1. By Josh Oliver and Fitsum Tesfa

2. Expansive soil  Soil obtain in Plano, Texas

3. First Step  Oven dried for 24hrs at 160 degree

4.  The oven dried soil was crushed  After soil was crushed it was then pulverized

5. Classification of soil using mechanical analysis  Sieve analysis was performed on soil for 10 to 15 min  Depending on the particle size,we concluded the ratio of gravel, sand, and clay and silt the soil contained

6. Classification of Soil using mechanical analysis  Hydrometer analysis, performed using the hydrometer bulb  The main idea of this experiment was to determine particulates sizes that are smaller than 0.075mm in diameter

7. Treatment of Soil  Chemical additive were lime and cement  Two different ratios were added to soil  3%lime, 3%cement  4% lime, 4%cement

8. Dynamic & static compression  These two types of compression are used in the preparation of soil samples for testing in the swell potential and unconfined compression test

9. One dimensional swelling test one dimensional swelling test time(min) controltreated 3%limetreated 4%lime 3%cement4%cement h= 0.983in1.008in1.026in d=2.495ind=2.498ind=2.500in w=139.05gmw=138.24gmw=137.29gm 0.10.09700.17500.2990 0.50.1020.5086470.17500.2990 10.1030.6103760.17500.2990 20.1060.9155650.17500.2990 50.1141.72940.17500.2990 150.1252.8484230.17500.2990 300.133.357070.17500.2990 600.1353.8657170.17500.2990 1200.144.3743640.17500.2990 14400.1636.714140.17500.2990 100800.1697.3245170.1770.1984130.2990 Swelling test graph

10. Soil test for linear shrinkage 4% lime, 4% cement 3% lime, 3% cement control soil test for linear shrinkage controltreated 3%lime treated 4%lime 3%cement4%cement soil(gm)200 water45% initial length(mm)12.8 final length(mm)10.81212.6 shrinks(mm)20.80.2 linear shrinkage strain %15.636.251.563 Shrinkage test graph

11. Soil samples for Unconfined Compression Test  Soil sample stayed in moisture room at 100% humidity for 7days  UCT is than ran on samples

12. Unconfined Compression Test

13. unconfined commpression test data soil strength(lb) F=220450588 pressure(psi) P=35.3572.193.81 soilcontroltreated3%limetreated4%limePRESSURE=FORCE/AREA 3%cement4%cement AREA=3.141 * DIAMETER^2/4 diameter(in) D=2.8152.8192.825 height(in) H=5.635.6695.583 area(in)^2 A=6.2246.2416.268

14. Unconfine Compression Test Pressure endured before failure

15. Unconfined Compression Test

16. Conclusion  Soil treated or chemically altered with a 4% lime-4% cement proved to be more stable as indicated by the test performed.  The 3% lime-3% cement treatment increased stability but not substantially compared to the 4% ratios.  Both treatments proved stronger and more stable than the control.  This research proved that lime and cement additives improved the overall qualities and performance of the soil.  Research in this field is proving invaluable to stabilization there by improving long term viability of structures.

17. Acknowledgments  I would like to extend a special thanks to Dr. Puppala, Aravind Pedarla, and Ranjan Rout for expertise and assistance rendered that provided me with invaluable experience also recognizing Dr. Yazdani, Dr. Daza, Dr. Weatherton, Minh Le, the University of Texas at Arlington Civil engineering Dept., University of Texas at Arlington and the National Science Foundation.

18. Questions