Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e15

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Application of lignin-based by-product stabilized silty soil in highway

subgrade: A eld investigation
Tao Zhang a, *, Guojun Cai b, Songyu Liu b
a
Faculty of Engineering, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, China
b
Institute of Geotechnical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, Jiangsu 210096, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Lignin is a by-product of paper and timber industry, and it has not been fully utilized in both developed
Received 21 September 2016 and developing countries. Improper disposal or storage of lignin is not only a waste of natural resources,
Received in revised form but also posing signicant risk to public health and the environment. Sustainable reuse options for lignin
1 December 2016
in civil engineering infrastructures, such as road embankments and dam foundations, have been recently
Accepted 1 December 2016
Available online xxx
evaluated by laboratory testing. However, up to now studies on the actual led performance of lignin in
stabilizing silty soils in highway subgrade have been noticed to be quite limited. With this in view, a eld
trial was carried out to verify the viability of using lignin stabilized silty soil as a highway subgrade
Keywords:
Lignin
course material. Traditional soil stabilizer, quicklime, was selected as a control chemical mixture in the
Industrial by-product eld trial for comparison purposes. The construction procedures of the subgrade silty soil stabilized by
Stabilization lignin and quicklime in eld Sections were presented. A series of eld tests, including California Bearing
Field test Ratio (CBR) test, resilient modulus (Ep) test, Benkelman beam deection test, and dynamic cone pene-
Silty soil trometer (DCP) test were carried out after the subgrade construction to investigate the effects of the
curing time and additive content on the mechanical properties and bearing capacity of the stabilized silt.
In addition, moisture content and compaction degree tests were conducted to evaluate the quality of the
compacted subgrade soils. The test results indicate that at the bottom zone of the lled soil layers with
96% degree of compaction, the 12% lignin stabilized silt exhibits superior mechanical performances (i.e.,
higher value of CBR and Ep, and lower values of resilient deection (Hr) and DCP Index) than the 8%
quicklime stabilized silt after 15 days of curing. Under the same additive content (i.e., 8%), the bearing
capacity of lignin stabilized silt is slightly lower relative to the quicklime stabilized one. The eld trial
results reveal that as a stabilizer of the subgrade soil, lignin has negligible environmental inuences and
induces low construction costs. The use of lignin as a stabilization chemical mixture for silty soil may be
one of the viable answers to the reuse of biobased organic by-product in civil engineering. The outcome
of this study is of great signicance for the development of nontraditional, cost-effective, and environ-
mentally friendly soil stabilizer in solidication/stabilization technology.
2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Vast deposits of silty soils are widely distributed in Eastern
China, and they have posed great challenges in the design and
construction of transport infrastructure projects such as highway
embankments (Cai et al., 2011; Zhang et al., 2015). Typically, the
silty soils exhibit poor engineering properties, i.e., low strength,
low stiffness, and difcult to compaction, making them not allowed
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: zhangtao_seu@163.com (T. Zhang).
to be used directly in embankment (Zhu and Liu, 2008). Silty soils
beneath foundations can easily cause excessive settlements, unac-
ceptable lateral movements upon trafc loading, and loss of bearing
capacity, if effective ground improvement is not implemented.
Among various ground improvement techniques, chemical stabi-
lization is one of the effective and well-practiced methods to
improve the engineering properties of the silty soils. Chemical
mixtures, such as Portland cement, quicklime, and yash, have
been utilized extensively to enhance the strength, stiffness, and
compressibility properties of the problem soils by earlier re-
searchers (Bell, 1996; Lo and Wardani, 2002; Petry and Little, 2002;
Horpibulsuk et al., 2003, 2011; Puppala et al., 2004; Du et al., 2016).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.002
0959-6526/ 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: Zhang, T., et al., Application of lignin-based by-product stabilized silty soil in highway subgrade: A eld
investigation, Journal of Cleaner Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.002
2 T. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e15
However, these traditional chemical stabilizers are not always
readily accepted in engineering construction because (i) cement
and quicklime are nonrenewable resources, during their produc-
tion a large amount of energy (5000 MJ/t cement) are consumed,
and massive greenhouse gas are released (0.95 t CO2/t cement)
(Higgins, 2007); (ii) stabilized soils treated by above mentioned
chemical mixtures commonly possess lower water/nutrients
holding capacity compared with raw soils, which poses a threat on
the growth of vegetation and the safety of groundwater (Mitchell
and Soga, 1976; Sherwood, 1993; Rollings and Burkes, 1999; Chen
et al., 2014); (iii) a brittle performance of the stabilized soils is
exhibited, which affects the stability of structures, especially under
trafc or impact loading (Horpibulsuk et al., 2004; Sariosseiri and
Muhunthan, 2009; Okyay and Dias, 2010). To overcome these
problems, it is necessary to develop an environmentally friendly
and cost-effective chemical additive for silty soils. As the re-
quirements of sustainable development, the use of industrial by-
product for soil stabilization has also been strongly encouraged.
Lignin is generated after extracting valuable ber and wood pulp
from plant biomass. As a massive by-product of the paper and
timber industry, lignin has shown promising aspects for stabilizing
both cohesive and non-cohesive soils (Karol, 2003; Indraratna et al.,
2012; Zhang et al., 2015, 2016; Cai et al., 2016). It is an organic
polymer compound that consists of both hydrophilic groups and
hydrophobic groups (Chen, 2004). Approximately 50 million tons of
lignin-based by-products were produced from paper
manufacturing industry worldwide annually (Angenent et al.,
2004). Over the past decades, more than 95% of the lignin-based
by-products were directly discharged into rivers in the form of
black liquid or burned after enrichment in China (Jiang, 2008; Yao
et al., 2009). This increasing large quantity of discharged lignin
by-products has result in serious environmental pollution. To
improve the disposal efciency, lignin as a soil stabilizer has been
studied and implemented. Due to the large lengths and widths
geometries of highway embankments, using lignin stabilized soils
as a ll material in subgrade construction would expend large
quantities of industrial by-product and reduce the usage of con-
ventional nonrenewable mineral aggregates. Compared to tradi-
tional chemical additives, lignin is an environmentally friendly,
non-corrosive, and non-toxic chemical that can effectively
enhance the strength and stiffness of the problematic soils (Chen
et al., 2014). Furthermore, reuse application of lignin in soil stabi-
lization has been identied as a sustainable path to rapidly
consume this growing production (Kim et al., 2011).
The viability of lignin as a chemical additive to treat geo-
materials has been studied by examining compaction and
compressibility characteristics, swelling, moisture susceptibility,
strength, durability, and erosion resistance (Puppala and
Hanchanloet, 1999; Chen and Indraratna, 2014; Alazigha et al.,
2016). The improved engineering properties of lignin stabilized
clayey soils and silty sands have been reported by Santoni et al.
(2002), Tingle and Santoni (2003), and Ceylan et al. (2010). For
example, Tingle and Santoni (2003) indicated that lignin stabilized
soils exhibited comparatively higher compressive strength than
that of other nontraditional chemical additives. Zhang et al. (2016)
had conducted a systematical laboratory tests to investigate the
physical and engineering properties of the problematic silty soil
stabilized with by-product lignin, and stated that lignin was more
effective than lime in soil stabilization in terms of unconned
compressive strength, modulus, and moisture stability. These
studies also demonstrated that the addition of lignin signicantly
enhanced the durability and erosion resistance of virgin soils. Vinod
et al. (2010) and Cai et al. (2016) discussed that the formation of
lignin-based cementing materials which coats and bonds soil par-
ticles closely together is the reason for the more stable soil
Please cite this article in press as: Zhang, T., et al., Application of lignin-based by-product stabilized silty soil in highway subgrade: A eld
investigation, Journal of Cleaner Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.002
structure after lignin treatment. Although there have been several
researches on the mechanical properties and erosion characteris-
tics of lignin stabilized soils, these were predominantly carried out
in laboratory scale only. Studies on the eld trials scale to investi-
gate the mechanical performances of lignin stabilized silty soils
have been noticed to be quite limited. In addition, very few as-
sessments have been done with respect to the environmental im-
pacts of using lignin by-product in the stabilization of highway
subgrade soils.
In view of the above, this study is concerned with the benecial
utilization of lignin-based industrial by-product as a silty soil sta-
bilizer. A eld trial was conducted to investigate the bearing ca-
pacity and mechanical performances of the lignin stabilized
highway subgrade silty soil. The traditional soil stabilizer, quick-
lime, was selected as a control chemical mixture in an adjacent test
Section for comparison purpose. A series of eld tests, including
California Bearing Ratio (CBR), resilient modulus (Ep), Benkelman
beam deection, dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP), moisture
content, and degree of compaction tests, were carried out to assess
the strength and stiffness behaviours, and deformation character-
istics of the stabilized silty soil. The effects of curing time, stabilizer
type, and additive content on CBR, Ep, resilient deection (Hr), DCP
Index (DCPI), and penetration resistance (Rs) were systematically
studied. Changes in the degree of compaction and moisture content
in different test Sections were measured by resorting to sand cone
method and oven drying method, respectively. In addition, the
environmental impacts of utilizing lignin and quicklime stabilizers
were investigated by measuring the total concentrations of the
heavy metals within their stabilized silt. The material costs of lignin
and quicklime stabilizations were also estimated and compared.
Based on these results, an effort has been made to ascertain the
viability of using lignin stabilized silty soil as a subgrade course
material. It is believed that such eld investigations would be quite
useful to develop the new environmentally friendly organic soil
stabilizer and reuse lignin based industrial by-product in geotech-
nical engineering.
2. Material and methods
2.1. Site description
The eld tests were performed on Ramp C along the Fu-Jian
Expressway located in Yancheng city, Jiangsu Province, China. The
detailed soil proles of the Ramp C were obtained by conducting a
static cone penetration test at CK 1 088 as per ASTM (2005)
Fig. 1. Soil proles of the eld trial site from the static cone penetration test at
CK1088.
 T. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e15
D3441, as shown in Fig. 1. It can be observed that the in-situ soil in
Ramp C is predominantly composed of silt clays and silts. The
clayey soils were found beneath the ground surface approximately
15 m. Fig. 2 presents the plan view of the eld test Section in Ramp
C, which was devided into three Sections, Section A (CK0800 to
CK0850, 50 m in length), Section B (CK0850 to CK0899, 49 m
in length), and Section C (CK0899 to CK0950, 51 m in length).
Fig. 3 shows the cross-sectional layout of Ramp C. The width of
pavement and subgrade base are 15.0 m and 24.5 m, respectively.
According to the difference in compaction degree, the subgrade was
devided into two zones, namely, 96% compaction degree zone and
94% compaction degree zone.
2.2. Testing materials
In all three Sections, the highway subgrade was lled with soils
excavated from the nearby construction site, which is approxi-
mately 150 m away from the eld test site. The excavated soil was
stockpiled on the site under natural climatic conditions for about
one week prior to compaction or stabilization. Eight samples from
the led site were taken to laboratory for engineering property
testing. Table 1 lists the basic engineering and physical properties
of the lled subgrade soil. The Atterberg limits of samples were
measured as per ASTM (2010) D4318. Based on the Unied Soil
Classication System (ASTM (2011a) D2487), the subgrade soil is
classied as low plasticity silt (ML). In addition, the X-ray uores-
cence analysis was also conducted on the lled soil, and the results
were listed in Table 2. It reveals that the lled soil contains 63.20%
of silicon dioxide (SiO2), 12.53% of aluminum oxide (Al2O3), 6.41% of
calcium oxide (CaO), and 2.39% magnesium oxide (MgO).
The 12% lignin, 8% lignin, and 8% quicklime additives (as speci-
ed by the project designers) were employed to stabilize the lled
subgrade silt in Section A, Section B, and Section C, respectively. The
designed contents of lignin and quicklime were calculated by dry
weight of the lled soil. The used lignin, exhibited as a yellow-
brown water-soluble powder with a smell of fragrance, is a pro-
cessed waste by-product from a paper mill in Henan province,
China. This additive was the same as that used by the authors in
previous studies (Cai et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2016), and its basic
physicochemical properties and microstructure are shown in
Fig. S1 and Fig. S2. The used lignin is composed of carbon (C),
Fig. 2. Plan view of eld test Sections for lignin and quicklime stabilized soil in Ramp
C, Fu-Jian Expressway: Section A (12% lignin), Section B (8% lignin), and Section C (8%
quicklime).
Please cite this article in press as: Zhang, T., et al., Application of lignin-based by-product stabilized silty soil in highway subgrade: A eld
investigation, Journal of Cleaner Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.002
3
oxygen (O), sodium (Na), and sulfur (S). Lignin is a kind of organic
polymer compound documented by previous researchers. It con-
tains a number of hydrophilic groups including sulfonate, phenylic
hydroxyl, as well as alcoholic hydroxyl, and hydrophobic groups
including the carbon chain as shown in Fig. S2. The chemical
properties of the locally produced quicklime powder used in this
investigation are presented in Table 2. The used quicklime was
classied as high-calcium lime based on ASTM (2011b) C51. Fig. 4
shows the compaction curves of natural lled soil, lignin and
quicklime stabilized soil with different additive contents, as tested
via the modied Proctor test (China MOT (2007) JTG E40-2007).
The modied Proctor test (modied effort 2687.0 kJ/m3)
employed in this study is to better represent the true eld condi-
tions of subgrade soils compacted by heavy rollers. It is evident
from the Figure that the maximum dry density (rdmax) of lignin
stabilized silt is much higher than that of natural silt, which is
mainly due to the pore lled by lignin. In addition, the optimum
moisture content (womc) of lignin stabilized silt is lower than that of
its natural counterpart. However, the compaction characteristics of
quicklime stabilized silt are much different from those of lignin
stabilized silt. The reasons for higher womc and lower rdmax of
quicklime stabilized silt are the hydration and pozzolanic reactions,
which would result in considerable consumption of moisture in the
soil and increase in the size of soil particle (Wild et al., 1999;
Horpibulsuk et al., 2012). The womc of 8% lignin, 12% lignin, and
8% quicklime stabilized silt are 11.6%, 14.0%, and 17.5%, respectively.
The reason for the difference in compaction characteristics of lignin
and quicklime stabilized silt can be attributed to the various
chemical compositions of the additives, as shown in Table 2, Fig. S1,
and Fig. S2.
2.3. Construction procedures
Fig. 5 presents the ow chart of the construction process for
lignin stabilized subgrade soils. To intuitionally illustrate the con-
struction produces, Fig. S3 shows the eld photos of the lignin
amended embankment. First, the quality of lower course was
checked, and the construction survey and setting out were con-
ducted for preparing the embankment lling. Then the in-situ silty
soil was placed on the surface of lower course and spread by a dozer
to air-dry under the natural conditions. The lled silty soil was air-
dried until the moisture content reduced from 28.6% to approxi-
mately 16% (see Fig. S3(a)). Simultaneously, the calculated chemical
stabilizers, lignin and quicklime, were prepared and stacked in the
vicinity (see Fig. S3(b) and Fig. S3(c)). The used lignin is with traces
moisture (w < 1%), thus, it can be considered as a dry chemical
material for construction. When the lled soil attained the target
moisture content, the lignin was paved using scrapers (see
Fig. S3(d)). Subsequently, the lignin powder and lled soil were
mixed thoroughly to achieve homogeneity by a dozer (see
Fig. S3(e)). The mixture was then slightly air-dried to the moisture
content of womc-2%. According to the requirements of China MOT
(2000) JTJ 034-2000, the womc is recommended for the construc-
tion of quicklime stabilized soils in highway subgrades. In view of
the capacity of absorbing moisture of lignin in the eld environ-
ment, the 2% moisture content is discounted for lignin stabilized
soils in this eld trial. After that, approximately 25 cme35 cm thick
layer of lignin-silt mixture was leveled for compaction. The primary
compaction was then conducted once with a static roller (20 t).
Subsequently, the enhanced compaction was carried out on the
lled mixtures via a 20 t vibratory roller (see Fig. S3(f)). After four to
six repetitions, the vibratory compaction was stopped and the
designed degree of compaction was attained (96% in this eld
trial). Finally, the static compaction was conducted once again and
the surface of compacted soil layer was smoothed using a scraper
4 T. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e15

Fig. 3. Cross-sectional diagram of the embankment of eld test Sections in Ramp C (the values of embankment height separated by slash represent those at the center of each
Section).

Table 1
Physicochemical properties of lled subgrade soil used in this study.

Property Characteristic

Natural moisture content, wn (%) 28.5

Specic gravity, Gs 2.71
Grain size distribution (%)a
Clay (<0.005 mm) 10.8
Silt (0.005e0.075 mm) 80.1
Sand (0.075e2 mm) 9.1
Liquid limit, wL (%) 32.4
Plasticity limit, wP (%) 23.6
Plasticity index 8.8
Optimum moisture content (%) 16.1
Maximum dry unit weight (gdmax), (kg/m3) 1720
pHb 8.74
a
Measured using a laser particle size analyzer Mastersize 2000.
b
Measured as per ASTM (2013) D4972.

Table 2
Oxide chemistry of lled soil and quicklime tested. Fig. 4. Compaction curves of lignin and quicklime stabilized silt with various additive
Oxide chemistrya Filled soil (%) Quicklime (%) contents.

Silicon oxide (SiO2) 63.20 2.62

Aluminium oxide (Al2O3) 12.53 1.16
trafc loading and rainfall inltration. The eld tests (such as
Calcium oxide (CaO) 6.41 71.23
Ferric oxide (Fe2O3) 3.12 0.74 Benkelman beam test, see Fig. S3(h)) were then conducted on the
Potassium oxide (K2O) 2.46 0.18 stabilized soil with the given curing times. The construction pro-
Magnesium oxide (MgO) 2.39 0.46 cedures of quicklime stabilized lled embankment were almost the
Sodium oxide (Na2O) 2.30 0.20 same with that of lignin stabilized embankment, apart from the
Sulphate oxide (SO3) 0.18 0.13
Phosphorus oxide (P2O5) 0.16 NAc
quicklime stabilized lled soil was air-dried until the moisture
Others 7.25 23.28 content reduced to the womc.
Loss on ignitionb 5.81 24.36 The mechanical performances of both 94IV and 96I layers were
a
Mineral composition was analyzed by X-ray uorescence method using monitored, but only the data of 96I was reported in this paper to
ARL9800XPXRF spectrometry. avoid repetition. In addition, the degree of compaction and mois-
b
Value of loss on ignition is referenced to 950  C. ture content of the stabilized soils were measured as per sand cone
c
Not available. test and oven drying test, respectively. Four points were 0.5 hori-
zontally away from the corresponding DCP testing points, as shown
in Fig. 6. Table 3 shows the measured results of the degree of
(see Fig. S3(g)). The height of the compacted soil layer was also compaction and moisture content of the stabilized soils in both
leveled and controlled by a laser level. 94IV and 96I layers. It can be observed that the average values of
The overlain soil layers (from 94 II to 96 IV in Fig. 3) were degree of compaction for 94IV layer in all Sections are almost more
constructed as per the aforementioned construction procedures. than 94% apart from Section C at 7 days curing (93.6%). The reason
According to the specications stated in the China MOT (2004) JTG for lower value of degree of compaction in Section C is that the
D30-2004, the degree of compaction of the upper layer (0e0.8 m location of this Section is on the ramp curve, which is not conve-
beneath the pavement) must achieve  96%, while the lower layer nient to mechanical compaction. For 96I layer at 15 days of curing,
(0.8e1.5 m beneath the pavement) must achieve  94%. Therefore, the average degree of compaction is obviously higher than the re-
both the upper and lower layers were devided into four layers with quirements stated in the standard. Overall, the compaction char-
96% and 94% degree of compaction, respectively (see Fig. 3). The acteristics of both lignin and quicklime stabilized subgrade soil
designed thickness of each devided layers is approximately 20 cm satisfy the requirements of the China MOT (2004) JTG D30-2004. It
in this study. When the construction of embankment was is noteworthy that the moisture content decreases with an increase
completed, the lignin stabilized lled soil was cured without heavy in curing time in all test Sections. The natural evaporation as well as

Please cite this article in press as: Zhang, T., et al., Application of lignin-based by-product stabilized silty soil in highway subgrade: A eld
investigation, Journal of Cleaner Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.002
 T. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e15 5

Fig. 5. Construction procedure ow chart of the lignin stabilized embankment.

chemical interactions which induced between soil stabilizers and
clay minerals, would consume the moisture in the soils.
2.4. Testing programs
A series of eld tests have been carried out to comprehensively
evaluate the mechanical performances and environmental effect of
the stabilized lled soil in the 96I layer in the Section A, Section B,
and Section C. Moreover, the effectiveness of lignin and quicklime
as stabilizer for silt stabilization was also compared. Due to the
strict requirements of the employer on the construction period and
the in-situ weather conditions, the eld tests were performed 0, 8,
and 15 days after construction. The informations of in-situ weather
conditions during the subgrade lling and eld tests were also
recorded. The temperature, relative humidity, and rainfall precipi-
tation during the period of eld tests are summarized in Table S1.
According to the statistical result of weather conditions, the test site
experienced moderate rainy days at curing times of 3 days and 4
days, and most days during the curing time were sunny weather.
Fig. 6 shows the detailed layouts of the locations of various eld
tests. The in-situ CBR, Ep test, Benkelman beam test, and DCP test
were employed to evaluate the mechanical properties of the sta-
bilized subgrade soil. In this investigation, the CBR test was con-
ducted on subgrade silt, by setting the truck load as 60 kN and
xing the load penetration rate as 1 mm/min, as per China MOT
(2008) JTG E60-2008. The penetration piston length is 200 mm
and the diameter of the surcharge plate is 254 mm. In Section A,
Section B, and Section C, eight testing points on the compacted
subgrade soil layers were set and tested, and the spacing between
these points was set as 2 m, as shown in Fig. 6(a).
The portable falling weight deectometer (PFWD) is a non-
destructive testing device that is used in rapid determination of
the elastic modulus of subgrade soil in this study. The use of PFWD
to pavement evaluation is very popular in road engineering due to
its capacity in obtaining quick estimation of modulus and its con-
venience of operation. The PFWD test was conducted on subgrade
soil layers in accordance with China MOT (2008) JTG E60-2008. The
main technical parameters of PFWD are summarized as follows:
weight of hammer is 10 kg, height of the hammer falling is 90 cm,
and diameter of the surcharge plate is 300 mm. The Ep measured by
PFWD is a dynamic modulus, which could be employed as a su-
perior indicator of the inuence of vehicle loads on subgrade soil
layers. The layout plan of the PFWD testing points is the same as
that of CBR tests presented in Fig. 6(a).
The Benkelman beam tests were carried out to measure the
layer surface deections under a known static load. The test was
conducted as per China MOT (2008) JTG E60-2008, which is
compatible with ASTM (2015) D4695-03. The testing truck with a
load of 100 kN and a tire pressure of 0.7 MPa was employed in this
study. The layout of the Benkelman beam testing points is shown in
Fig. 6(b). The lateral spacing between these testing points was set as
2 m and a total of 20 points were tested in each Section.
DCP test is one of the most versatile methods in determination
of the in-situ engineering properties of subgrade materials in
geotechnical engineering. It is convenient, inexpensive, and pro-
vides accurate data in assessing the bear capacity and compaction
characteristics of subgrade layers and pavements. The DCP equip-
ments are of many types, but all with the same testing principle as
mentioned in previous studies. The used DCP in this study consists
of a 10 kg hammer that drops over a height of 500 mm, and drives a

Please cite this article in press as: Zhang, T., et al., Application of lignin-based by-product stabilized silty soil in highway subgrade: A eld
investigation, Journal of Cleaner Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.002
6 T. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e15

Fig. 6. Schematic diagram of the location of eld tests: (a) CBR and Ep tests; (b) Benkelman beam tests; and (c) DCP tests.

60 cone tip with 40 mm base diameter vertically into the subgrade
layer, as shown in Fig. S4. The number of blow during testing is
recorded with depth of cone penetration. The slope of the pene-
tration curve represents the relationship between number of blows
and depth of penetration at a given linear depth segment, which is
dened as DCPI. The value of DCPI for each penetration depth can
be calculated by the following Equation (Mohammadi et al., 2008):
Pi1  Pi
DCPI
Bi1  Bi
where DCPI is the DCP penetration index (mm/blow), Pi1 and Pi are
the cone penetration depth at i and i1 hammer drops, respec-
tively, and Bi1 and Bi are the blow count at i and i1 hammer
drops, respectively. The Rs is also used in this investigation to
evaluate the mechanical properties of stabilized subgrade soil,
which can be expressed by (Burnham, 1997):
Ws
Rs (2)
Pd
where Ws is the work done to soil layers (50 J in this study), and Pd
is the distance of the cone penetrometer through the soil layers (J/
cm). The average value of Rs in every 5 cm penetration depth within
30 cm was calculated and analyzed in this paper. The detailed
layout of the DCP testing points is shown in Fig. 6(c). Four points
were selected and tested in each Section and the spacing between
(1)
these points was set as 4 m.
The potential environmental impact resulting from the use of
lignin or quicklime stabilized silt as highway subgrade materials
were evaluated by measuring the total concentrations of heavy
metals in the natural silt, lignin stabilized silt, and quicklime sta-
bilized silt, respectively. The testing soil samples were obtained
from the holes of DCP tests and their moisture contents were also
measured in eld. The concentrations of heavy metals in soils, i.e.,

Please cite this article in press as: Zhang, T., et al., Application of lignin-based by-product stabilized silty soil in highway subgrade: A eld
investigation, Journal of Cleaner Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.002
 T. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e15 7

Table 3
Measured values of degree of compaction and moisture content (w) in both 94IV and
96I layers.

Curing time (d) Section A Section B Section C

DCd (%) w (%) DCd (%) w (%) DCd (%) w (%)

a
7 (94IV layer) 1 96.1 16.5 94.1 15.9 94.4 17.8
2a 95.7 16.0 95.8 15.1 93.6 18.5
3a 96.6 15.7 95.2 14.7 92.8 19.1
4a 94.2 16.2 94.7 15.6 93.7 19.2
Ab 95.6 16.1 94.9 15.3 93.6 18.7
SDc 0.90 0.29 0.63 0.46 0.57 0.56

14 (94IV layer) 1a 97.1 14.2 95.2 11.9 97.5 15.7

2a 97.7 14.3 95.1 11.2 95.2 16.1
3a 96.8 15.2 96.3 12.1 96.4 15.9
4a 96.5 14.4 96.0 11.7 98.1 16.4
Ab 97.0 14.5 95.7 11.7 96.8 16.0
SDc 0.44 0.40 0.51 0.33 1.11 0.26

8 (96I layer) 1a 96.2 16.6 94.5 15.3 92.3 19.5

2a 95.9 16.7 95.1 15.2 95.8 19.7
3a 98.1 15.9 94.6 14.8 94.6 18.8
4a 97.3 16.5 95.8 14.7 94.3 19.2
Ab 96.9 16.4 95.0 15.0 94.3 19.3
SDc 0.88 0.31 0.51 0.25 1.26 0.34

15 (96I layer) 1a 97.2 15.5 97.2 14.4 96.7 17.3

2a 98.8 15.5 96.9 14.2 95.9 16.8
3a 97.8 16.1 96.2 13.8 97.2 17.2
4a 98.1 15.4 98.1 14.6 97.4 16.5
Ab 98.0 15.6 97.1 14.3 96.8 17.0
SDc 0.58 0.28 0.68 0.30 0.58 0.32
a
Testing point number.
b
Average value.
c
Standard deviation.
d
Degree of compaction.

copper (Cu), zinc (Zn), nickel (Ni), lead (Pb), cadmium (Cd), chro-
mium (Cr), mercury (Hg), arsenic (As), and selenium (Se), were
determined using leaching test, as per US EPA (1996) methods, by
the Center of Environmental Monitoring in Nanjing city, China.
Triplicate samples were tested for leaching test and the average
values of parameters were reported here.

3. Results

3.1. CBR test

Fig. 7 presents the variation of CBR tested after 0 day, 8 days, and
15 days curing for all testing points in the 96I layer. The average
values of CBR for each curing time are also marked on the Figure. It
can be observed that the CBR values increase with an increase in
curing time in all Sections. The CBR values of the stabilized silt
range from 40% to 130%. At 0 day of curing, the average CBR value in
Section A is higher than that of Section B and Section C. In addition,
the average values in both Section B and Section C are approxi-
mately identical (40.3% and 43.7% for Section B and Section C,
respectively) immediately after the construction completion (i.e.,
0 day curing). The reason for higher CBR value of the lignin stabi-
lized silt in Section A at 0 day of curing is that the Section A located
on the straight road, which is convenient for the compaction of
Fig. 7. Effect of curing time on CBR of the stabilized silt: (a) Section A, 12% lignin
subgrade soils. Moreover, the hydration reaction rate of quicklime stabilized silt; (b) Section B, 8% lignin stabilized silt; and (c) Section C, 8% quicklime
is very rapid, which leads to higher CBR value in the silt stabilized stabilized silt.
by quicklime (Section C) relative to that stabilized by lignin (Section
B) with the same additive dosage (8%) at 0 day curing.
As curing time increases from 0 day to 8 days, the average CBR values of quicklime stabilized silt is mainly attributed to the evo-
values increase dramatically from 50.6% to 87.7% for 12% lignin lution of hydration and pozzolanic reactions during the curing time,
stabilized silt (Section A), from 40.3% to 70.6% for 8% lignin stabi- in which the hydration products (i.e., hydrated calcium silicate (C-
lized silt (Section B), and from 43.7% to 76.3% for 8% quicklime S-H) and hydrated calcium aluminate (C-A-H)) are formed and
stabilized silt (Section C), respectively. The increasement of CBR contributing to the cementation bonding and lling between soil

Please cite this article in press as: Zhang, T., et al., Application of lignin-based by-product stabilized silty soil in highway subgrade: A eld
investigation, Journal of Cleaner Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.002
8 T. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e15

particles, as reported in the literature (Mohamed, 2000). The
observation of lignin stabilized silt (Section A and Section B) is due
to the precipitated cementing materials induced by lignin in the
stabilization process, which coat the soil particles and bond them
together to produce a stronger soil structure (Indraratna et al.,
2008). When the curing time increases to 15 days, the variation
of CBR in all Sections shows a similar trend with that of curing with
8 days. It is noteworthy that after 15 days of curing, the rank of
average CBR values in these three Sections are found to be Section
A > Section C > Section B. This emphasises that the improvement of
12% lignin on mechanical properties of subgrade silt is better than
that of 8% quicklime. Moreover, 8% quicklime stabilized silt shows a
higher average CBR value compared with lignin stabilized silt with
the same additive content. Form these observations, it can be
deduced that the stabilization mechanism of lignin would be
absolutely different from that of traditional quicklime stabilizer.
This is consistent with that reported in the previous studies for the
silty sand or clay treated with lignin (Santoni et al., 2002; Tingle
and Santoni, 2003; Tingle et al., 2007).
To quantitatively evaluate the variations of CBR values in three
Sections, a probability statistical analysis method was employed
with assuming that the tested CBR values at a given curing time in
all Sections obeyed the Normal Distribution. Consequently, the
mathematical distribution of the difference between two CBR
values also satised the Normal Distribution. Table 4 shows the
statistical analysis results of the Normal Distribution for the
measured CBR values. It can be observed from the statistical
analysis results that the possibility for the stabilized silt with a
higher CBR values at 8 days curing compared with 0 day or at 15
days curing compared with 8 days exceeds 88% regardless of the
stabilizer type, which indicates that the mechanical properties of
stabilized silt are improved after a period of curing. Moreover, the
probability for 12% lignin stabilized silt obtaining higher CBR
values than 8% quicklime stabilized silt are 85.05%, 67.56%, and
86.90% at curing time of 0 day, 8 days, and 15 days, respectively. In
contrast, the probabilities of CBR differences between Section B
and Section C at each curing time (i.e., Section BeSection C at
0 day, 8 days, and 15 days curing) are insignicant, due to the fact
that the probabilities of positive CBR difference are lower than
50%. This observation suggests that with the same additive
content (8% in this study), the lignin stabilized silt (Section B) can
not be compared well with quicklime stabilized silt (Section C)
with respect to their CBR properties. Therefore, the additive con-
tent of lignin is increased to 12%, the CBR properties of stabilized
silt in Section A are better than those of quicklime stabilized silt in
Section C, despite the variation in measured CBR values with the
testing points at each Section.
3.2. Resilient modulus test
Fig. 8 depicts the variations of Ep with the curing time in each
test Section. It can be observed that the average magnitude of Ep in
Section C (30.4 MPa) is slightly higher relative to Section A
(29.8 MPa) and Section B (23.9 MPa) momentarily right after the
compaction. After 8 days curing, the Ep of stabilized silt in all three
Sections shows an increasing trend. When the curing time up to 15
days, the average values of Ep increase dramatically from 29.8 MPa
to 66.4 MPa for 12% lignin stabilized silt, from 23.9 MPa to 43.2 MPa
for 8% lignin stabilized silt, and from 30.4 MPa to 55.8 MPa for 8%
quicklime treated silt, respectively. The evolution of Ep with curing
time is consistent with CBR, which has been described earlier. The
reason for the Ep difference between Section B and Section C is the
diverse stabilization mechanisms of the two soil stabilizers, which
would result in a dramatically different in the type of cementation
materials and the intensity of reactions. Overall, the resilient
modulus properties of lignin stabilized silt can not compare well
with quicklime stabilized silt under the same additive content and
curing time. Nevertheless, when lignin content increases to 12%, a
more superior stiffness performance is obtained relative to 8%
quicklime stabilized silt after 15 days of curing.
Due to the CBR and Ep tests were performed on the same loca-
tion of testing points, further correlation could then be made be-
tween CBR and Ep for lignin or quicklime stabilized silt in all
Sections. Fig. 9 depicts the relationship between Ep and CBR for
both lignin and quicklime stabilized silt. It can be noticed from the
Figure that both lignin and quicklime stabilized silt shows a
simultaneous increasing trend of Ep with an increase in CBR. The
dashed lines represent the upper bound and lower bound of the Ep-
CBR correlations, respectively. The correlations investigated in this
study are similar to those reported in the literature (Heukelom and

Table 4
Statistical analysis of measured CBR values in each Section.

CBR test value Average value, m (%) Standard deviation, s (%) Probability of CBR value difference > 0 (%)

Section A (12% Lignin), 0d 50.6 5.45

Section A (12% Lignin), 8d 87.7 17.49
Section A (12% Lignin), 15d 124.0 12.49
Section B (8% Lignin), 0d 40.3 6.31
Section B (8% Lignin), 8d 70.6 12.91
Section B (8% Lignin), 15d 93.7 13.97
Section C (8% Quicklime), 0d 43.7 5.58
Section C (8% Quicklime), 8d 76.3 22.74
Section C (8% Quicklime), 15d 107.4 16.49
Section AeSection C, 0 d 6.9 6.64 85.05
Section AeSection C, 8 d 11.4 25.08 67.56
Section AeSection C, 15 d 16.7 14.85 86.90
Section BeSection C, 0 d 3.4 9.26 35.63
Section BeSection C, 8 d 5.7 25.37 41.17
Section BeSection C, 15 d 13.7 15.42 18.72
8de0d, Section A 37.1 20.77 96.30
15de8d, Section A 36.3 23.26 94.06
8de0d, Section B 30.4 15.61 97.41
15de8d, Section B 23.0 18.59 89.21
8de0d, Section C 32.6 27.00 88.63
15de8d, Section C 31.0 19.92 94.04

Note: The distribution of measured CBR values was assumed to satisfy the Normal Distribution. Average value, standard deviation, and probability of CBR value difference were
calculated from all testing points.

Please cite this article in press as: Zhang, T., et al., Application of lignin-based by-product stabilized silty soil in highway subgrade: A eld
investigation, Journal of Cleaner Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.002
 T. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e15 9

Fig. 9. Relationship between resilient modulus Ep and CBR of the stabilized silt.

3.3. Benkelman beam test

Fig. 10 shows the effect of curing time on Hr in all Sections. It is

noteworthy that this Figure presents the average values and stan-
dard deviations for all 60 testing points in Section A, Section B, and
Section C to investigate the effects of soil stabilizers (viz., lignin and
quicklime) and curing time on the Hr of stabilized silt. It was
calculated that the coefcient of variation (C.V) of measured Hr
values for all Sections were less than 6%, demonstrating that the
average values can represent the individual measuring data.
Consequently, average values with standard deviations were
selected in the Figure to quantitatively analyse of the mechanical
properties of the stabilized subgrade silt.
At curing time of 0 day (momentarily after the compaction), the
initial Hr in Section A is 3.29 mm, which is slightly higher than that
in Section B (3.00 mm) or in Section C (2.75 mm). As the curing time
increases from 0 day to 8 days, the Hr in each Section shows a
dramatical reduction. The average Hr values in Section A, Section B,
and Section C are 1.91 mm, 2.13 mm, and 1.11 mm, respectively. At
the subsequent curing of 7 days, the Hr values of each Section are
further reduced. The Hr values of both lignin and quicklime

Fig. 8. Effect of curing time on resilient modulus Ep of the stabilized silt: (a) Section A,
12% lignin stabilized silt; (b) Section B, 8% lignin stabilized silt; and (c) Section C, 8%
quicklime stabilized silt.

Klomp, 1962; Du et al., 2016). In addition, efforts had been made by

the authors to t the data represented in Fig. 9 by resorting to linear
or power functions but not successful. Interestingly, earlier
researcher also reported that they failed to achieve a unique
mathematical expression for describing the relationship between
Ep and CBR for subgrade soils (Zaman et al., 1994). Fig. 10. Variations in Hr with curing time of lignin and quicklime stabilized silt.

Please cite this article in press as: Zhang, T., et al., Application of lignin-based by-product stabilized silty soil in highway subgrade: A eld
investigation, Journal of Cleaner Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.002
10 T. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e15

stabilized silts are lower than 1 mm after 15 days curing, and all the
Sections exhibit approximately similar deections (e.g., 0.33 mm in
Section A, 0.56 mm in Section B, and 0.47 mm in Section C). This
indicates that after stabilized with lignin or quicklime, the strength
and stiffness of the compacted subgrade silt are improved. Overall,
the 12% lignin stabilized silt displays greater deformation resistance
behaviors compared to 8% lignin and 8% quicklime stabilized silt.
These observations are also consistent with the results of CBR and
resilient modulus tests mentioned above.
Generally, the resilient deection value of subgrade layer can be
calculated by the following Equation (Li and Selig, 1994):

Hr s Ep  H1 (3)

where Hr is the resilient deection (mm), s is the applied stress of

the Benkelman bean test (kPa), Ep is the resilient modulus (MPa),
and H1 is the thickness of the subgrade soil layer (0.20 m in this
study). According to Equation (3), it can be concluded that under
the same applied stress s and subgrade soil layer thickness H1, the
product of Hr and Ep is equal to a constant (i.e., s  H1). Therefore,
the product value of Hr and Ep were calculated in each Section and
the results were listed in Table 5. The large variation among the
various cases is observed from the calculation results, which is
mainly due to the fact that the Benkelman beam test and Ep test
were not conducted on the same location of testing points. In
addition, the Ep measured by PFWD in this study is a type of dy-
namic modulus which is slightly different from the modulus
induced from the plate loading test. Consequently, the spatial var-
iations and the difference in testing methods might lead to varied
values of Hr  Ep in Table 5. Table 5 also reveals that Hr  Ep dropped
dramatically with an increase in curing time for each test Section.
When the curing time is 15 days, the values of Hr  Ep are
approximately the same for 12% lignin, 8% lignin, and 8% quicklime
stabilized silt. These observations indicate that the decrease rate of
Hr is not consistent with the increase rate of Ep for the stabilized silt
with increasing curing time.

3.4. Dynamic cone penetrometer test

Fig. 11 depicts the variation in the DCP blow counts with

penetration depths, and it can be noted that the penetration curves
of both lignin and quicklime stabilized silt show a trend to move
right in coordinates with an increase in curing time. This indicates
that the penetration depth per blow of hammer decreases and
furthermore the strength of stabilized silt is enhanced. To quanti-
tatively analyse the results of DCP test, the parameters of DCPI and
Rs were calculated in this study. The design thickness of the 96I
layer is approximately 20 cm, thus, the calculation of DCPI is only
according to the testing data from 0 to 20 cm in penetration depth. Fig. 11. Variations in blow counts with penetration depth of the DCP tests at curing
time of 0, 8, and 15 days: (a) Section A, 12% lignin stabilized silt; (b) Section B, 8% lignin
Table 6 shows the variations of DCPI with curing time at all
stabilized silt; and (c) Section C, 8% quicklime stabilized silt.
testing points in each Section. Additionally, the average values and

Table 5
Calculation results of resilient deection (Hr), resilient modulus (Ep), and their product (Hr  Ep).

Test Section Curing time (d) Resilient deection, Hr (mm) Resilient modulus, Ep (MPa) Hr  Ep (MPa$mm)

Section A (12% Lignin) 0 3.29 29.8 98.04

8 1.91 44.7 85.38
15 0.33 66.4 21.91

Section B (8% Lignin) 0 3.00 23.9 71.70

8 2.13 32.8 69.86
15 0.56 43.2 24.19

Section C (8% Quicklime) 0 2.75 30.4 83.60

8 1.11 39.1 43.40
15 0.47 55.8 26.23

Please cite this article in press as: Zhang, T., et al., Application of lignin-based by-product stabilized silty soil in highway subgrade: A eld
investigation, Journal of Cleaner Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.002
 T. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e15 11

Table 6
Variations in dynamic cone penetration index (DCPI) with curing time in each Section.

Test Section Curing time (d) DCPI (mm/blow) Average value SDb

1a 2a 3a 4a

Section A (12% Lignin) 0 3.92 4.05 5.30 4.56 4.46 0.54

8 2.26 2.86 3.42 2.87 2.85 0.41
15 2.02 1.54 1.43 1.19 1.55 0.30

Section B (8% Lignin) 0 4.98 4.22 4.01 4.31 4.38 0.37

8 3.66 3.52 2.93 3.15 3.31 0.29
15 2.31 1.98 1.93 1.89 2.03 0.17

Section C (8% Quicklime) 0 4.65 3.48 3.93 2.39 3.61 0.82

8 3.26 2.61 3.15 3.32 3.09 0.28
15 NDc 1.66 1.98 1.80 1.81 0.13
a
Testing point number.
b
Standard deviation.
c
Not detected.

standard deviation values are also calculated to depict the accuracy

and dispersion of the results. It can be observed from this table that
the DCPI value of stabilized silt ranges from 1.19 to 5.30 mm/blow.
The 8% quicklime stabilized silt in Section C obviously presents a
lower DCPI average value at 0 day curing (immediately after the
compaction construction) than lignin stabilized silt with various
additive contents in Section A and Section B. This observation is
different from the CBR and Ep tests reported earlier. In order to
explain this result, the following possible reasons are listed: (i) the
DCP test in Section A was conducted approaching evening, and a
spatter of rain was taken place coincidently during this test period;
(ii) The DCP test work in Section A was done at last due to the re-
striction of in-situ construction conditions. Thus, the detrimental
effects of rainfall on stabilized silt in Section A are more signicant
than other Sections. However, after 8 days of curing, the 12% lignin
stabilized silt (Section A) displays 13.9% and 7.8% lower DCPI
average value than the 8% lignin stabilized silt (Section B) and 8%
quicklime stabilized silt (Section C), respectively, though all Sec-
tions exhibit signicant reduction in DCPI values compared to the
0 d of curing. When the curing time increases to 15 days, due to the
stabilization, the DCPI average value further decreases by 45.6%,
38.7%, and 41.4% in Section A, Section B, and Section C, respectively.
Nevertheless, the 12% lignin stabilized silt shows a lowest DCPI
value relative to other stabilized silt. Overall, these observations
indicate that although there are detrimental effects of rainfall on
strength growth of stabilized silt, the 12% lignin stabilized silt
shows better engineering properties than 8% quicklime stabilized
silt after a period of curing. The effects of rainfall on strength be-
haviours of lignin stabilized are of short duration.
A considerable number of studies on DCPI, CBR, and Ep have
been conducted by researchers, and the relationship between CBR
and DCPI for various subgrade soils reported by them can be
expressed by the following Equations (Gabr et al., 2000):

logCBR a  b logDCPI (4)

where a and b are two empirical coefcients, which range from 1.40
to 3.03 and 0.55 to 1.51, respectively. Similarly, the correlation be-
Fig. 12. Correlations between DCPI and mechanical parameters for the stabilized silt
tween Ep and DCPI can be represented by Chen et al. (2005): on a logarithmic scale: (a) relationship between CBR and DCPI and (b) relationship
between Ep and DCPI.


log Ep c  d logDCPI (5)
between these two engineering property indexes for both lignin
where c and d are also two empirical coefcients, which are based
and quicklime stabilized silt and, furthermore, the relationship CBR
on the measuring data. Fig. 12(a) depicts the relationship between
and DCPI in all Sections is consistent with Equation (4). The cor-
CBR and DCPI of stabilized silt in all Sections. In this Figure, the data
relation coefcient (R2) of the tted lines for Section A, Section B,
of all testing points at various curing times (i.e., 0, 8, and 15 days)
and Section C are 0.74, 0.79, and 0.78, respectively. The empirical
are plotted. It is evident that a good linear relation is shown

Please cite this article in press as: Zhang, T., et al., Application of lignin-based by-product stabilized silty soil in highway subgrade: A eld
investigation, Journal of Cleaner Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.002
12 T. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e15
coefcients a and b in Equation (4) are 2.16 and 0.65 for Section A,
2.29 and 0.96 for Section B, and 2.04 and 0.61 for Section C,
respectively. It can be observed that these tting parameters satisfy
the value range reported from the previous studies. Fig. 12(b)
presents the relationship between Ep and DCPI in all Sections. It can
be observed that the Ep-DCPI correlations are similar to those of
CBR-DCPI, and the tted lines in this Figure consistent with Equa-
tion (5). This observation is consistent with that reported in liter-
ature for the lateritic soils (comprise silty sand and clayey sand)
subgrade (George et al., 2009). The parameters c and d in Equation
(5) are 1.84 and 0.58 for Section A, 1.87 and 0.72 for Section B, and
1.75 and 0.56 for Section C, respectively.
In addition to DCPI index, the Rs was also calculated according to
Fig. 13. Variations in penetration resistance Rs with penetration depth of the stabilized
silt at curing time of 0, 8, and 15 days: (a) Section A, 12% lignin stabilized silt; (b)
Section B, 8% lignin stabilized silt; and (c) Section C, 8% quicklime stabilized silt.
Please cite this article in press as: Zhang, T., et al., Application of lignin-based by-product stabilized silty soil in highway subgrade: A eld
investigation, Journal of Cleaner Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.002
the DCP testing data to evaluate the bearing capacity and strength
of the stabilized subgrade silt. Fig. 13 depicts the variations in Rs
with the penetration depth in all Sections at various curing times. It
is evident that when the penetration depth is over 20 cm, the Rs of
all testing points increases obviously. This could be attributed to the
fact that the thickness of 96I soil layer is designed as 20 cm, and the
under soil layer (94 IV) would attain higher bearing capacity and
strength relative to 96I layer with more curing times and
compaction energy. It can also be observed that there are some
discrete points on the Figure in each Section. Moreover, the Rs
values along the penetration depth of the four testing points at the
same curing time are not identical. These variations could be
attributed to: (i) the slightly different compactions at four testing
points in each Section; and (ii) the detrimental effect of rainfall on
the development of bearing capacity of stabilized silt is also
different. Therefore, the average value of Rs was employed to
describe the effects of stabilizer, curing time, and additive content
on Rs.
Fig. 14 presents the variation in average Rs values per 5 cm
penetration depth. It can be observed that right after compaction
construction (0 day curing), the average value of Rs for 12% lignin
stabilized silt (Section A) is approximately 100 J/cm within the
15 cm penetration depth. With the further increase in penetration
depth, the average value increases from 92 J/cm to 421 J/cm. For
stabilized silt in Section B and Section C, the variation of average Rs
with penetration depth shows a similar trend to that in Section A,
the magnitude of average Rs within 15 cm penetration depth for
8% lignin stabilized silt and 8% quicklime stabilized silt are 89 J/cm
and 155 J/cm, respectively. Due to the detrimental effect of rainfall
at 0 day curing test reported earlier, the average Rs value of silt in
both Section A and Section B is reduced. At the curing time of 8
days, the 12% lignin stabilized silt exhibits a dramatical increase in
the average value of Rs, which reaches to 283 J/cm as shown in
Fig. 14. In contrast, the 8% lignin, and 8% quicklime stabilized silt
induce smaller Rs growth to 223 J/cm and 258 J/cm, respectively.
When curing time increases from 8 days to 15 days, the further
increase in average value of Rs happens in all Sections. Never-
theless, this changing pattern, again, indicates that 12% lignin
stabilized silt obtains higher bearing capacity and strength
compared to the lignin, and quicklime stabilized silt with 8% ad-
ditive content after 15 days of curing. By comprehensive consid-
ering the results of CBR, Ep, and DCP tests, the silt stabilized with
12% lignin, even considering the effect of rainfall and compaction,
could achieve higher bearing capacity and strength from the
curing of 15 days onwards.
Fig. 14. Variations in average penetration resistance Rs with penetration depth of all
Sections at curing time of 0, 8, and 15 days.
 T. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e15 13

In summary, the results of CBR, Ep, Benkelman beam, and DCP addition, the concentrations of Cu and Zn within the 12% lignin
tests demonstrated that 12% lignin stabilized subgrade silt had stabilized silt satisfy the corresponding requirements of second
superior mechanical properties than the 8% lignin or 8% quicklime grade soil quality strandards in China (limit values of Cu and Zn are
stabilized silt. The mechanical performances of lignin stabilized silt 100 mg/kg and 300 mg/kg (pH > 7.5), respectively.). Therefore, for
were slightly lower than quicklime stabilized silt with the same the highway subgrade construction, the lignin used in this inves-
additive content (8%). This shortage in the mechanical perfor- tigation is an environmentally friendly industrial by-product that
mances can be made up by increasing the lignin content. The value does not pose any potential risk to human health. Indraratna et al.
of measured CBR and Ep of 12% lignin stabilized silt also satised the (2008, 2012) used the industrial by-product lignin to enhance the
requirements detailed by the China highway construction stan- erosion resistance of silty sand in Australia, and also reported that
dards (i.e., for compacted subgrade soils of rst-class highway, lignin is a cheaper, environmentally friendly, nonhazardous soil
CBR  8% and Ep  30 MPa) (China MOT (2004) JTG D30-2004; stabilizer compared with other traditional chemical mixtures. It is
China MOT (2006) JTG D50-2006). It is noteworthy that the noteworthy that lignin is a type of organic polymer documented by
allowable values of resilient deection detailed in the China high- researchers, which consists of both hydrophilic groups and hy-
way construction standards is at the surface of top soil layer of the drophobic groups. Further study is suggested on the long-term
subgrade soil with 96% degree of compaction (viz., 96 IV soil layer evolution of engineering properties of lignin stabilized soils and
shown in Fig. 3). Consequently, the measured values of resilient the degradation of lignin in the soils.
deection on the stabilized silt at 96 I soil layer in this study are
used solely for comparison purposes of their mechanical properties 4.2. Material cost comparison
without subjection to test specication. The stabilization mecha-
nisms and mechanistic explanations of lignin stabilized silt are not In order to verify the economy of using lignin to stabilize the
discussed in this study. They have been reported by the authors in a subgrade soils, the material costs of lignin and quicklime in the test
previous study (Cai et al., 2016). Sections were estimated and also compared in this study. Table 8
lists the material costs of lignin and quicklime used in the eld
4. Discussion Sections. The material costs of both lignin and quicklime estimated
in the table are related to 96 I and 94 IV soil layers. It can be
4.1. Environmental evaluations observed that the total material costs of lignin used in the Section A
are less than 1/10 of those of quicklime used in Section C even if the
To evaluate the effects of lignin stabilized subgrade soils on the quantity of lignin used in Section A is obviously higher than that of
surrounding environment, the total concentrations of major heavy quicklime. Generally, the annual production of lignin-based by-
metals within the stabilized silt were measured. Table 7 shows the product from paper and timber industries is approximately 50
test results of heavy metal concentrations within the natural silt, million tons. Therefore, if only 1/5 of the industrial by-product
12% lignin stabilized silt, and 8% quicklime stabilized silt after lignin is utilized in the road subgrade construction, it would
curing of 15 days. The background limit values listed in the table represent a saving of nearly 36.8 million dollars relative to the
were specied by China Soil Environmental Quality Standard (GB material cost of using quicklime.
15618-1995) (China MEP, 1995). It can be observed from the table
that the concentrations of major heavy metals within natural silt 4.3. Results comparison between eld and laboratory tests
and 8% quicklime stabilized silt (15 days of curing) are lower than
the background limit value. This indicates that the quality of sub- A systematical laboratory tests have been conducted by the
grade silt and 8% quicklime stabilized silt satisfy the requirements authors to evaluate the variations in engineering properties of
of rst grade soil quality strandards in China. However, the con- lignin stabilized silty soil with additive content and curing time, as
centrations of Cu and Zn within the 12% lignin stabilized silt achieve mentioned above. The results of laboratory test reveal that with an
38.1 mg/kg and 118.5 mg/kg, respectively, which slightly exceed the increase in lignin content, the unconned compressive strength,
background values (i.e., Cu is 35 mg/kg and Zn is 100 mg/kg). The CBR, and modulus of the lignin stabilized soils increase dramati-
lignin used in this study is a kind of industrial by-product, which cally. When the lignin content exceeds 12%, these mechanical
would contain some contaminants during the process of produc- property indexes present a decreasing trend with content further
tion. The excessive concentrations of heavy metal (i.e., Cu and Zn in increased. In addition, the quicklime stabilized soil possesses su-
this study) are also closely related to the productive technology. In perior mechanical performances than the lignin stabilized soil at
the same conditions. For instance, at curing time of 28 days, the
unconned compressive strength of 8% lignin stabilized and 8%
quicklime stabilized silty soil are 464 kPa and 668 kPa, respectively.
Table 7
Heavy metal concentrations within the natural silt, 12% lignin stabilized silt, and 8% When the lignin content increases to 12%, the corresponding
quicklime stabilized silt (mg/kg). compressive strength reaches to 729 kPa, which is higher than that
of 8% quicklime stabilized soil. These observations are consistent
Heavy metal Background valuea Natural silt 12% Lignin 8% Quicklime
well with the eld test results. Due to the laboratory test conditions
b
Cu 35 29.6 38.1 28.2 are articially controlled, soil samples with the same degree of
Znb 100 89.7 118.5 91.8
Nib 40 27.5 26.8 27.8
compaction were prepared. Weather conditions also have not effect
Crb 90 40.9 39.9 41.1 on the strength development of the stabilized samples. Conse-
Pbb 35 11.2 11.7 15.6 quently, there is no obvious strength difference between lignin
Cdb 0.20 0.106 0.118 0.175 stabilized and quicklime stabilized soils at curing time of 0 day. This
Hgc 0.15 0.067 0.079 0.081
phenomenon is different from that reported from the eld test
Asd 15 12.7 12.8 19.3
results, as shown in Figs. 7 and 8.
a
Based on China Soil Environmental Quality Standard (GB 15618-1995) (China It is noteworthy that this study presents the results of engi-
MEP, 1995).
b
Based on EPA 6010B (US EPA, 1996).
neering properties within the curing time of 15 days. Indeed, the
c
Based on EPA 7471A (US EPA, 1996). durability of the lignin stabilized silty soil is of a great important
d
Based on EPA 7060A (US EPA, 1996). concern to engineering designers. Approximately 2 years have

Please cite this article in press as: Zhang, T., et al., Application of lignin-based by-product stabilized silty soil in highway subgrade: A eld
investigation, Journal of Cleaner Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.002
14 T. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e15
Table 8
Cost comparison of lignin and quicklime materials in the eld test.
Test Section Stabilizer Dosage (%)
Section A Lignin 12
Section B Lignin 8 26,428
Section C Quicklime 8 28,265
passed from the completion of eld tests, the pavement of test
Sections still maintains good working performance, and the
obvious settlement and cracks have not been observed by the on-
site monitors. Therefore, further study is suggested on the long-
term evolution of engineering properties and decomposition of
lignin during the service life. In addition, it should be noted that the
mechanical behaviour responses and volume changes of lignin
stabilized soils under vehicular loads would be a critical concern for
the service performance of the road during operation. Further in-
vestigations also need to be conducted on the swelling properties
and long-term durability of lignin stabilized soils.
5. Conclusions
This paper provides a comprehensive summary of the eld
testing program conducted to investigate the mechanical perfor-
mances of lignin stabilized silty soil employed as highway subgrade
lling material. Quicklime was selected as a contrast chemical ad-
ditive in an adjacent test Section to compare with the performance
of lignin. Based on the results reported, the following conclusions
can be drawn:
(1) The 12% lignin stabilized silt had a higher strength and
bearing capacity compared to the 8% quicklime stabilized silt.
The mechanical performances of lignin stabilized silt were
slightly lower than quicklime stabilized silt when the addi-
tive content was 8%. When the curing time increased from
0 day to 15 days, the average CBR values increased sharply
from 50.6% to 124.0% for the 12% lignin stabilized silt, from
40.3% to 93.7% for the 8% lignin stabilized silt, and from 43.7%
to 107.4% for the 8% quicklime stabilized silt, respectively. It
has been found that compaction has a controlling role in the
strength of stabilized silt right after the construction.
(2) The 12% lignin stabilized silt possessed a superior Ep and Hr
relative to quicklime stabilized silt after 15 days of curing.
Even if the stabilization mechanisms of lignin and quicklime
stabilized soils were different, the 12% lignin stabilized silt
still presented higher Ep and lower Hr than 8% quicklime
stabilized silt.
(3) The test Section with 12% lignin stabilization attained a
slightly higher DCPI right after construction, but it was found
to grow faster and surpass the quicklime stabilized soils after
15 days of curing. Its corresponding average penetration
resistance exhibited a similar variation trend with increasing
curing time. The rainfall that occurred during the construc-
tion process and testing period was found to have a detri-
mental effect on the measurement and development in
bearing capacity of the stabilized soils. It was observed that
the DCPI had good linear correlation with CBR or Ep on a
logarithmic scale for all stabilized silt.
(4) The analysis results of heavy metals concentration demon-
strated that the used lignin is an environmentally friendly
chemical mixture, which can be utilized as a soil stabilizer for
stabilization of highway subgrade silt. The environmental
quality of lignin stabilized subgrade silt satised the re-
quirements of second grade quality strandards. The results of
Please cite this article in press as: Zhang, T., et al., Application of lignin-based by-product stabilized silty soil in highway subgrade: A eld
investigation, Journal of Cleaner Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.002
Weight (kg) Price ($/kg) Material cost ($)
38,716 0.003 117
0.003 80
0.050 1432
material cost estimation also revealed that the cost of by-
product lignin used in the eld test Section was approxi-
mately 90% more economical than the use of quicklime in the
adjacent Section.
Acknowledgements
The experimental work presented in this paper was carried out
at the Institute of Geotechnical Engineering, Southeast University,
in the academic year of 2014e2015 when the rst author was a PhD
candidate there. The funding provided by the Jiangsu Trafc Science
Research Project (Grant No. 2013Y04) is appreciated. The authors
would like to thank Weihong Duan and Wenliang Liu at Southeast
University, for their assistance in eld testing. The authors sincerely
appreciate the editor's and anonymous reviewers's valuable com-
ments, which improved the quality of this paper signicantly.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data related to this article can be found at http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.002.
References
Alazigha, D.P., Indraratna, B., Vinod, J.S., Ezeajugh, L.E., 2016. The swelling behaviour
of lignosulfonate-treated expansive soil. Proc. Institution Civ. Eng. Ground
Improv. 1e12.
Angenent, L.T., Karim, K., Al-Dahhan, M.H., Wrenn, B.A., Domguez-Espinosa, R.,
2004. Production of bioenergy and biochemicals from industrial and agricul-
tural wastewater. Trends Biotechnol. 22 (9), 477e485.
ASTM, 2005. Standard Test Method for Mechanical Cone Penetration Tests of Soil.
ASTM standard D3441-05. American Society for Testing and Materials, West
Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM, 2010. Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity
Index of Soils. ASTM standard D4318. American Society for Testing and Mate-
rials, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM, 2011a. Standard Practice for Classication of Soils for Engineering Purposes
(Unied Soil Classication System). ASTM standard D2487. American Society for
Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM, 2011b. Standard Terminology Relating to Lime and Limestone (As Used by
the Industry). ASTM standard C51-11. American Society for Testing and Mate-
rials, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM, 2013. Standard Test Method for PH of Soils. ASTM standard D4972-13.
American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM, 2015. Standard Guide for General Pavement Deection Measurements. ASTM
standard D4695-03 (Reapproved 2015). American Society for Testing and Ma-
terials, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
Bell, F.G., 1996. Lime stabilization of clay minerals and soils. Eng. Geol. 42 (4),
223e237.
Burnham, T.R., 1997. Application of the Dynamic Cone Penetrometer to Minnesota
Department of Transportation, Pavement Assessment Procedures. Minnesota
Department of Transportation, Maplewood, MN, USA. MN/RC-97/19.
Cai, G., Liu, S., Puppala, A.J., 2011. Comparison of CPT charts for soil classication
using PCPT data: example from clay deposits in Jiangsu Province, China. Eng.
Geol. 121 (1), 89e96.
Cai, G., Zhang, T., Liu, S., Li, J., Jie, D., 2016. Stabilization mechanism and effect
evaluation of stabilized silt with lignin based on laboratory data. Mar. Geore-
sources Geotechnol. 34 (4), 331e340.
Ceylan, H., Gopalakrishnan, K., Kim, S., 2010. Soil stabilization with bioenergy
coproduct. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2186, 130e137.
Chen, B., 2004. Polymer-clay nanocomposites: an overview with emphasis on
interaction mechanisms. Br. Ceram. Trans. 103 (6), 241e249.
Chen, D., Chen, D.H., Lin, D.F., Bilyeu, J., Liau, P.H., 2005. A correlation between
dynamic cone penetrometer values and pavement layer moduli. Geotechnical
Test. J. 28 (1), 1e8.
Chen, Q., Indraratna, B., 2014. Shear behaviour of sandy silt treated with
 T. Zhang et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e15
lignosulfonate. Can. Geotechnical J. 52 (8), 1180e1185.
Chen, Q., Indraratna, B., Carter, J., Rujikiatkamjorn, C., 2014. A theoretical and
experimental study on the behaviour of lignosulfonate-treated sandy silt.
Comput. Geotechnics 61, 316e327.
China MEP, 1995. Environmental Quality Standard for Soils GB 15618-1995. Ministry
of Environmental Protection of China, Beijing, China.
China MOT, 2000. Technical Specications for Construction of Highway Roadbases
JTJ 034-2000. China Ministry of Transportation, Beijing, China.
China MOT, 2004. Specications for Design of Highway Subgrades JTG D30-2004.
China Ministry of Transportation, Beijing, China.
China MOT, 2006. Specications for Design of Highway Asphalt Pavement JTG D50-
2006. China Ministry of Transportation, Beijing, China.
China MOT, 2007. Test Methods of Soils for Highway Engineering JTG E40-2007.
China Ministry of Transportation, Beijing, China.
China MOT, 2008. Field Test Methods of Subgrade and Pavement for Highway En-
gineering JTG E60-2008. China Ministry of Transportation, Beijing, China.
Du, Y.J., Jiang, N.J., Liu, S.Y., Horpibulsuk, S., Arulrajah, A., 2016. Field evaluation of
soft highway subgrade soil stabilized with calcium carbide residue. Soils Found.
56 (2), 301e314.
Gabr, M.A., Hopkins, K., Coonse, J., Hearne, T., 2000. DCP criteria for performance
evaluation of pavement layers. J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 14 (4), 141e148.
George, V., Rao, N.C., Shivashankar, R., 2009. PFWD, DCP and CBR correlations for
evaluation of lateritic subgrades. Int. J. Pavement Eng. 10 (3), 189e199.
Heukelom, W., Klomp, A.J.G., 1962. Dynamic testing as a means of controlling
pavement during and after construction. In: Proceedings of the 1st Interna-
tional Conference on the Structural Design of Asphalt Pavement. University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Higgins, D.D., 2007. GGBS and sustainability. Constr. Mater. 160 (3), 99e101.
Horpibulsuk, S., Miura, N., Bergado, D.T., 2004. Undrained shear behavior of cement
admixed clay at high water content. J. Geotechnical Geoenvironmental Eng. 130
(10), 1096e1105.
Horpibulsuk, S., Miura, N., Nagaraj, T.S., 2003. Assessment of strength development
in cement-admixed high water content clays with Abrams' law as a basis.
Geotechnique 53 (4), 439e444.
Horpibulsuk, S., Phojan, W., Suddeepong, A., Chinkulkijniwat, A., Liu, M.D., 2012.
Strength development in blended cement admixed saline clay. Appl. Clay Sci.
55, 44e52.
Horpibulsuk, S., Rachan, R., Suddeepong, A., Chinkulkijniwat, A., 2011. Strength
development in cement admixed Bangkok clay: laboratory and eld in-
vestigations. Soils Found. 51 (2), 239e251.
Indraratna, B., Athukorala, R., Vinod, J., 2012. Estimating the rate of erosion of a silty
sand treated with lignosulfonate. J. Geotechnical Geoenvironmental Eng. 139
(5), 701e714.
Indraratna, B., Muttuvel, T., Khabbaz, H., Armstrong, R., 2008. Predicting the erosion
rate of chemically treated soil using a process simulation apparatus for internal
crack erosion. J. Geotechnical Geoenvironmental Eng. 134 (6), 837e844.
Jiang, T.D., 2008. Lignin. Chemical Industry Press, Beijing.
Karol, R.H., 2003. Chemical Grouting and Soil Stabilization, third ed. Marcel Dekker
Inc., New York.
Kim, S., Gopalakrishnan, K., Ceylan, H., 2011. Moisture susceptibility of subgrade
soils stabilized by lignin-based renewable energy coproduct. J. Transp. Eng. 138
(11), 1283e1290.
Li, D., Selig, E.T., 1994. Resilient modulus for ne-grained subgrade soils.
J. Geotechnical Eng. 120 (6), 939e957.
Please cite this article in press as: Zhang, T., et al., Application of lignin-based by-product stabilized silty soil in highway subgrade: A eld
investigation, Journal of Cleaner Production (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.002
15
Lo, S.R., Wardani, S.P.R., 2002. Strength and dilatancy of a silt stabilized by a cement
and y ash mixture. Can. Geotechnical J. 39 (1), 77e89.
Mitchell, J.K., Soga, K., 1976. Fundamentals of Soil Behavior. John Wiley and Sons,
Inc., New York.
Mohamed, A.M.O., 2000. The role of clay minerals in marly soils on its stability. Eng.
Geol. 57 (3), 193e203.
Mohammadi, S.D., Nikoudel, M.R., Rahimi, H., Khamehchiyan, M., 2008. Application
of the dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) for determination of the engineering
parameters of sandy soils. Eng. Geol. 101 (3), 195e203.
Okyay, U.S., Dias, D., 2010. Use of lime and cement treated soils as pile supported
load transfer platform. Eng. Geol. 114 (1), 34e44.
Petry, T.M., Little, D.N., 2002. Review of stabilization of clays and expansive soils in
pavements and lightly loaded structures-history, practice, and future. J. Mater.
Civ. Eng. 14 (6), 447e460.
Puppala, A.J., Grifn, J.A., Hoyos, L.R., Chomtid, S., 2004. Studies on sulfate-resistant
cement stabilization methods to address sulfate-induced soil heave.
J. Geotechnical Geoenvironmental Eng. 130 (4), 391e402.
Puppala, A.J., Hanchanloet, S., 1999. Evaluation of a new chemical (SA-44/LS-40)
treatment method on strength and resilient properties of a cohesive soil. In:
78th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
Paper No.990389.
Rollings, R.S., Burkes, J.P., 1999. Sulfate attack on cementestabilized sand.
J. Geotechnical Geoenvironmental Eng. 125 (5), 364e372.
Santoni, R.L., Tingle, J.S., Webster, S.L., 2002. Stabilization of silty sand with
nontraditional additives. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 1787, 61e70.
Sariosseiri, F., Muhunthan, B., 2009. Effect of cement treatment on geotechnical
properties of some Washington State soils. Eng. Geol. 104 (1), 119e125.
Sherwood, P., 1993. Soil Stabilization with Cement and Lime: State-of-the-art Re-
view. Transport Research Laboratory, Her Majesty's Stationery Ofce, London.
Tingle, J., Newman, J., Larson, S., Weiss, C., Rushing, J., 2007. Stabilization mecha-
nisms of nontraditional additives. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 1989,
59e67.
Tingle, J.S., Santoni, R.L., 2003. Stabilization of clay soils with nontraditional addi-
tives. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 1819, 72e84.
US EPA, 1996. Inductively Coupled Plasma-atomic Emission Spectrometry. US
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington D.C.
Vinod, J.S., Indraratna, B., Al Mahamud, M.A., 2010. Stabilisation of an erodible soil
using a chemical admixture. Proc. Institution Civ. Eng. Ground Improv. 163,
43e51.
Wild, S., Kinuthia, J.M., Jones, G.I., Higgins, D.D., 1999. Suppression of swelling
associated with ettringite formation in lime stabilized sulphate bearing clay
soils by partial substitution of lime with ground granulated blastfurnace slag
(GGBS). Eng. Geol. 51 (4), 257e277.
Yao, M., Sun, R.J., Chen, M.Y., Lai, K., 2009. Development and utilization of plant
cellulose, lignin and hemicelluloses and so on. Fine Chem. 26 (10), 938e942.
Zaman, M., Chen, D.H., Laguros, J., 1994. Resilient moduli of granular materials.
J. Transp. Eng. 120 (6), 967e988.
Zhang, T., Cai, G., Liu, S., Puppala, A.J., 2016. Engineering properties and micro-
structural characteristics of foundation silt stabilized by lignin-based industrial
by-product. KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 1e12.
Zhang, T., Liu, S., Cai, G., Puppala, A.J., 2015. Experimental investigation of thermal
and mechanical properties of lignin treated silt. Eng. Geol. 196, 1e11.
Zhu, Z.D., Liu, S.Y., 2008. Utilization of a new soil stabilizer for silt subgrade. Eng.
Geol. 97 (3), 192e198.