ASTM D4609-2001 Standard Guide for Evaluating Effectiveness of Chemicals for Soil Stabilization《土壤稳定用化学品效果评定的标准指南》.pdf

《ASTM D4609-2001 Standard Guide for Evaluating Effectiveness of Chemicals for Soil Stabilization《土壤稳定用化学品效果评定的标准指南》.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《ASTM D4609-2001 Standard Guide for Evaluating Effectiveness of Chemicals for Soil Stabilization《土壤稳定用化学品效果评定的标准指南》.pdf（5页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、Designation: D 4609 01Standard Guide forEvaluating Effectiveness of Admixtures for SoilStabilization1This standard is issued under the fixed designation D 4609; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year oforiginal adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revis

2、ion. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. Asuperscript epsilon (e) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.1. Scope *1.1 This guide describes laboratory techniques for evaluat-ing the effectiveness of admixtures for improving the engineer-ing pro

3、perties of fine-grained soils.1.2 Effectiveness is assessed by comparing the unconfinedcompressive strength (UCS), moisture susceptibility, andmoisture-density relationships (MD) of treated and untreatedsoils.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as thestandard. The inch-pound units g

4、iven in parentheses are forinformation only.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of thesafety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is theresponsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-bility of regulat

5、ory limitations prior to use.1.5 This guide offers an organized collection of informationor a series of options and does not recommend a specificcourse of action. This document cannot replace education orexperience and should be used in conjunction with professionaljudgment. Not all aspects of this

6、guide may be applicable in allcircumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to repre-sent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy ofa given professional service must be judged, nor should thisdocument be applied without consideration of a projects manyunique aspects. The word “Stan

7、dard” in the title of thisdocument means only that the document has been approvedthrough the ASTM consensus process.2. Referenced Documents2.1 ASTM Standards:D 421 Practice for Dry Preparation of Soil Samples forParticle Size Analysis and Determination of Soil Con-stants2D 422 Test Method for Partic

8、le-Size Analysis of Soils2D 653 Terminology Relating to Soil, Rock, and ContainedFluids2D 698 Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Character-istics of Soil Using Standard Effort (12,4000 ft-lbf/ft3(600kN-m/m3)2D 2166 Test Method for Unconfined Compressive Strengthof Cohesive Soil2D 2216 Test Metho

9、d for Laboratory Determination of Water(Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass2D 2217 Practice for Wet Preparation of Soil Samples forParticle Size Analysis and Determination of Soil Con-stants2D 3740 Practice for Minimum Requirements for AgenciesEngaged in the Testing and/or Inspection of Soil

10、and Rockas Used in Engineering Design and Construction2D 3877 Test Methods for One-Dimensional Expansion,Shrinkage, and Uplift Pressure of Soil-Lime Mixtures2D 4318 Test Method for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, andPlasticity Index of Soils22.2 AASHTO Documents:SPEL Special Products Evaluation List3T

11、99 Moisture-Density Relations of Soils, Using a 5.5-lb(2.5-kg) Rammer and a 12-in. (305-mm) Drop33. Terminology3.1 DefinitionsFor common definitions of soil and rockterms in this standard, refer to Terminology D 653.4. Summary of Guide4.1 Soil stabilizers are screened by comparing the results ofa su

12、ite of engineering soil tests conducted on untreated soil andthe same soil treated at appropriate amounts of the materialbeing evaluated. Effectiveness is assessed by comparing theAtterberg limits, MD, USC, and resistance to moisture oftreated and untreated soil samples.5. Significance and Use5.1 Th

13、is guide is intended to assist users and producers ofsoil modifiers, and stabilizers in the evaluation of a productspotential for improving a soils engineering properties (such as,deformation under load, shear strength, and volume stability).5.2 The results of these tests can be used to make a decis

14、ion1This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee D18 on Soil and Rockand is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee D18.15 on Stabilization withAdmixtures.Current edition approved Nov. 10, 2001. Published February 2002. Originallypublished as D 4609 86. Last previous edition D 4609 94.2A

15、nnual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 04.08.3Available from American Association of State Highway and TransportationOfficials, 444 N. Capitol St., NW, Suite 225, Washington, DC 20001.1*A Summary of Changes section appears at the end of this standard.Copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P

16、O Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.to continue experimentation to assess longevity, durability, andpractical value, and establish appropriate rates of applicationfor field trials.NOTE 1The quality of the result produced by this standard isdependent on the competence of the p

17、ersonnel performing it, and thesuitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet thecriteria of Practice D 3740 are generally considered capable of competentand objective testingsampling/inspection, and the like. Users of thisstandard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D

18、3740 does not initself assure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors.Practice D 3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.6. Apparatus6.1 Harvard Miniature Compaction Apparatus, or apparatusfor preparing remolded specimens for UCS as described in theSignificance an

19、d Use section of Test Method D 2166. Forinstructions on calibration, see Annex A1.7. Sampling and Test Specimens7.1 Obtain a 150-kg (300-lb) supply or have easy access tofour or five soil and soil-aggregate materials as referencematerials for stabilizer evaluations. These samples shouldrepresent two

20、 or more fine-grained soils of different claymineralogy that are widely distributed and would be likelycandidates for stabilization. One or two of the samples couldrepresent the minus No. 10 fraction of plentiful marginalaggregates in need of beneficiation.7.2 Review literature and test results prov

21、ided by thematerial manufacturer or supplier.7.3 Consult publications such as Special Products Evalua-tion List (SPEL) or other product evaluation or qualifiedproducts lists maintained by state highway agencies.47.4 If background search demonstrates that the subjectmaterial has promise, proceed with

22、 testing program.8. Procedure8.1 Obtain 20-kg (45-lb) portions of two or more soilsamples selected in 7.1 for an evaluation program. Thisquantity of soil will provide sufficient material for tests on thetreated and untreated soil mixtures at three rates of application:the amount recommended by the s

23、upplier, and amounts moreand less than recommended.NOTE 2All the tests recommended in 8.2 do not need to be conductedat all four rates of application (raw soil or zero rate, recommended rate, arate more than recommended, a rate less than recommended.)NOTE 3The 20-kg recommended sample size is from t

24、he followingscenario:Two compaction tests (untreated and optimum rate) 6 kgCalibration of Harvard Apparatus 1 kgAtterberg limits (untreated and of optimum rate) 1 kgExpansion (untreated and optimum rates) 2 kgUnconfined Compressive Strength (untreated and threerates of treatment)4kgReserve for rerun

25、 of any test 6 kg_20 kg8.2 Test each untreated soil by the several test methodslisted in 8.2.1 through 8.2.6. Perform the same tests on thetreated mixtures. For each rate of admixture, five batches of thetreated mixture are required. Prepare a batch by combining ina mechanical mixer carefully weighe

26、d portions of soil, admix-ture, and water. Blend thoroughly (normally for about 5 min) toproduce a high degree of homogeneity. Prepare each batch andtest separately as follows:8.2.1 Moisture ContentTest Method D 2216 .8.2.2 Particle-Size Analysis of SoilsTest Method D 422.8.2.3 Liquid Limit, Plastic

27、 Limit, and Plasticity IndexTestMethod D 4318 .8.2.4 Moisture-Density RelationsTest Methods D 698(Method A) or T 99 (Method A) (see Note 4).8.2.5 Volume ChangeTest Methods D 3877 (see Note 5).8.2.6 Unconfined Compressive Strength (see Note 6)TestMethod D 2166 .NOTE 4The sample may be reused and wate

28、r added for successivepoints on the moisture-density curve if the soil material is not fragile andwill not reduce in particle size due to repeated compaction or is not aheavy-textured clay into which it is difficult to incorporate water.NOTE 5Although this test method is for soil-lime mixtures, othe

29、rstabilizing admixtures may be used.NOTE 6Specimen preparation and determination of moisture absorp-tion are described in Annex A2. The moisture absorption specimens arealso used for determining unconfined compressive strength, which isdetermined in accordance with the methods indicated in 8.2.1-8.2

30、.6.8.3 On approximately 3 kg (7 lb), determine optimummoisture and maximum density in accordance with TestMethod D 698.8.4 On approximately 1 kg (2.2 lb), as described in thecalibration procedure given in Annex A1, determine with theHarvard apparatus the number of tamps and the spring pressurerequir

31、ed to duplicate the standard density obtained by TestMethod D 698.8.5 Prepare a 500-g (1-lb) batch at optimum moisturecontent. As soon as the mixing is completed, divide the mixtureinto three approximately equal portions. Perform liquid andplastic limit tests on one portion after air-drying overnigh

32、t, onanother after overnight storage at high-humidity, and on theother after 7 days of curing at high humidity.8.6 On approximately 3600 g, determine expansion inaccordance with Test Methods D 3877.8.7 On approximately 1 kg (2.2 lb), with the Harvardapparatus, prepare six five-layer specimens (requi

33、red for ac-ceptable homogeneity) compacted to Test Methods D 698density, and determine moisture absorption and unconfinedcompressive strength as described in Annex A2.9. Interpretations of Results9.1 The recommendations in 9.1.1-9.1.5 are provided toevaluate whether an admixture has improved the eng

34、ineeringproperties of fine-grained soils. Changes in one or more, butnot necessarily all, of the properties in 9.1.1-9.1.5 may be usedto judge effectiveness. The results of these tests may or may notbe useful for determining the cost-effectiveness or practicalvalue of the treatment; that decision wi

35、ll most probably need tobe made after additional testing and data analysis.9.1.1 Particle-Size AnalysisFor stabilizers whose mecha-nism is through cementing fine particles together, a shift in theparticle-size distribution curve demonstrating a coarsening or4Illinois, Louisiana, and New Jersey are t

36、hree states that publish such lists.D 46092granulation of the soil may be interpreted as an improvement inengineering properties. Particle-size analysis should be per-formed on the treated material after an appropriate curingperiod has elapsed.NOTE 7If mechanical pulverization using Practice D 421 i

37、s too severefor treated samples, Practice D 2217 may be used.9.1.2 Liquid and Plastic Limits and Plasticity IndexSignificant reduction of liquid limit and plasticity index isindicative of improvement. Rendering a soil, having a plastic-ity index, of lesser plasticity or nonplastic by treatment is as

38、ignificant improvement.9.1.3 Moisture-Density RelationsImproving soil com-pactability, that is, reducing the optimum moisture content orincreasing the maximum dry density, is often of engineeringsignificance. Lowering the optimum moisture content would beconsidered beneficial because frequently wate

39、r must be pur-chased, or in any event transported, and distributed on the soil,requiring the use of motor fuel and time.9.1.3.1 An increase in maximum dry density would indicatethat an increase in strength was afforded by treatment or that atarget density could be achieved with less compactive effor

40、t.The single-operator precision for Test Methods D 698 is 1.9 %for maximum density and 9.5 % for optimum moisture content;consequently, a change in optimum moisture content of greaterthan about 15 % from the optimum for the untreated soil and achange in maximum density of about 80 kg/m3(5 pcf) from

41、theuntreated may be interpreted as a result of chemical treatmentbecause the observed changes are greater than the expectedexperimental error.9.1.4 Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) and Mois-ture AbsorptionUnconfined compressive strength criteriahave been established for soil-stabilizer mixtures

42、 using asphalt,cement, chemicals, fly ash, fly ash-lime, lime, or others byvarious road building agencies.5However, these criteria areused primarily to ensure durable soil-stabilizer mixtures. Forthe purposes of this guide, it is suggested that an increase inUCS of 345 kPa (50 psi) or more due to tr

43、eatment beconsidered effective. Also, if specimens do not slake duringimmersion, the treatment may be effective; and if no significantstrength is lost due to immersion, the treatment may beeffective for waterproofing soils.9.1.5 Volume ChangeDistress to pavements and struc-tures is prevalent in area

44、s where subgrade soils undergosignificant volume changes with changes in moisture regime;that is, shrink with decreases in moisture and swell withincreases in moisture. If treatment being evaluated achieves thedesired control of volume changes, the material may be judgedeffective.10. Keywords10.1 ad

45、mixture screening; Harvard apparatus; liquid limit;moisture content; moisture-density; particle size; plastic limit;plasticity index; soil stabilization; unconfined compressivestrength; volume changeANNEXES(Mandatory Information)A1. CALIBRATION OF THE HARVARD MINIATURE COMPACTION APPARATUSA1.1 In or

46、der to prepare moisture absorption and uncon-fined compressive strength test specimens having the requiredstandard AASHTO T99 density, it is first necessary to calibratethe Harvard apparatus to determine the correct number oftamps per layer and to regulate the tamper springs so thattamping pressures

47、 of 10 kg (20 lb), 15 kg (30 lb), 20 kg (40 lb)can be utilized. Normally, ten or more tamps per layer arerequired. The calibration is illustrated in Fig. A1.1, whichpresents moisture-density curves for an experimental soil. Thetwo curves for the Harvard method involve two differentcombinations of ta

48、mper spring loadings and numbers of tampsper layer.A1.2 For the calibration, prepare a soil-water mixture fromapproximately 1000 g of soil and the amount of water requiredfor the AASHTO T 99 optimum moisture content. Place thismixture in a suitable container to prevent moisture loss, andremove an in

49、dividual portion of about 150 g (0.3 lb) for thefirst compaction trial. From this portion, compact a five-layerspecimen by the procedure given in A2.2.1-A2.2.8, using anarbitrary combination of number of tamps and tamper springpressure. Remove the specimen from the mold with the ejector,slice into three or more portions, and determine the actualmoisture content by Test Method D 2216.A1.2.1 Knowing the volume, the wet weight, and themoisture content of the compacted specimen, compute the drydensity and compare with that from the AASHTO T 99procedure. Using a se