An Experimental Study On Black Cotton Soil

Stabilization by Using Terazyme

Karnati chakrapani

Department of Civil Engineering

National Institute of Technology Rourkela
 AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON BLACK
COTTON SOIL STABILIZATION BY USING
TERAZYME

Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfilment On

The Requirements for The Degree Of

MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY
in
CIVIL ENGINEERING
(GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING)
by

KARNATI CHAKRAPANI
(214CE1066)
Under the guidance of:

DR. N. ROY

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, ROURKELA
May2016
 Department of Civil Engineering
National Institute of Technology Rourkela
May 30, 2016

Certificate of Examination
Roll Number: 214CE1066
Name: karnati chakrapani
Title of Dissertation: An Experimental Study On Black Cotton Soil Stabilization By Using
Terazyme

We the below signed, after checking the dissertation mentioned above and the official record
book (s) of the student, hereby state our approval of the dissertation submitted in partial
fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Technology in Civil Engineering
(Geotechnical Engineering) at National Institute of Technology Rourkela. We are satisfied with
the volume, quality, correctness, and originality of the work.

Dr. N. Roy Dr. S. k. Sahu

Supervisor Head of the Department

i
 Department of Civil Engineering
National Institute of Technology Rourkela

Dr. N. Roy
Professor

May 30, 2016

Supervisors’ Certificate

This is to certify that the work presented in the dissertation entitled An experimental An
Experimental Study On Black Cotton Soil Stabilization By Using Terazyme submitted by
karnati chakrapani, Roll Number 214CE1066, is a record of original research carried out by
him under my supervision and guidance in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree
of Master of Technology in Civil Engineering (Geotechnical Engineering). Neither this
dissertation nor any part of it has been submitted earlier for any degree or diploma to any
institute or university in India or abroad.

Dr. N. Roy
Professor

ii
 Declaration of Originality
I, karnati chakrapani, Roll Number 214CE1066 hereby declare that this dissertation entitled
“An experimental An Experimental Study On Black Cotton Soil Stabilization By Using
Terazyme” represents my original work carried out as postgraduate student of NIT Rourkela
and, to the best of my knowledge, it contains no material previously published or written by
another person, not any material represents for the award of any other degree or diploma of
NIT Rourkela or any other institution. Any contribution made to this research by others, with
whom I worked at NIT Rourkela or elsewhere, is explicitly acknowledged in the dissertation.
Works of other authors cited in this dissertation have been duly acknowledged under the section
“Bibliography”. I have also submitted my original research records to the scrutiny committee
foe evaluation of my dissertation.

I am fully aware that in case of any non-compliance detected in future, the Senate of NIT
Rourkela may withdraw the degree awarded to me on the basis of the present dissertation.

May 30, 2016 karnati chakrapani

NIT Rourkela 214ce1066

iii
 ACKNOWLDGEMENTS

I take it as privilege to express my gratitude towards my supervisor Dr. N. Roy Professor,

Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Rourkela, for his
continuous help and encouragement. It has been an honour to work under the supervision of
Dr. N. Roy, whose valuable guidance and support enriched the quality of work.

I express my sincere regards to Prof. S.K. Sarangi, Director of NIT, Rourkela and Prof. S.K.
Sahu, Head of the civil engineering department, NIT, Rourkela for providing facilities in the
Geotechnical Engineering laboratory round the clock for research work.

I also express my thanks to the staff members of Geotechnical Engineering laboratory for their
co-operation during the course of experimentation.

I am thankful to Mr. Apoorva Modi, Avijeet agencies, Chennai for supporting this project by
supplying enzyme.

I am greatly indebted to my parents for their encouragement and endless support that helped
me at every step of life. Their blessings and wishes have enabled me to complete my work
successfully.

Lastly, I am very much thankful to all those who are directly or indirectly involved in
completion of this research work.

karnati chakrapani

iv
 CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................vii

LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................. viii
LIST OF SYMBOLS ............................................................................................................... x
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................. xi
CHAPTER 1 ............................................................................................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 BLACK COTTON SOILS ............................................................................................................ 1
1.2 General .......................................................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Soil stabilization............................................................................................................................ 2
1.3.1 Mechanical Stabilization ........................................................................................................ 3
1.3.2 Chemical Stabilization ........................................................................................................... 3
1.4 Soil stabilization by enzyme ......................................................................................................... 3
1.5 Scope and objective of research work........................................................................................... 4
1.6 Outline of the thesis ...................................................................................................................... 4
CHAPTER2 .............................................................................................................................. 6
LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................................... 6
2.1 Literature on liquid chemicals stabilizers ............................................................................ 6
CHAPTER3 ............................................................................................................................ 11
MATERIAL AND METHODOLOGY ................................................................................ 11
3.1 MATERIALS ..................................................................................................................... 11
3.2 SPECIFICGRAVITY ........................................................................................................ 11
3.3 LIQUIDLIMIT ................................................................................................................... 11
3.4 PLASTIC LIMIT TEST..................................................................................................... 12
3.5 DRY SIEVE ANALYSIS .................................................................................................. 12
3.6 HYDROMETER ANALYSIS ........................................................................................... 12
3.7 COMPACTION TEST....................................................................................................... 12
3.8 MODIFIED PROCTOR TEST .......................................................................................... 13
3.9 UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST .......................................................................... 13
3.10 CONSOLIDATION TEST .............................................................................................. 13
3.11 SWELLING PRESSURE (CONSOLIDOMETER METHOD) ...................................... 14
3.12TERAZYME ENZYME ................................................................................................... 19
CHAPTER4 ............................................................................................................................ 22
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................................ 22

v
4.1 CONSISTENCY LIMITS .................................................................................................. 22
4.2UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (UCS) ..................................................... 23
4.2.1 Effect of 200ml/3.5m3 Enzyme on unconfined compressive strength of black cotton soil
.................................................................................................................................................. 25
4.2.2 Effect of 200ml/3.0m3 Enzyme on unconfined compressive strength of black cotton soil
.................................................................................................................................................. 26
4.2.3 Effect of 200ml/2.5m3 Enzyme on unconfined compressive strength of black cotton soil
.................................................................................................................................................. 27
4.2.4 Effect of 200ml/2m3 Enzyme on unconfined compressive strength of black cotton soil
.................................................................................................................................................. 28
4.2.5 Effect of 200ml/1.5m3 Enzyme on unconfined compressive strength of black cotton soil
.................................................................................................................................................. 29
4.2.6 Effect of different dosage of Terazyme on UCS values for different curing period ...... 30
4.3 SWELLING PRESSURE (CONSOLIDOMETER METHOD) ........................................ 32
4.4 ENZYME TREATED SOIL: ............................................................................................. 33
CHAPTER 5 ............................................................................................................................ 43
CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK ............................................................................. 43
5.2 Future work ........................................................................................................................ 43
REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................... 44

vi
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 Properties of black cotton soil…………………………………………………15

Table3.2 Properties of Terazyme…………………………………………………………20
Table 4.1 Consistency limits of enzymatic soil………………………………………….22
Table 4.2 UCS of black cotton soil with curing period………………………………….24
Table 4.2 Swell pressure test of black cotton soil with different enzyme dosage……….31
Table 4.3 Coefficient of consolidation values of stabilized soil…………………….…....36

vii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Fig 1.1 Expansive soil………………………………………………………………………...2

Fig 1.2 Flow chart showing the outline of the thesis…………………………….….….….…5
Fig 3.1 Grain size distribution curve……………………………………………….…..........16

Fig 3.2 Light compaction curve………………………………………………………...…...17

Fig 3.3 Heavy compaction curve………………...………...………………………………...17
Fig 3.4 Time vs settlement curve for black cotton soil...……………………...…...…...…...18
Fig 3.5 compression index curve of untreated soil……………………………………........ 19

Fig 4.1 Ucs sample testing…………………………………………………………...…...…23

Fig 4.2 Failure pattern of the UCS specimen…...……...……………………………………24

Fig 4.3 Variation in UCS of 200 ml/3.5 m3 enzyme treated BC soil…………………...…...25

Fig 4.4 Variation in UCS of 200 ml/3.0 m3 enzyme treated BC soil…………………….….26
Fig 4.5 Variation in UCS of 200 ml/2.5 m3 enzyme treated BC soil…………………….….27
Fig 4.6 Variation in UCS of 200 ml/2.0 m3 enzyme treated BC soil…………………….….28
Fig 4.7 Variation in UCS of 200 ml/1.5 m3 enzyme treated BC soil…………………….….29
Fig 4.8 Variation of UCS for different curing period on black cotton soil……………….…30
Fig 4.9 Bar chart showing of UCS for different curing period on black cotton soil………...31

Fig 4.10 UCS strength increment in percentage……….…………………………………....31

Fig 4.11 Variation in swelling pressure for different curing period…………………………32
Fig 4.12 Coefficient of consolidation curve of an enzymatic soil for a dosage 3.….….…....33
Fig 4.13 coefficient of consolidation curve of an enzymatic soil for a dosage 1…………....34
Fig 4.14 Coefficient of consolidation curve of an enzymatic soil for a dosage 3…………...35
Fig 4.15 Coefficient of consolidation curve of an enzymatic soil for a dosage 3……...…....36
Fig 4.16 Coefficient of consolidation curve of an enzymatic soil for a dosage 3…...……....37
Fig 4.17 coefficient of consolidation curve of an enzymatic soil for a dosage 3…………....38
Fig 4.18 Compresiion index curve for a dosage 3…………………………………………...39
Fig 4.19 Compresiion index curve for a dosage 1…………………………………………...39
Fig 4.20 Compresiion index curve for a dosage 3…………………………………………...40
Fig 4.21 Compresiion index curve for a dosage 1…………………………………………...40

viii
Fig 4.22 Compresiion index curve for a dosage 3…………………………………………...41
Fig 4.23 Compresiion index curve for a dosage 3…………………………………………...41

ix
 LIST OF SYMBOLS

Notation Description
G Specific gravity
Cu Coefficient of uniformity
Cc Coefficient of curvature
OMC Optimum Moisture Content
MDD Maximum Dry Density
UCS Unconfined compression test
CBR California Bearing Ratio
TZ Terazyme
BC Black cotton soil
CV coefficient of consolidation

x
 ABSTRACT

In developing countries like India the most important requirement of any project after
performance criteria is its economical feasibility and serviceability criteria. The conventional
methods are time consuming and are not economically feasible. Hence there is a need to find
the other possible ways to satisfy the performance as well as economical criteria. These
enzymes have been proven to be very effective and economical. Another advantage of the bio-
enzyme is that these are environment friendly. The efficiency of bio enzyme depends upon the
amount of dosage, type of soil and curing period. In our country vast areas consist of black
cotton soils. As the conventional soil stabilizers like gravel, sand and others are depleting and
becoming expensive day by day at a very rapid pace, it becomes necessary to look towards for
alternative eco-friendly stabilizers as their substitute. Recently many Bio-enzymes have
emerged as cost effective stabilizers for soil stabilization. One such type of bio-enzyme,
Terazyme, has been used in the present work. The Terazyme effect on the unconfined
compressive strength and on the atterberg limits were studied. The enzyme treated soil showing
significant improvement in unconfined compressive strength values. The untreated soil has
compressive strength as 71 kN/m2. After treating with Terazyme the soil showed significant
improvement in strength. With curing period, the strength is increasing. The strength increment
was found to be 300 percent. No significant improvement in liquid and plastic limit values with
treatment of Terazyme enzyme. The compression index and coefficient of consolidation values
decreasing with enzyme treatment for a prefixing curing period.

xi
 CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

1.1 BLACK COTTON SOILS

Black cotton is one of the expansive soil available in India. Black cotton soil is an
expansive soil that generally available in the tropical zones. Their appearance varies from black
colour to brown colour. In our country black cotton soil occupies nearly 20% of the available
land. Expansive soil major portion generally found in central part and some places in south
India. Expansive soils known by black cotton soil are available in the Deccan plateau fields
(Deccan Trap) including Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh and in some
parts of Odisha, in the Indian sub-continent. Black cotton soil available in the valley of river
Tapti, Narmada, Godavari and Krishna. The west side of Deccan plateau and in upper portion
of Krishna and Godavari basin. In this area the black cotton soil depth is very narrow. These
soils formed by the residual action of basalt or trap rocks. The other reason behind formation
of these soils is weathering of igneous rocks, after volcanic eruption by the cooling action of
lava. These soil shows high plasticity nature. The major clay mineral is montmorillonite.
Because of montmorillonite group mineral these clays exhibit more swelling and shrinkage
characteristic. The main problem with this type of minerals is instability of earth material.
Expansive soils are hard when they lose water content, and the another day if they capture
water they become soft in nature.

For a lightly loaded structure it creates problem, under burden and by changing
volumetrically alongside regular dampness variety. Subsequently, the superstructures generally
counter excessive settlement and differential developments, bringing about harm to
establishment frameworks, basic components and structural elements. In a critical number of
cases the structure gets to be precarious or dreadful. Notwithstanding when endeavours are
made to enhance swelling soil, the absence of proper innovation in some cases results
volumetric change that are in charge of billion dollars harm every year. It is because of this that
the present work is taken up. The design was to check the extent of enhancing bearing limit
esteem and lessen extensiveness by including added substances. These soils are hard in dry
state however lose their load carrying strength when once they are permitted water into the clay
structure.so we can say that especially expansive soil touchy to changes in environment. These
properties have made the soil inadmissible for structural designing purposes either as
embankment material or foundation material.
1
 Fig 1.1 Expansive soil

1.2 General
A liquid chemical products are actively marketed for stabilizing soils on pavement
projects. Normally supplied as concentrated fluids, these additives are mixed with water on the
field and splashed on the soil to be dealt with before compaction. Pressure injection is
sometimes used to treat deeper soil layers. The concept behind chemical stabilization is to keep
the soil properties same, positive effects of the given engineering project with respect to
changes of moisture in environment. As known in soil chemistry, clay minerals are arranged
in layers with various ions and surrounded by absorbed water molecule. The absorbed water
molecule strongly connected to clay surface. The intention is to modify the interaction between
clay surface and water in such a way the clay would not absorb water molecule.
In this present study, one type of Bio-enzyme that is Terazyme has been used for
alerting the properties of black cotton soil. Detailed laboratory tests were carried out to
ascertain the benefits in terms of engineering properties.

1.3 Soil stabilization

The mode of alteration and the degree of alteration necessarily depend on the character
of the soil and its deficiencies. In general requirement is adequate strength. In the case of a
cohesion less soils can be achieved by proper confinement or by mixing the cohesion lees soil
with cohesion material. Here the cohesion material act like a cementing agent. In case of
cohesive soil, we can improve the soil strength by drying process or make the soil water
resistant, changing the soil electrolyte configuration by adding frictional properties. Stabilizing
the soil is one of the technique to increase soil strength and maintain atterberg limits within in
the specified limit. By chemical alteration we can improve the engineering properties.
Stabilization technique can be used to treat extensive variety of soil materials having poor
engineering properties. Various types of stabilization techniques are in use. Stabilization can
be broadly classified into two type

2
 1.mechanical stabilization
2.chemical stabilization

1.3.1 Mechanical Stabilization

In general, weak aggregates are preferred for mechanical stabilization. Mechanical
stabilization covers two strategies for changing soil properties
1.the soil particles rearrangement
By improving the gradation of soil
Any material prone to weathering action is suitable for mechanical stabilization.

1.3.2 Chemical Stabilization

Chemical stabilization comprises of binding the soil particles by a cementing agent.
The binding agent i.e. cementing agent can be produced chemical reaction within in the soil.
The chemical reaction does not as a matter of course incorporate the soil particles, although
the holding involves intermolecular strengths of the soil.

1.4 Soil stabilization by enzyme

An organic catalyst that increases the rate of chemical reaction without being part of
end product is called as enzyme. Initially the enzymes are used in treating the horticulture
products. For roads to be stabilized by the enzymes require strength and durability. The
enzymes are modified by little amount to keep the clay durable. The enzymes react with organic
molecules and forms a compound. This compound plays an important role in ions exchange
process. First step in ions exchange processes is break down the lattice structure and enzyme
act like a surfactant. These surfactants will avoid the clay further gaining the moisture content.
After mixing with soil, enzymes are adsorbed by the clay lattice structure. They play a vital
role on lattice structure, at first making them to expand and afterwards to tighten. Colloids
absorb the enzyme empowering them to be transported through the soil electrolyte media.
Generally, soil bacteria release the hydrogen ions. The enzymes are catalyses the process.by
chain reaction enzyme are regenerated and goes on reacting.th size of ions is large, so some
amount of osmotic migration took place. For this enzyme requires better mixing process. After
adding the enzyme to the soil immediately enzyme increases the clay particle wetting and
bonding behaviour. For this reason, soil will be compacted to denser that will increase the
density of soil Also. Enzymes enhance the chemical bonding. It will help to bind the soil
particles more closely. So the clay structure becomes permanent structure; it becomes more
durable to weathering conditions.

3
1.5 Scope and objective of research work
There are majorly 4 types of bio-enzymes till date are Renolith, Permazyme, Fujibeton
and Terazyme. In the present investigation an attempt is made to stabilize the black cotton soil
with bio Enzyme (Terazyme). Detailed laboratory tests were carried out to ascertain the
benefits in terms of engineering properties.
(a)To evaluate physical properties of Black cotton soil.
(b)To determine the effects of adding enzyme to black cotton soil on its properties.

1.6 Outline of the thesis

The present research work consists of six chapters. In each chapter a brief introduction
was written. Chapter one contains the about the expansive soils and their availability in our
country. Problems related to expansive soils was discussed. After that to stabilize the expansive
soil by using enzymes was discussed. Literature review was discussed in second chapter. In
this chapter previous works related to enzymes has been discussed. Chapter three consists of
materials and methodology. In this chapter the procedure to determine the various properties
of i.e. engineering properties and physical properties had been discussed. The fourth chapter
consists of detailed laboratory investigation done on the black cotton soil. The enzymatic soil
properties with a prefixing reports was mentioned. Chapter 5 focuses on the conclusions drawn
from the Laboratory test in what way the black cotton soil is usefull. In which way we can
improve the soil behaviour.

4
CHAPTER
INTRODUCTION
1
CHAPTER LITERATURE
2 REVIEW

CHAPTER MATERIALS AND

3 METHODS

MATERIALS METHODS

CHAPTER RESULTS AND

4 DISCUSSION

CHAPTER CONCLUSION
5 AND FUTURE
SCOPE
Fig 1.2 Flow chart showing the outline of the thesis

5
 CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW

As a prelude to begin with a project it is more essential to have general and detailed information
regarding the subject content, strategic approaches, available research in the subject area,
interpreted results and drawn conclusions. This chapter reviews the attempts made by several
researchers to understand the behaviour of Enzymes as reinforcing material in soil.

2.1 Literature on liquid chemical stabilizers

Isaac et al. (2003) had conducted laboratory study on five types of soil namely CL, OH, CH,
CI SX.to improve the five soil properties they mixed with bio enzyme. They conducted CBR
test for a pre fixing curing period. From the results it is clear that Terazyme is very effective,
economical. most effective in case of silt content is more.

Velasquez et al. (2005) studied the enzyme mixing on soil stabilization. they used two types
of enzymes namely enzyme A and enzyme B. They conducted chemical analysis of enzyme A
before the mechanical testing. After that they conducted resilient modulus and shear strength
test on two soils which were stabilized with two different enzymes. Two types of soil are used
named as soil 1 and soil 2. soil 1 mechanical properties are not affected by the enzyme A with
enzyme B. The stiffness of soil 1 was increased. The resilient modulus of soil 2 increases by
the application of both enzymes A and B. With time the enzyme activity on the soil stabilization
increases. From the observations minimum four months of time required to get improvement
in the shear strength of the soil.

Shankar et al. (2009) studied the effect of Terazyme on locally available lateritic soil. The
investigated lateritic soil was collected from udipi district region in Karnataka state. The
lateritic soil is not full fill the requirements of sub base coarse.so to brought down the atterberg
limits they mixed the lateritic soil with locally available river sand. The blended soil is mixed
is stabilized by using Terazyme enzyme.

From the observations it has been concluded that if sand amount increases in blended
soil the enzyme treated soil cbr value was decreasing. The enzyme is ineffective in improving
the consistency limits of lateritic soil. Whereas Terazyme is effective in improving the

6
engineering properties of the lateritic soil. For cohesion less soil Terazyme is not useful to
improve its properties.
Mgangira MB (2009) conducted laboratory results on the effect of enzyme based liquid
chemicals as soil stabilizer. Soil 1 had plasticity index of 35 and the other had PI of 7. Tests –
Atterberg limits, Standard proctor and unconfined compressive strength.
1)Treatment with enzyme based products to lead a slight decrease in PI of both soil.

2) Enzyme based chemical treatment of two soils using the two products showed a mixed
effect on the UCS. No consistence significant improvement in the UCS could be attributed to
treatment.
Naagesh and Gandgadhara (2010) made experiments on an expansive soil treated with an
organic, non-toxic, eco-friendly bio-enzyme stabilizer in order to assess its suitability in
reducing the swelling in expansive soils. They stated that reduction in void ratio of bio enzyme
treated specimens with curing period significant reduction in swell properties. The
experimental results indicate that the bio enzyme stabilizer used in the present investigation is
effective and the swelling of an expansive soil reduces on wet side of OMC.
Venkatasubramanian and Dhinakaran (2011) three different soils with four different
dosages for 2 and 4 weeks of period after application of enzyme on its strength parameters
were studied. It is inferred from the results that addition of bio enzyme significantly improves
UCC and CBR values of selected samples.
Unconfined compressive strength: Among three different selected soils, UCC of soil 2
has got higher value compare to two other soils. At the same time, the UCC of soil 1 falls in
between values of soil 1 and 3 and soil 3 has got lowest UCC value. This higher rate of increase
observed for all the soils treated with bio-enzyme with 4 weeks of duration. For all the soils,
soil treated with dosage 3 for a period of 2 weeks’ duration shows descending trend in CBR.
For soil 3 except for dosage 1, for other three dosages of bio-enzyme there is descending trend
in the rate of increase in CBR

Faisal A (2012) studied the three different types of residual soils. These three soils named as
soil 1 soil 2 and soil 3. They conducted the tests as per the British institution. To brought down
the residual soil atterberg limits, the residual soil is mixed with liquid chemical. The liquid
chemical was mixed to the residual soil in four different proportions. The liquid chemical
mixed residual soil is tested after 1,7 and 14 days. It has been observed that the atterberg limit
values is decreasing pattern. They conducted the proctor test. The liquid chemical soil showing

7
that omc value decreases and dry density value is increasing. The unconfined compression
strength is also increasing for liquid chemical mixed soil.

Greeshma et al. (2014) conducted experimental work on high liquid limit clay. The liquid
limit clay behaviour was investigated by using Bio enzyme Terazyme additive. With treatment
of Terazyme the liquid limit is about 30% increase in the first two weeks. After that liquid limit
is decreased slightly. However, shrinkage limit was decreased. The ucs value enhanced twelve
times the original value.

Agarwal p and Kaur S (2014) studied the effect of Terazyme effect on expansive soil. They
conducted unconfined strength test to determine the optimum dosage value. To determine the
optimum value of dosage totally 5 dosages are mixed to the soil. After that they tested with
curing period of 1day and 7 days. From experiments concluded that UCS strength value
increases about 200 percent. They give the reason for working mechanism of Terazyme.

Rajoria V and Kaur S (2014) presented a research paper on soil stabilization by using
enzymes. In this research paper four different types of enzymes were discussed. These enzymes
are practised in different countries. The four enzymes are Renolith, Permazyme, Fujibeto and
Terazyme. Renolith enzyme was developed in Germany country. Renolith is mixed with water
in a predetermined quantity. This water mixture was sprinkled over the soil. This type of
enzyme is suitable in cement stabilized soil. By using Renolith enzyme cost reduction is
reduced about 20 to 40 percent. This enzyme was helpful in arresting cracks.

The second enzyme discussed is pemazyme.it is very useful in taw freeze types of soil.
It increases the compaction effort of clays and soils with silt content is more.

Fujibeton enzyme material was available in japan. Fujibeton is an organic polymer. Fujibeto
soil mix is very easy to handle. This enzyme soil mixture requires less skilful workers, with
minimum effort we can achieve maximum compaction effort.

The last enzyme discussed was Terazyme enzyme. Which was used in the present
investigation to improve the properties of black cotton soil. The main supplier in India is avijeet
agencies. The Terazyme is nontoxic eco-friendly material. The Terazyme soil mixture showing
the ucs Value increases about 100 times for a curing period of 30 days.

Thida AN and Than MS (2014) studied the strength behaviour on enzyme treated soils.
Soil samples are taken at about 3ft depth from Kyarnikan village in Patheingyi township and
two places of ASEAN Highway. The soil examined belongs to CL as per the UNIFIED SOIL

8
CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM. Three enzyme dosages are selected as 0.5 litre, 1 litre and 1.5
litre per 33m3 of soil. The strength tests are conducted after the curing period of one week and
four weeks. When soils are stabilized with enzyme, UCS and CBR values are higher than that
of natural soil.

Khan TA and Taha MR (2015) In this experimental study, three types of bio enzymes from
three different countries were used to improve University Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM)soil.
The effect of the three different bio enzymes on Atterberg limits, compaction curves, and
unconfined compressive strength was studied. Controlled untreated and treated samples for two
dosages at curing times up to three months were prepared and tested after completion of the
curing period. From the experiment results, the mixed enzymes did not show any
comprehensible improvement in the lab experiment program. that is, Atterberg limits,
compaction, and unconfined compression tests. Little improvement, in some cases, could be
related to the hypothesis that the enzymes did not produce any chemical change, and they only
prevented moisture absorption to bring the particles closer.
Sen J and Singh JP (2015) In this study Black cotton soil with varying index properties have
been tested for stabilization process. The black cotton soil is mixed with enzyme. The mixed
stabilized soil was for a pre fixing period of 0 days, 14days, 21 days and 28 days for various
enzyme dosages. The tests which were carried out are the California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test
and Unconfined Compressive strength (UCS) test of the soil specimen. The test results indicate
that bio-enzyme stabilization improves the strength of BC soil up to great extent, which indicate
the bearing capacity and the resistance to deformation increases in stabilized soil.
Nandini DN and Kumar MT (2015) conducted experiments on red soil. The red soil is mixed
with Terazyme for three different dosages namely D1, D2, D3. They prepared the ucs sample
with different moisture content and different density. They made samples for dry side of omc,
omc and wet side of omc. From the results they concluded that there is reduction in strength
with curing period at omc density. There is significant improvement in ucs was observed at all
curing period corresponding to dry side of omc.

Venika S and Priyanka V (2015) put an effort to improve the local soil properties. For this
they mixed the local soil with Terazyme for different dosages. After addition of enzyme they
conducted experiments on specific gravity, atterberg limits, proctor test and cbr test for soaked
and un soaked conditions. The results showing that there is no improvement in atterberg limits
and improvement was observed in cbr value.

9
Ramesh HN and Sagar SR (2015) studied the effect of Terazyme on black cotton soil and red
earth soil separately. They conducted liquid limit, cbr. Unconfined compression strength, free
swell index, compressibility and compaction characteristics were studied. The tests were
carried for both desiccators dried and air dried samples. The Terazyme showed improvement
in air dried than the desiccator dried samples. From the experiments concluded that after 7 days
there is a little increment in liquid limit of the soil. Free swell index decreases very rapidly.
The ucs value of both soil material is increased very fast.

10
 CHAPTER3
MATERIAL AND METHODOLOGY
3.1 MATERIALS
For the present research work, black cotton soil was collected from muddurunagar,
Kurnool district Andhra Pradesh by method of distributed method of sampling black cotton
soil was collected. Before the digging Top soil layer was removed. Because it contains natural
vegetation. The soil was taken at a depth of 1.5-meter for the research work. To know the
natural moisture content soil was sealed in a polythene bag. Measures were taken for there is
no further loss of moisture content. The collected soil was air dried for 1 day. The air dried soil
was pulverized using wooden hammer. The pulverized soil was passed through 4.75 mm sieve.
Soil passed through 4.75mm sieve was taken in this research work.

3.2 SPECIFICGRAVITY
The ratio of a given volume of a material to the equal volume of displaced liquid is defined as
specific gravity. In geotechnical field specific gravity plays an important role. Specific gravity
test was conducted according to IS: 2720 (Part 3): Sec 1-1980.
About 50 kg of soil was taken for conducting the specific gravity test. Take the empty weight
of the pycnometer and report it as W1. Soil was filled in pycnometer. Weigh the pycnometer
and report the weight as W2. After that Bottle was filled with distilled water and placed on sand
bath to remove air bubbles. After sometime take out the pycnometer from the sand bath and
kept cooling fill the pycnometer up to the mark. Weigh the pycnometer (soil and water) and
report it as W3. After that fil the water up to the mark. Take the pycnometer and water weight
and report it as W4. Now the specific gravity of the soil is calibrated as for the formula.

3.3 LIQUIDLIMIT
Liquid limit test was conducted according to IS: 2720 (part5)-1985. The Soil which is passing
through 425-micron sieve was used to conducted the test. About 200 gm of soil is taken in a
tray. Some amount of water was mixed to the soil. Soil paste was taken into the casagrande
apparatus.by the help of groove a cut was made in middle of the soil. The groove divides the
soil paste into two parts along the diameter. After that handle of the device was turned. After
the some turns the two parts will join together. Take some amount into container for knowing
the moisture content. Note down the corresponding blows. Repeat the test two to three times.
Draw a graph between blows vs moisture content. Measure the moisture content corresponding
to 25 blows. It is reported as liquid of the soil.

11
3.4 PLASTIC LIMIT TEST
For determination of plastic limit of a soil, sieved through 425 IS sieve. About 30 gm of soil is
taken, is mixed thoroughly with distilled water. Take 10 gm of water mixed soil into hand and
form a ball. Now the ball was rolled against glass plate with fingers. The ball shape turns into
thread shape.do the process until the thread is of size 3 mm size. The rate of rolling was about
80 to 90 strokes per minute. Take the soil into the container to know the moisture content.
The water content at which soil thread showing cracks that moisture content was known as
plastic limit of the soil.

3.5 DRY SIEVE ANALYSIS

Take an amount of 2 kg of soil into container. The measured soil was taken sieve by using 75-
micron sieve. The 75-micron sieve was so small. For this we adopted wet sieving. Through wet
sieving the sieving time reduces. The sieving was done unto clear water comes out of the sieve.
After that take the soil into tray and keep it in oven for drying process. After 24 hours take out
from the oven. The residue soil was passed through a series of sieves. Measure the weight on
each sieve.

3.6 HYDROMETER ANALYSIS

For determining the specific gravity of solids hydrometer can be used as the specific gravity of
the soil suspension depends upon the particle size, hydrometer can be used for the particle size
analysis. About 50 gm of oven dried soil weighed accurately, transferred to an evaporating
dish. sodiumhexameta phosphate was added to the soil (2%). For slurry formation water was
added. Then the soaked soil was transferred to dispersion cup and Was stirred for 15 minutes.
Then the suspension was poured into the standard measuring flask of 1000ml.The suspension
mixed thoroughly by placing a bung on the open end of the jar. The jar is placed on the table
and a stop watch is started. The hydrometer is inserted in the suspension and the first reading
is taken after 30 sec of the commencement of the sedimentation. Further readings are taken
after 1,2,4,8, 15.30minutes. The hydrometer is removed from jar and rinsed with distilled water
and floated in a comparison cylinder containing distilled water. Further readings were taken
after 1,2,4,8,24 hours reckoned from the beginning of sedimentation.

3.7 COMPACTION TEST

Compaction test was conducted according to IS: 2720 (Part 7)-1980. For compaction test soil
should pass through 4.75 mm sieve. 2500 gm of oven dried measured soil was taken for doing
the compaction test. Predicted amount of water was added to the soil. The soil is placed into
the compaction mould in three layers. The soil compaction mould volume was about

12
1000cc.using hammer for each layer is compacted. For each layer compacting to 25 blows of
energy was used.in the initial stages soil weight in the mould increases. After certain moisture
content the soil weight decreases. At this stage stops the processes. draw a graph between the
moisture content and dry density. The top point on the curve was considered to be max dry
density and corresponding moisture content was known as OMC.

3.8 MODIFIED PROCTOR TEST

Modified proctor test was performed according to IS: 2720 (Part 7)-1980. For modified proctor
test soil should pass through 4.75 mm sieve.3000 gm of oven dried measured soil was taken
for doing the modified proctor test. predicted amount of water was added to the soil. The soil
is placed into the compaction mould in five layers. The soil compacting mould volume was
about 1000cc.using hammer for each layer is compacted. For each layer compacting to 25
blows of energy was used. In the initial stages soil weight in the mould increases. After certain
moisture content the soil weight decreases. At this stage stops the processes. Draw a graph
between the moisture content and dry density. The top point on the curve was considered to be
max dry density and corresponding moisture content was known as OMC.

3.9 UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST

Modified proctor test was conducted according to IS: 2720 (Part 10)-1991. It is a modification
to the triaxial test in which unconfined pressure is kept as zero. The soil specimen is placed
unconfined compression test machine. The dial gauge and proving ring are set to zero. The
compressive load is applied to the specimen by turning handle. As the handle is turned, the
upper plate moves downward causes compression. The compressive force is determined from
ring reading and the axial strain is found from the dial gauge reading. Force divided with area
gives the stress value.

3.10 CONSOLIDATION TEST

Consolidation test was performed to know the, a confined soil was subjected to laterally vertical
pressure how the soil specimen volume behaviour changes. Consolidation is essentially time
dependent process. The parameters obtained from the consolidation test was used to determine
the primary consolidation settlement and secondary consolidation settlement respectively. The
test procedure as follows. Consolidation test consists of a loading device. Present study contain
fixed ring consolidometer was adopted. Load is placed through a loading head that is placed
on the top porous stone. Apply the load the magnitude of pressure p, in such a way that present
and previous loading pressure should be constant. As ∆𝑝/𝑝 = 1 (where ∆𝑝 =increase in

13
pressure and p=the pressure before the increase). After end of the experiment values be placed
in appropriate formula to get the coefficient of consolidation, coefficient of volume of
compressibility.

3.11 SWELLING PRESSURE (CONSOLIDOMETER METHOD)

Expansive soils are known to have great swelling ability because of the presence of swelling
dominant clay minerals such as the montmorillonite group. Table 4.2 shows the swelling
pressure results of black cotton soil for different dosage of Enzyme. The swelling pressure for
untreated soil is 180 kN/m2, as addition of enzymes (Terazyme) with different dosage lowers
the swelling pressure to 160, and 40, kN/m2 for 7 days and 30 days curing period. This implies
that as enzyme is added the lesser the swelling pressure of the compacted soil and hence the
more stable the material is. After adding the enzyme, it is also consistent that swelling potential
decreases with the amount of stabilizer.

14
 Table 3.1 Properties of black cotton soil

CONFIRMING TO IS
VALUE
SL.NO PROPERTIES CODE

1 Coefficient of uniformity(Cu) IS: 2720 (Part 4) -1985 2.65

2 Coefficient of7curvature (Cc) IS: 2720 (Part 4)-1985 0.54

3 Specific gravity (G) IS: 2720 (Part 3)-1980 2.65

Maximum/dry density (MDD),

4 IS: 2720 (Part 7)-1980 14.10
kN/m3

Optimum moisture content

5 IS: 2720 ( Part 7)-1983 30.00
(OMC), per cent

IS: 2720 (Part 8)-1983

6 Modified proctor test, kN/m3 16.70

Modified proctor moisture IS: 2720 (Part 8)-1983

7 20.00
content, per cent

Natural moisture content, per IS: 2720 (Part 2)-1973

8 7.00
cent

Free swell index, per cent IS: 2720 (Part 25)-1977

9 78.00

15
 10 Liquid limit ,per cent IS: 2720 (Part 5)-1985 83.00

11 Plastic limit, per cent IS: 2720 (Part 5)-1985 35.00

Unconfined compression test,

12 IS: 2720 (Part 10)-1991 71.00
kN/m2

13 classification IS: 2720 (part 4)-1985 CH

14 Swelling pressure, kN/m2 IS: 2720 (part 41)-1977 180

100.00

90.00

80.00

70.00

60.00
% finer
50.00

40.00

30.00

20.00

10.00

0.00
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
particle size (mm)

Fig 3.1 Grain size distribution curve

From the graph it is observed that coefficient of uniformity was 2.4 and coefficient of curvature
was 0.54

16
 DRY DENSITY
1.44
1.42
1.40
DRYDENSITY (KN/M3)

1.38
1.36
1.34
1.32
1.30
1.28
1.26
1.24
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00
WATER CONTENT(%)

Fig 3.2 Light compaction curve

Maximum dry density (MDD) =14.1kN/m3
Optimum moisture content (OMC) =20%

Modified proctor test

1.7

1.68

1.66
DRYDENSITY (kN/m3)

1.64

1.62

1.6

1.58

1.56

1.54
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
WATER CONTENT(%)

Fig 3.3 water content Vs dry density curve

Maximum dry density (MDD) =16.7kN/m3

Optimum moisture content (OMC) =30%

17
Coefficient of Consolidation
The graphical construction suggested by Taylor (1948) has been made use of for computing
CV Taylor developed a procedure for evaluating Cv, using the square root of time. These data
were plotted in Fig 3.4: Usually a straight line can be drawn through the data points in the
initial part of the compression curve. The line is projected backward to zero time to define zero
time. The common point at R0 may be slightly lower than the initial dial reading (at zero time)
observed in the laboratory due to immediate compression of the 1.15 times as large as
corresponding values on the first line. The intersection of this second line and the laboratory
curve defines R90 and is the point of 90% consolidation. Its time is T90.

800 kPa
2360

2340

2320
settlement in mm( 10-3)

2300

2280

2260

2240

2220

2200

2180
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
time (√t) min

Fig 3.4 Time vs settlement curve for black cotton soil

Coefficient of consolidation signifies the rate at which saturated clay undergoes 1- dimensional
analysis when subjected to increase in pressure. Coefficient of consolidation was measured in
cm2/sec. From the above graph √𝑡90 =4 minute consolidation test is carried under double
drainage conditions.so drainage path is=1.171 mm. From the above data cv =33.9cm2/sec.

18
Compression index
Compression index curve was plotted stress Vs void ratio. Stress was expressed in kN/m2.
Compression indices for untreated and treated enzyme for different curing period discussed
below. The compression index of the untreated soil is 0.339, which decreases on treatment with
Terazyme
Untreated soil

Compression index
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
void ratio

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
1 10 100 1000 10000
stress (kPa)

Figure 3.5 compression index curve of untreated soil

From void ratio vs. log (𝜎) the coefficient of compressibility =0.335

3.12TERAZYME ENZYME
Terazyme is a natural enzyme. Terazyme was prepared from molasses from fermentation
process. Terazyme is a nontoxic, eco-friendly non-flammable material. Generally chemical
products stored with care. In case of Terazyme no need of special care. While handling
Terazyme product no gloves were required. The use of Terazyme in the construction of base
and sub-base structures removes the need5for the use of a sand/gravel mix, soling or water
bound macadam in the construction4of road structures. The base and sub-base7constructed with
Terazyme are built up immediately from the sub-grade level. When compared to
conventional2structures Terazyme constructed structures showing a much greater flexural
strength5and a higher CBR % than the conventional structures.

19
 Table3.2 properties of Terazyme

S.NO PROPERTY VALUE OR DESCRIPTION

1 Identity(appeared on label) N-zyme

2 Specific gravity 1.05

3 pH value 3.50

4 Appearance/Odour Dark Brown liquid/ Non-obnoxious

5 Hazardous components None

6 Boiling point 1000c

7 Evaporation rate Same as water

8 Solubility in water Complete

9 Melting point Liquid

10 Reactivity data Stable

11 Materials to avoid Caustics and strong bases

The soil was mixed with different dosages of enzyme for different prefixing periods such as 7,
14, 21, 28 and 60 days. With enzymatic soil tests to be performed to know the suitability of
enzyme. The dosage of the enzyme was calculated as follows.

Dry density of the present investigated soil was 14.1 kN/m3. Density was defined as the ratio
between weight to volume. Asper this
Dry density =weight/volume from this
Weight =volume x dry density
According to manufacture suggested that the Terazyme dosage for 2 m3 to 3m3 .to determine
the optimum dosage following dosages are used for conducting test.
From the literature study the dosage were calculated as follows.

For Dosage 1

2005ml for 3.5 m3 of soil = 1.41 x 3.5 x 1000 = 49355 kg of soil

For 1 kg = 0.040 ml of Enzyme

For Dosage 2

200[ml for 3.0 m3 of7soil = 1.41x 3.0 x 1000 = 4230 kg of soil

20
For 1 kg = 0.047 ml of Enzyme

For Dosage 3
200[ml for 2.5 m3 of7soil = 1.41 x 2.5 x 1000 = 3525 kg of soil

For 1 kg = 0.056 ml of Enzyme

For Dosage 4
200[ml for 2.0 m3 of7soil =1.41 x 2 x1000 =2820 kg of soil
For Dosage 5
200[ml for 1.5 m3 of7soil =1.41 x 1.5 x1000 =2115 kg of soil
For 1 kg = 0.094 ml of Enzyme

21
 CHAPTER4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Varying quantities of stabilizers can cause different effect in the same soil sample.
Insufficient quantity of Enzyme (Terazyme) may lead to less stabilization of the soil where as
excess quantities may result the stabilization ineffective and uneconomical. Hence, to
determine the optimum quantity of Enzyme for best results, UCS, Swell pressure, consistency
limit tests were conducted on each of the soil samples with varying quantity of Enzyme
(Terazyme).

4.1 CONSISTENCY LIMITS

The effect of Enzyme at different dosage on index properties (Liquid limit, Plastic limit and
Plasticity index) of investigating soils have been presented in Table 4.1. From this table 4.1 it
is observed that liquid limit decreases marginally and plastic limit also decreases marginally.
Terazyme is found to be insignificant for improving consistency limits.

Table 4.1 Consistency limits of enzymatic soil

Dosage Enzyme dosage Liquid limit (%) Plastic limit (%) Plasticity index
number
0 Un treated 83.50 35.54 47.96
Black cotton soil 7 days 14 days 7 days 14 days 7 days 14 days
1 200 ml/3.0 m3 82.80 81.50 35.00 35.00 47.80 46.50
2 200 ml/3.0 m3 82.10 80.50 34.20 33.50 47.90 47.00
3 200 ml/2.5 m3 80.20 80.10 34.40 33.00 45.80 47.00
4 200 ml/2.0 m3 80.00 79.00 34.50 32.00 45.50 47.00
5 200 ml/1.5 m3 79.00 77.00 34.30 31.50 44.70 45.50

22
4.2UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (UCS)

For tests of specimen of soil– Terazyme mixtures, specimens were prepared by

thoroughly mixing the required quantity of soil and Terazyme as per preselected proportion in
dry state and then calculated quantity of water to be sprinkled and mixed thoroughly to get a
homogeneous and uniform mixture of soil and Terazyme, and the test results obtained are
discussed as follows.
Unconfined compressive strength of black cotton was evaluated by stabilization with
variable dosages of enzyme for 0, 7, 14, 21, 28 and 60 days curing. The specimens were
prepared and kept in desiccator to retain moisture of the sample so that reaction between soil
particle and enzyme would be continued. Numbers of samples were tested with different
dosage of enzyme i.e., 200 ml for 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5 m3. The results of the UCS tests for
natural and treated soil compacted at maximum dry density and optimum moisture content

Fig 4.1 Experimental setup for UCS

23
 Fig 4.2 Failure pattern of the specimen

Table 4.2 UCS of black cotton soil with curing period

UCS of soil in (kPa) for period of treatment

Dosages
Dosage
0 day 7 days 14 days 21 days 28 days 56 days
number
Curing curing curing curing curing curing
0 Un Treated 71
1 200 ml/3.5 m3 96 120 136 145 165 224
2 200 ml/3.0 m3 113 131 135 154 184 242
3 200 ml/2.5 m3 117 139 167 177 212 272
4 200 ml/2.0 m3 121 186 212 224 277 313
5 200 ml/1.5 m3 125 173 201 211 248 262

24
4.2.1 Effect of 200 ml/3.5m3 Enzyme on unconfined compressive strength of
black cotton soil
The effect on unconfined compressive strength with curing period of 0, 7, 14, 21, 28 and 60
days for addition of 200 ml/3.5m3 Terazyme dosage were illustrated in this section. Below fig
4.3 shows the effect of Terazyme on the stress-strain behaviour of the black cotton soil
specimens tested for UCS. From the Fig 4.3 we observe that, the treated black cotton soil
specimens failed at a stress of 96, 120, 136, 145, 165 and 224 kPa for 0, 7, 14, 21, 28 and 60
days curing respectively. The 200 ml/3m3 Terazyme dosage treated soil specimen failed at an
optimum stress 224 kPa at 60 days curing period where curing has positive effect on unconfined
compressive strength (qu).

200 ml/3.5 m3
250

200

o days
150
stress(kPa)

7 days
14 days

100 21 days
28 days
60 days
50

0
0 2 4 6 8
strain(%)

Fig 4.3 Variation in UCS of 200 ml/3.5 m3 enzyme treated BC soil.

25
4.2.2 Effect of 200 ml/3.0m3 Enzyme on unconfined compressive strength of
black cotton soil
The effect on unconfined compressive strength with curing period of 0, 7, 14, 21, 28 and 60
days for addition of 200 ml/2m3 Enzyme are illustrated in this topic. Fig 4.4 shows the effect
of enzymes on the stress-strain behaviour of the black cotton soil specimens tested for UCS.
(i) From the fig 4.4 we observe that, the treated black cotton soil specimens failed at a
stress of 113, 131, 135, 154, 184 and 242 kPa for 0, 7, 14, 21, 28 and 60 days curing
respectively.

200 ml/3 m3

300

250

0 days
200
7 days
stress(kPa)

14 days
150
21 days

100 28 days
60 days

50

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
strain(%)

Fig 4.4 Variation in UCS of 200 ml/3.0 m3 enzyme treated BC soil.

26
4.2.3 Effect of 200 ml/2.5m3 Enzyme on unconfined compressive strength of
black cotton soil
The effect on unconfined compressive strength with curing period of 0, 7, 14, 21, 28
and 60 days for addition of 200 ml/2.5m3 Enzyme are illustrated in this topic. Fig 4.5 shows
the effect of enzymes on the stress-strain behaviour of the black cotton soil specimens tested
for UCS.
(i) From the Fig 4.5 we observe that, the treated black cotton soil specimens failed at a
stress of 117, 139, 167, 177, 212 and 272 kPa for 0, 7, 14, 21, 28 and 60 days curing
respectively.

200 ml/2.5 m3
300

250

200

0 days
stress(kPa)

150 7 days
14 days
21 days
100 28 days
60 days

50

0
0 2 4 6 8 10

strain(%)

Fig 4.5 Variation in UCS of 200 ml/2.5 m3 enzyme treated BC soil.

27
4.2.4 Effect of 200 ml/2m3 Enzyme on unconfined compressive strength of
black cotton soil
The effect on unconfined compressive strength with curing period of 0, 7, 14, 21, 28
and 60 days for addition of 200 ml/2m3 Enzyme are illustrated in this topic. Fig 4.6 shows the
effect of enzymes on the stress-strain behaviour of the black cotton soil specimens tested for
UCS.
(i) From the Fig 4.6 we observe that, the treated black cotton soil specimens failed at a stress
of 121, 186, 212, 224, and 277 and 313 kPa for 0, 7, 14, 21, 28 and 60 day’s curing period
respectively.

200 ml/2 m3
350

300

250

0 days
stress(kPa)

200
7 days
14 days
150
21 days
28 days
100
60 days

50

0
0 2 4 6 8 10

strain(%)

Fig 4.6 Variation in UCS of 200 ml/2 m3 enzyme treated BC soil.

28
4.2.5 Effect of 200 ml/1.5m3 Enzyme on unconfined compressive strength of
black cotton soil
The effect on unconfined compressive strength with curing period of 0, 7, 14, 21, 30
and 60 days for addition of 200 ml/1.5m3 Enzyme are illustrated in this topic. Fig 4.7 shows
the effect of enzymes on the stress-strain behaviour of the black cotton soil specimens tested
for UCS.
From the Fig 4.7 we observe that, the treated black cotton soil specimens failed at a stress
of 125, 173, 201, 211, 248 and 262 kPa for 0, 7, 14, 21,30 and 60 days curing respectively.

200 ml/1.5 m3
300

250

200
0 days
stress(kPa)

150 7 days
14 days
21 days
100
28 days
60 days
50

0
0 2 4 6 8

strain(%)

Fig 4.7 Variation in UCS of 200 ml/1.5 m3 enzyme treated BC soil.

29
4.2.6 Effect of different dosage of Terazyme on UCS values for different
curing period

Fig 4.8 shows the UCS results of black cotton soil for different curing periods with
different dosage of Terazyme. Fig 4.8 shows uniform increment in UCS along with increase in
curing period, for untreated soil, UCS value increases as curing period increases up to 60 days
for dosage number 1 and 2 there is uniform increase in UCS value along with curing period,
and dosage number 3 and 4 shows similar trend along with curing period, strength gains have
been much improved for dosage number 3 and 4 compared to dosage 1 and 2.

350

300

250
strength in (kpa)

200 ml/3.5 m3 dosage

200 200 ml/3.0 m3
200 ml/2.5 m3
200 ml/2.0 m3
150
200 ml/1.5 m3

100

50
0 20 40 60 80
curing period (days)

Fig 4.8 Variation of UCS for different curing period on black cotton soil

For zero days of curing with different dosage (1, 2, 3, 4 and 5) indicates the marginal change
in the UCS value and similarly for dosage 1 to 2 and 3 to 4 increases in UCS value is not
significant for curing period of 7, 14, 21 and 30 days of curing. From the figure 4.8 it can be
concluding that for curing period of 60 days is more significant for all dosage of Terazyme.

30
 350

300

250
0 days
200
ucs(kPa)

7 days
14 days
150
21 days

100 28 days
60 days
50

0
200 ml/3.5 m3 200 ml/3 m3 200 ml/2.5 m3 200 ml/2 m3 200 ml/1.5 m3
terazyme dosage

Fig 4.9 Bar chart showing variation of UCS for different curing period on black cotton soil

Strength variation
400
Strength increament in percentage

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0
200 ml/3.5 m3 200 ml/3.0 m3 200 ml/2.5 m3 200 ml/2.0 m3 200 ml/1.5 m3
terazyme dosage

Fig 4.10 Strength increment in percentage

31
4.3 SWELLING PRESSURE (CONSOLIDOMETER METHOD)
Expansive soils are known to have great swelling ability because of the presence of swelling
dominant clay minerals such as the montmorillonite group. Table 4.2 shows the swelling
pressure results of black cotton soil for different dosage of Enzyme. The swelling pressure for
untreated soil is 180 kN/m2, as addition of enzymes (Terazyme) with different dosage lowers
the swelling pressure to 160 and 40 kN/m2 for 7 days and 14 days curing period. This implies
that as enzyme is added the lesser the swelling pressure of the compacted soil and hence the
more stable the material is. After adding the enzyme, it is also consistent that swelling potential
decreases with the amount of stabilizer.

Table 4.2 Swell pressure test of black cotton soil with different enzyme dosage

Dosage number Enzyme dosage Swelling pressure (kN/m2)

0 untreated 180
1 200 ml/2.5 m3 7 days 14days 30days
160 120 52
2 200 ml/3.5 m3 162 127 64

Swelling pressure
180
160
Swelling pressure (kPa)

140
120
100
7 days
80
14 days
60
30 days
40
20
0
200 ml/2.5 m3 200 ml/3.5 m3
Dosage

Fig 4.11 Variation in swelling pressure for different curing period

32
4.4 ENZYME TREATED SOIL:
Enzyme was added to the soil and compacted at max dry density at optimum moisture content.
The soil was under curing conditions, there is no further loss of moisture content. Below fig
4.12 and fig 4.13 were 7 days curing period

500 kPa
2220

2210

2200
settlement in mm( 10-3)

2190

2180

2170

2160

2150

2140

2130
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
time (√t) min

Fig 4.12 Coefficient of consolidation curve of an enzymatic soil for a dosage of 3

From the above graph √𝑡90 =9.5 min

The consolidation test is carried under double drainage conditions.

drainage path is=13.145 mm

From the above data cv =2.7 cm2/sec.

33
Settlement in mm(10-3)

time (√t) min

Fig 4.13 Coefficient of consolidation curve of an enzymatic soil for a dosage 1

From the above graph √𝑡90 =5.45 min

The consolidation test is carried under double drainage conditions.

drainage path is=13.145 mm

From the above data cv =27 cm2/sec.

34
 14 days curing period:
In similar fashion Terazyme is added to the soil and compacted to MDD value, kept for 14 days
curing such that no loss of moisture content. For 14 days’ experiment program corresponding
graph as shown below.
settlement in mm
( 10-3)

Time (√t) min

Fig 4.14 Coefficient of consolidation curve
(√t) min of an enzymatic soil for a dosage 3

From the above graph √𝑡90 =9.948 min

The consolidation test is carried under double drainage conditions.

So drainage path is=12.43 mm

From the above data cv =2.2 cm2/sec.
From above figures it is observed that coefficient of consolidation decreases with the addition
of enzyme.

35
Settlement in mm

time (√t) min

Fig 4.15 Coefficient of consolidation curve of an enzymatic soil for a dosage 1

From the above graph √𝑡90 =4.5 min

The consolidation test is carried under double drainage conditions.

The drainage path is=13.1725 mm

From the above data cv =12.1 cm2/sec.
From above figures it is observed that coefficient of consolidation decreases with the addition
of enzyme.

36
30 days curing period:
In similar fashion Terazyme is added to the soil and compacted to MDD value, kept for 17 days
curing such that no loss of moisture content. For 14 days’ experiment program corresponding
graph as shown below.

Fig 4.16 Coefficient of consolidation curve of an enzymatic soil for a dosage 3

From the above graph √𝑡90 =7.745 min

The consolidation test is carried under double drainage conditions.

So drainage path is=9.035 mm

From the above data cv =0.583 cm2/sec.
From above figures it is observed that coefficient of consolidation increases with the curing
period.

37
Settlement in mm

time (√t) min

Fig 4.17 Coefficient of consolidation curve of an enzymatic soil for a dosage1

From the above graph √𝑡90 =15 min

The consolidation test is carried under double drainage conditions.

So drainage path is=13.11 mm

From the above data cv =1 cm2/sec.
From above data it is observed that coefficient of consolidation decreases with the addition of
enzyme.
Table 4.3 Coefficient of consolidation values of stabilized soil

Sl DOSAGE Coefficient of consolidation (cm2/sec)

no
Untreated 33.9
Curing period, days 7 14 30
1
200 ml/2.5 m 3 2.7 2.2 0.583
2 200ml/3.5 m 3 27 12.1 1

38
Compression index:
Compression indices for untreated and treated enzyme for different curing period
discussed below. The compression index of the untreated soil is 0.339, which decreases on
treatment with Terazyme

With enzyme: The soil is treated with enzyme for dosage 200 ml/2.5 m3 and for dosage of
200 ml/3.5 m3 for 7, 14 and 30 days were tested. For dosage 200 ml/2.5 m3 7 days’ compression
index is 0.25. For dosage of 200 ml/3.5 m3 7 days’ compression index is 0.27. The graphs
corresponding to compression index as shown below.

7 days
0.9
0.8
void ratio

0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
1 10 100 1000 10000

stress (kpa)
Fig 4.18 Compresiion index curve for a dosage 3

7 days
0.9
0.8
void ratio

0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800

stress (kPa)
Fig 4.19 Compresiion index curve for a dosage 1

39
 14 days
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
void ratio

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
1 10 100 1000 10000

stress (kPa)

Fig 4.20 Compresiion index curve for a dosage 3

14 days
1.2

1
void ratio

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
1 10 100 1000

stress (kPa)

Fig 4.21 Compresiion index curve for a dosage 1

For 14 days the compression index corresponding to dosage 200 ml/2.5 m3 is 0.199 and for
dosage of 200 ml/3.5 m3 is 0.23.

40
 30 days

compression index

0.4
0.35
0.3
void ratio

0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
1 10 100 1000 10000

stress (kPa)

Fig 4.22 Compresiion index curve for a dosage 3

30 days
0.6

0.5
void ratio

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
1 10 100 1000 10000

stress (kPa)

Fig 4.23 Compresiion index curve for a dosage 1

41
For 30 days the compression index is 0.059. For dosage 1 the compression index was 0.146.
From the above data it is clear that with curing period the compression index decreases. So the
enzyme treatment is considerable in reducing swelling activity and consolidation activities.

42
 CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK

The present research work was done to improve the geotechnical properties of black cotton
soil. To improve the geotechnical properties a bio enzyme called Terazyme had been used. The
Terazyme enzyme was mixed to the soil for different dosage and different curing period were
tested. From the experimental investigation and results obtained, the following conclusions are
drawn.
1. Untreated black cotton soil has 83.50% liquid limit. After adding the enzyme there is
slight change in liquid limit. The overall plasticity index is in between 43.00-48.00
2. The atterberg limits of the treated enzymatic soil not with in the specified limits. Since
the enzymatic soil having liquid limit in the range of 83.00%-79.00%. plasticity index
is in between 43.00-48.00. The values are not satisfying the subgrade of a pavement.
So it is unsuitable to use as sub grade material of the pavement
3. The unconfined compressive strength of enzyme treated soil indicates good
improvement with curing period
4. The coefficient of consolidation decreases with curing period. However, there is slight
downfall for first week curing period to second week curing period
5. The compression index values decreasing with curing period

5.2 A scope for future work

The following aspects may be further investigated
1. Effect of some other additives like fly ash and lime with enzyme product
2. Effect of different bio enzyme products
3. Permeability, shear strength and CBR have to be conducted
4. In the present research work for only black cotton soil was studied. There need to
be check the enzyme suitability for different soils with different environmental
conditions

43
 REFERENCES

1. Agarwal, P. & Kaur, S., 2014. Effect of Bio-Enzyme Stabilization on Unconfined

Compressive Strength of Expansive Soil. International Journal of Research in
Engineering and Technology, 03(05), pp.2319–2322.
2. Ali, F., 2012. Stabilization of residual soils using liquid chemical. Electronic Journal
of Geotechnical Engineering, 17 B, pp.115–126.
3. Aye, N.T. & Than M.S, 2015. Experiemental research on the strength behavior of
Enzyme –Treated soils. International Journal of Scientific Engineering, Technology
Research, 3(10), pp.1990–1995.
4. Dandin, S. & Hiremath, S., 2014. A Study on Some Geotechnical Properties of Bio-
Enzyme. Proceedings of Indian Geotechnical Conference, pp.20–26.
5. Greeshma, N.E., Lamanto, T.S., chandrakaran, S. & Sankar, N., 2014. Enzyme
Stabilization of high Liquid Limit Clay. Electronic Journal of Geotechnical
engineering, 19(2014), pp.6990–6994.
6. Isaac, K.P., Biju, P.B. & A.Veeraragavan, 2003. Soil Stabilization Using Bio-enzymes
for Rural Roads. IRC Seminar: Integrated Development of Rural and Arterial Road
Networks for Socio-Economic development, New Delhi, (December).
7. Khan, T.A. & Taha, M.R., 2015. Effect of Three Bioenzymes on Compaction ,
Consistency Limits , and Strength Characteristics of a Sedimentary Residual Soil.
Advances in Materials Science and Engineering, pp.2-7.
8. Mgangira, M.B., 2009. Evaluation Of The Effects Of Enzyme-Based Liquid Chemical
Stabilizers On Subgrade Soils . (July), pp.192–199.
9. Milburn, J.P. & Parsons, R.L., 2004. Final Report Performance of Soil Stabilization
Agents K-Tran a Cooperative Transportation Research Program Between : Kansas
Department of Transportation Kansas State University.
10. Narasihma, A.V., penchalaiah, B., chittaranjan, M., & Ramesh, P., 2014.
Compressibility Behaviour of Black Cotton Soil Admixed with Lime and Rice-Husk
Ash. International Journal of innovative Research in science, engineering and
technology , 3(4), pp.11473–11480.
11. peng, H., Haitao, S.U., Xinping, Z. & Jun, W., 2011. An Experiemental Comparsion
Of Compressive Strengths Of soils Stabilized with enzyme and quick lime . Advanced
materials research, vol 280, pp.9-12.
12. Rajoria, V. & Kaur, S., 2014. A Review on Stabilization of Soil Using Bio-Enzyme.

44
 International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology, 03(01), pp.75–78.
13. Raju, M.N.V.S.N., Prasad, D.S. V & Kumar, M.A., 2015. Evaluation of the Properties
of Fly Ash on Strength and Swelling Aspect of an Expansive Soil. International Journal
of Applied Research, 1(6), pp.34–39.
14. Ramesh, H.N., Krishnaiah, A.J. & Shet, S.S., 2013. Consolidation Behaviour of Black
Cotton Soil and Mine Tailings Mixtures Treated With Lime. Proceedings of Indian
Geotechnical Conference , pp.1–4.
15. Ramesh, H.N. & sagar, S.R., 2015. Effect of Drying On the Strength Properties of
Terazyme Treated Expansive and Non-Expansive Soils. Proceedings of Indian
Geotechnical Conference, pp.20–26.
16. Saini, V. & Vaishnava, P., 2015. Soil stabilization by using terazyme. International
Journal of Advances in Engineering & Technology, 8(4), pp.566–573.
17. Sen, J. & Singh, J.P., 2015. Stabilization of Black Cotton Soil using Bio- Enzyme for a
Highway Material. International Journal of innovative Research in science,
engineering and technology, 4(12) pp.12453–12459.
18. Shankar, A.U.R., Rai, H.K. & Mithanthaya, R.I., 2009. Bio-Enzyme stabilised laterite
soil as a highway material. Journal of the Indian Roads Congress. Paper No. 553, (553),
pp.143–151.
19. Stan, C. & Ciobanu, V., 2012. Using enzymatic emulsions to reinforce road layers.
Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Brasov, Series II: Forestry, Wood Industry,
Agricultural Food Engineering, 5(1), pp.109–114.
20. sureka, N. & Gangadhara, S., 2010. Swelling properties of bioenzyme treated expansive
soil. International Journal of Engineering Studies, 2(2), pp.155–159.
21. Taha, M.R. & A. Khan, T., 2013. Recent Experimental Studies in Soil Stabilization
with Bio-Enzymes – A Review. Ejge, 18, pp.3881–3894.
22. Velasquez, R., Marasteanu, M.O., Hozalski, R. & Clyne, T., 2005. Final Report on
Preliminary Laboratory Investigation of Enzyme solutions as a soil stabilizer ,
University of Minnesota.
23. Venkatasubramanian, C. & Dhinakaran, G., 2011. Effect of bio-enzymatic soil
stabilisation on unconfined compressrve strength and California Bearing Ratio. Journal
of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 6(5), pp.295–298.

45