, K. J. (2017).
usage results in increased demand and cost, making Stabilization of black cotton soil with lime and iron ore
it uneconomical. tailings admixture. Transportation Geotechnics, 10, 85-95.
• Non-traditional stabilizers are both effective and 9) Fauzi, A., Djauhari, Z., & Fauzi, U. J. (2016). Soil engineering
environmentally friendly. However, the availability properties improvement by utilization of cut waste plastic and
of enzymes and ionic stabilizers are limited. Hence, crushed waste glass as additive. International Journal of
more studies are needed on readily available non- Engineering and Technology, 8(1), 15.
traditional stabilizers. 10) Galvín, A. P., López-Uceda, A., Cabrera, M., Rosales, J., &
Ayuso, J. (2021). Stabilization of expansive soils with biomass
• Reinforcing stabilizers are easy to apply, as no bottom ashes for an eco-efficient construction. Environmental
chemical treatment and skill required. But since Science and Pollution Research, 28, 24441-24454.
natural fibers such as coir, jute, biopolymers are 11) Ganja, K. R. D. V., & Jagarlamudi, V. (2011). A Laboratory
biodegradable, the soil retaining its reinforced Study on the Utilization of GBFS and Fly Ash to Stabilize the
behavior with age is questionable. Expansive Soil for Subgrade Embankments. International
• Stabilizing the soil with industrial waste reduces Journal of Engineering Science & technology, 3, 8086.
both cost and environmental pollution. 12) Goud, G. N., Hyma, A., Chandra, V. S., & Rani, R. S. (2018,
Furthermore, it solves the disposal problem and March). Expansive soil stabilization with coir waste and lime
saves landfill space. Hence more studies on for flexible pavement subgrade. In IOP Conference Series:
industrial waste as stabilizers are encouraged. Materials Science and Engineering (Vol. 330, No. 1, p.
012130). IOP Publishing.
Most of the studies focused on static properties of
13) Hamza, M., Ijaz, N., Fang, C., & Ijaz, Z. (2022). Stabilization
stabilized soil neglecting the dynamic properties such as
of Problematic Expansive Clays Using Polypropylene Fiber
dynamic shear modulus, damping ratio, and resilient Reinforcement. Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, 16(4).
modulus. This raises a need for further research focusing

1558
14) Ifediniru, C., & Ekeocha, N. E. (2022). Performance of stabilized with recycled ashes and fibers. Journal of materials
cement-stabilized weak subgrade for highway embankment in Civil Engineering, 18(2), 295-306.
construction in Southeast Nigeria. International Journal of 31) Qureshi, M. A., Mistry, H. M., & Patel, V. D. (2015).
Geo-Engineering, 13(1), 1. Improvement in soil properties of expansive soil by using
15) Javed, S. A., & Chakraborty, S. (2020). Effects of waste glass copper slag. Int. J. Adv. Res. Eng. Sci. Technol, 2(7), 125-130.
powder on subgrade soil improvement. World Scientific News, 32) Sai, P. N. V., Surendra, S., Arjun, N. V. K., Sai, M. S., & Rao,
(144), 30-42. C. H. (2020). Reinforcement of Black Cotton Soil by Using
16) Kumar, M., Azhar, M., Mondal, S., & Singh, R. P. (2022). Geogrid.
Stabilization of expansive soil subgrade by waste 33) Sarker, D., Shahrear Apu, O., Kumar, N., Wang, J. X., &
plastic. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 15(10), 936. Lynam, J. G. (2021). Application of sustainable lignin
17) Kushwaha, S. S., Kishan, D., & Dindorkar, N. (2018). stabilized expansive soils in highway subgrade. In IFCEE
Stabilization of expansive soil using eko soil enzyme for 2021 (pp. 336-348).
highway embankment. Materials today: proceedings, 5(9), 34) Seda, J. H., Lee, J. C., & Carraro, J. A. H. (2007). Beneficial
19667-19679. use of waste tire rubber for swelling potential mitigation in
18) Latifi, N., Horpibulsuk, S., Meehan, C. L., Abd Majid, M. Z., expansive soils. In Soil improvement (pp. 1-9).
Tahir, M. M., & Mohamad, E. T. (2017). Improvement of 35) Sharma, A. K., & Sivapullaiah, P. V. (2016). Ground
problematic soils with biopolymer—an environmentally granulated blast furnace slag amended fly ash as an expansive
friendly soil stabilizer. Journal of Materials in Civil soil stabilizer. Soils and Foundations, 56(2), 205-212.
Engineering, 29(2), 04016204. 36) Sharma, A., & Sharma, R. K. (2019). Effect of addition of
19) Lu, Z., Zhao, Y., Xian, S., & Yao, H. (2020). Experimental construction–demolition waste on strength characteristics of
study on dynamic resilient modulus of lime-treated expansive high plastic clays. Innovative Infrastructure Solutions, 4(1),
soil. Advances in Materials Science and Engineering, 2020, 27.
1-10. 37) Sivakumar Babu, G. L., Vasudevan, A. K., & Sayida, M. K.
20) Lv, J., Yang, Z., Shi, W., Lu, Z., Zhang, Q., & Ling, X. (2022). (2008). Use of coir fibers for improving the engineering
Dynamic Characteristics of Rubber Reinforced Expansive properties of expansive soils. Journal of Natural Fibers, 5(1),
Soil (ESR) at Positive and Negative Ambient 61-75.
Temperatures. Polymers, 14(19), 3985. 38) Tiwari, N., & Satyam, N. (2020). An experimental study on
21) Miao, S., Shen, Z., Wang, X., Luo, F., Huang, X., & Wei, C. the behavior of lime and silica fume treated coir geotextile
(2017). Stabilization of highly expansive black cotton soils by reinforced expansive soil subgrade. Engineering Science and
means of geopolymerization. Journal of Materials in Civil Technology, an International Journal, 23(5), 1214-1222.
Engineering, 29(10), 04017170. 39) Vessely, M. J., & Wu, J. T. (2002). Feasibility of geosynthetic
22) Mujtaba, H., Aziz, T., Farooq, K., Sivakugan, N., & Das, B. inclusion for reducing swelling of expansive
M. (2018). Improvement in engineering properties of soils. Transportation research record, 1787(1), 42-52.
expansive soils using ground granulated blast furnace 40) Viswanadham, B. V. S., Phanikumar, B. R., & Mukherjee, R.
slag. Journal of the Geological Society of India, 92, 357-362. V. (2009). Swelling behaviour of a geofiber-reinforced
23) Munirwansyah, M., & Munirwan, R. P. (2017). Stabilization expansive soil. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 27(1), 73-76.
On Expansive Soil For Road-Subgrade For Geotechnic 41) Wang, M., Kong, L., Zhao, C., & Zang, M. (2012). Dynamic
Disaster Approach. International Journal of Disaster characteristics of lime-treated expansive soil under cyclic
Management, 1(1), 8-19. loading. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical
24) Nalbantoğlu, Z. (2004). Effectiveness of class C fly ash as an Engineering, 4(4), 352-359.
expansive soil stabilizer. Construction and Building 42) Wang, Y. X., Guo, P. P., Ren, W. X., Yuan, B. X., Yuan, H. P.,
Materials, 18(6), 377-381. Zhao, Y. L., ... & Cao, P. (2017). Laboratory investigation on
25) Osinubi, K. J., Ijimdiya, T. S., & Nmadu, I. (2009). Lime strength characteristics of expansive soil treated with jute fiber
stabilization of black cotton soil using bagasse ash as reinforcement. International Journal of
admixture. Advanced Materials Research, 62, 3-10. Geomechanics, 17(11), 04017101.
26) Oza, J. B., & Gundaliya, P. J. (2013). Study of black cotton 43) Wu, J., Liu, Q., Deng, Y., Yu, X., Feng, Q., & Yan, C. (2019).
soil characteristics with cement waste dust and lime. Procedia Expansive soil modified by waste steel slag and its application
Engineering, 51, 110-118. in subbase layer of highways. Soils and foundations, 59(4),
27) Parik, P., & Patra, N. R. (2020, February). Static and dynamic 955-965.
properties of expansive soil stabilised with industrial waste. 44) Wu, Y., Qiao, X., Yu, X., Yu, J., & Deng, Y. (2021). Study on
In Geo-Congress 2020 (pp. 496-506). Reston, VA: American properties of expansive soil improved by steel slag powder
Society of Civil Engineers. and cement under freeze-thaw cycles. KSCE Journal of Civil
28) Phani Kumar, B. R., & Sharma, R. S. (2004). Effect of fly ash Engineering, 25(2), 417-428.
on engineering properties of expansive soils. Journal of 45) Yang, Z. N., Lu, Z. C., Shi, W., Wang, C., Ling, X. Z., Li, J.,
Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 130(7), & Guan, D. (2023). Investigation of rubber content and size
764-767. on dynamic properties of expansive soil–
29) Pooni, J., Giustozzi, F., Robert, D., Setunge, S., & O'Donnell, rubber. Geosynthetics International, 1-14.
B. J. T. G. (2019). Durability of enzyme stabilized expansive 46) Yang, Z., Liu, X., Zhang, L., Niu, F., Ling, X., Li, G., & Shi,
soil in road pavements subjected to moisture W. (2021). Dynamic behavior of geosynthetic-reinforced
degradation. Transportation Geotechnics, 21, 100255. expansive soil under freeze-thaw cycles. Advances in Civil
30) Punthutaecha, K., Puppala, A. J., Vanapalli, S. K., & Inyang, Engineering, 2021, 1-11.
H. (2006). Volume change behaviors of expansive soils

1559