Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Technical Guide
qêÉ~íãÉåí=çÑ=ëçáäë=ïáíÜ=äáãÉ=
~åÇLçê=ÜóÇê~ìäáÅ=ÄáåÇÉêë =
^ééäáÅ~íáçå=íç=íÜÉ=ÅçåëíêìÅíáçå=çÑ=é~îÉãÉåí=Ä~ëÉ=ä~óÉêë=
The Technical Department for Transport, Roads and Bridges Engineering and Road Safety (Service d’études
techniques des routes et autoroutes - Sétra) is a technical department within the Ministry of Transport and
Infrastructure. Its field of activities is the road, the transportation and the engineering structures.
• The Sétra regularly exchanges its experience and projects with its foreign counterparts, through bilateral co-
operations, presentations in conferences and congresses, by welcoming delegations, through missions and
expertises in other countries. It takes part in the European standardization commissions and many authorities
and international working groups. The Sétra is an organization for technical approval, as an EOTA member
(European Organisation for Technical Approvals).
Technical guide
qêÉ~íãÉåí=çÑ=ëçáäë=ïáíÜ=äáãÉ==
~åÇLçê=ÜóÇê~ìäáÅ=ÄáåÇÉêë =
^ééäáÅ~íáçå=íç=íÜÉ=ÅçåëíêìÅíáçå=çÑ=é~îÉãÉåí=Ä~ëÉ=ä~óÉêë=
Published by Sétra and carried out by the French Road Engineering Committee (CFTR)
This document is the translation of the work "=Traitement des sols à la chaux
et/ou aux liants hydrauliques ", published in September 2007 under the reference 0718
The CFTR is a federative structure which joins together various components of the French
road community in order to work out an expression of the state of the art shared by all and
used as reference to the road professionals in the fields of pavements, earthworks and road
drainage.
This guide was drafted by the CFTR (French Road Engineering Committee) sectoral committee on
"methodology" of the by a working group made up of representatives of the Scientific and Technical Network
of the Ministry with responsibility for public works, the technical directorates of firms and local and regional
authorities.
Its content has been validated by a survey conducted among CFTR members.
The working group was led by Jean-Claude Auriol (LCPC Nantes) and Daniel Puiatti (Groupe Lhoist).
Comité de rédaction:
Contents
1 - Introduction ............................................................................................... 7
2 - St udies .................................................................................................... 10
2 . 1 - T h e t yp e s o f s o i l c o ve r e d b y t h e g u ide .................................................. 10
2 . 2 - T h e p r o g r e s s i ve n ature of studies ......................................................... 11
2 . 3 - Char ac t eriz at i o n of the deposit ............................................................. 12
2.3.1 - Minimum features of the geotechnical survey .................................................................................. 12
2.3.2 - Evaluation of the uniformity of the deposit....................................................................................... 12
2.3.3 - The mechanical strength criterion of the granular fraction ............................................................. 14
2 . 4 - M i x d e s ign studies ................................................................................ 15
2.4.1 - Objectives of the mix design study.................................................................................................... 15
2.4.2 - Need for pretreatment with lime ....................................................................................................... 15
2.4.3 - Choice of binder for the mix design study ........................................................................................ 15
2.4.4 - Soil specimen used for the study ....................................................................................................... 15
2.4.5 - Complete study ................................................................................................................................. 16
2.4.6 - Limited study .................................................................................................................................... 17
2.4.7 - Identification of the constituents....................................................................................................... 17
2.4.8 - Reference tests for compaction ......................................................................................................... 17
2.4.9 - Study of the immediate stability ........................................................................................................ 17
2.4.10 - Specimens ......................................................................................................................................... 18
2.4.11 - Conservation..................................................................................................................................... 20
2.4.12 - Performance ..................................................................................................................................... 21
2.4.13 - Sensitivity study of mechanical performance.................................................................................... 21
3 - D e s ign ..................................................................................................... 22
3 . 1 - T r a f f ic data ........................................................................................... 23
3.1.1 - The Ti traffic classes......................................................................................................................... 23
3.1.2 - The TCi cumulative traffic classes.................................................................................................... 23
3.1.3 - Aggressiveness of traffic ................................................................................................................... 24
3 . 2 - C la s s e s o f subgrade ............................................................................. 25
3.3 - Design parame ters ................................................................................ 25
3.3.1 - Materials........................................................................................................................................... 25
3.3.2 - The interface conditions ................................................................................................................... 29
3 . 4 - Pa ve m e n t design .................................................................................. 29
3.4.1 - Application ....................................................................................................................................... 29
3.4.2 - Minimum qualities ............................................................................................................................ 29
3.4.3 - Types of structures............................................................................................................................ 30
3.4.4 - Surfacing layers................................................................................................................................ 30
3.4.5 - Constructional measures .................................................................................................................. 30
3 . 5 - Ver i f ic a t io n o f frost design ................................................................... 31
3 . 6 - Exa mp l e s of design .............................................................................. 31
3.6.1 - First example (Table 26) .................................................................................................................. 31
3.6.2 - Second example (Table 27)............................................................................................................... 35
4 - Implementation ........................................................................................ 38
4.1 - Forew ord .............................................................................................. 38
4 . 2 - Pre p a r a t i o n of materials ....................................................................... 39
Introduction
The technique of soil treatment has been known about and used for many centuries – some Roman roads still
bear witness to the fact – but it has developed considerably since the 1960s. Of the countries that have applied
the technique, France is one of those that has made the greatest progress as a result of successive mastery of the
treatment of embankment materials, capping layers and then pavements. This progress is due to the combined
efforts of all the protagonists: awarding entities, contract managers, contractors, equipment and binder
manufacturers who have attempted to make the best possible use of treated soils by the rational characterization
of their properties and improving procedures, materials and products. Table 1 provides a schematic summary of
this process. It shows the presence of mutual influences very clearly, and, in particular, shows how an
prescriptive document, which is the logical outcome of any progress, can itself initiate a new phase of
development.
Thus, the publication in 1981 of the "Manuel de conception des chaussées neuves à faible trafic" by the Sétra
and the LCPC [2], and the many ensuing regional structural catalogues [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15]
marked the start of the use of fine treated soils in pavement base layers. This application has come into
widespread use since, particularly in regions where there is a shortage of aggregate that meets the applicable
specifications. Solid experience has been acquired thanks to the commitment of the entire profession which was
convinced that the technique would provide an economical response to the key question of the optimized use of
natural resources, which is a major concern with regard to “Sustainable Development”.
In order for the development of this application to continue under the best possible conditions, the stakeholders
involved in road construction felt that it was necessary to summarize their experience in this guide. The guide
places particular emphasis on the importance of preliminary studies, project design and the conduct of works for
obtaining structures which perform well. It also sets out to reduce the risks caused by the lack of uniformity of
natural materials by detailing the specific measures and know-how that supplement the normal rules of good
practice for conventional techniques.
The guide draws on our knowledge about the different phases of implementing the technique, which has
incidentally already been published in the documents and standards to which it refers. It is essentially a
supplement to these documents and can be thought of as a continuation of the technical guide "Traitement des
sols à la chaux et/ou aux liants hydrauliques" published by the Sétra and the LCPC (GTS) [4] in January 2000
whose structure therefore becomes:
• Part A: General concepts
• Part B: The treatment of soils in embankments
• Part C: The treatment of soils in capping layers
• Part D (this guide): The treatment of soils in pavement base layers
However, in contrast to the GTS, the soil categories that are considered have been deliberately restricted, to
exclude materials for which:
• existing references or experience are too partial or inclusive to be applied;
• no reference to an application is known.
This is why it takes the form of a methodological guide which will be modified with reference to local
application documents, for example in the form of regional guides some of which exist already (see
Bibliography).
In order to ensure that the technical approach is comparable with that used for conventional aggregate-based
materials (unbound graded aggregate (GNT), graded aggregate bound with a hydraulic binder (GTLH), road
base asphalt (GB), etc.), the following approach has been applied:
• After the collection of the available information and documents on the subject, analysis focused in particular
on information from construction sites, starting with soil studies and the design of soil treatment and ending
with the appraisal of the long-term performance of pavements under traffic.
• This work revealed the need to modify each phase of a project (soil study – mix design study – design –
construction - tests) with reference to:
– the nature, variability and prior knowledge of the soil which is a candidate for treatment;
– the planned application (sub-base layer and/or road base layer);
– the type and scale of future stresses;
– the accepted risks with reference to the nature of the works.
For example, it should be borne in mind that a car park for light vehicles does not need to withstand anything
like the same level of stress as a road that carries through traffic.
• Particular attention has been given to preliminary studies and the fact that the possibility of using a soil
depends on knowledge of the results of the studies on the soil in question and a minimum amount of local
experience.
• Last, the limits and potential for the use of treated soils in pavement base layers have been identified based on:
– the existence or lack of representative applications;
– monitoring of the performance of pavements that makes it possible to make a judgment about their
durability and long-term behaviour.
The characteristics to be considered for structural design have been established on the basis of all aspects of the
above approach.
It should be mentioned that the publication of this guide coincides with the completion of an important phase of
European standardization on this topic. This involves, in particular, the standards in the series NF EN 14227,
parts 10 [71], 11 [72], 12 [73], 13 [74] and 14 [75], which lay down specifications for soils treated with lime and
hydraulic binders (the precise references are given in the bibliography). Fully consistent with these standards, it
describes how the studies are to be performed, the structural design parameters, and the manufacturing and
laying conditions for the materials. Thus, following the recommendations in this guide correctly will necessarily
facilitate application of the standards in question.
Recommandation pour la réalisation Guide Réalisation des Guide Traitement des Sols à la
Recommandation sur le des Terrassements Routiers (RTR) Terrassements Routiers chaux et liants hydrauliques pour
traitement à la chaux Sétra-LCPC-1976) (SETRA-LCPC (GTR) Sétra-LCPC- remblais et couches de forme
Sétra-LCPC 1972 Recommendations for Road première édition 1992 [5]-
Development of codification (GTS)-Sétra-LCPC-2000 [4]
(SETRA-LCPC Earthworks 1976)
NF P 98-114-3 Méthodologie
Recommendations for treatment Manuel de conception des
NF P 98-115 Exécution des d’étude des sols traités utilisés en
with lime 1972). chaussées neuves à faible trafic
corps de chaussées [33] assises [32]
SétraLCPC1981 [2]
Applications Single combined capping layer and roadbase – Pavement base layers
Capping layer
Embankments
Table 1: The development and control of soil treatment in France
1 - Studies
1.1 - The types of soil covered by the guide
The soil categories, as defined in the standard NF P 11-300 [16], covered by this guide are as follows,
without considering whether they are homogeneous or not:
• fine soils with more than 35 % passing a 80 μm screen. When used in pavement base layers, a particle size
and clay content limit is applied. Therefore, only A1 and A2 soils will be considered in this guide;
• sandy soils (D ≤ 6.3 mm) with less than 35% passing an 80 μm screen and a high clay content
(VBS > 0.2). These can be used on local roads. They correspond to soil types B2, B5 and B6. In the case of
use in pavement base layers, a limit must be applied for the maximum clay content: due to a lack of
experience, the maximum VBS is to be limited to 1 for B2 soils and 2.5 for B6 soils depending on the fines
content of the sand. Only B5 soils and some B2 and B6 soils will therefore be considered in this guide;
• gravelly soils (D > 6.3 mm) with less than 35% passing an 80µm screen and VBS > 0.1. These correspond
to category Bi soils. In the case of use in a pavement base layer, a limit is applied for the maximum particle
size and clay content. Only soils B3, B5 and some B4 and B6 soils will be considered in this guide.
Thus, the two principal criteria that limit the use of soils in pavement base layers are the maximum particle
size and clay content. On this basis, the soils which are covered in this guide are summarized in Table 2.
The clay content criterion used to characterize soils is either the VBS or the IP (NF P 94-051) [22]. The VBS
(NF P 94-068) [24] or the methylene blue value of a soil differs from the MB (NF EN 933-9) [60] used in the
aggregate norm XP P 18-545 [76]. They measure the same property under conditions which are specific to
each material and express it differently. An approximate correspondence of the following type between these
two measurements can be accepted:
Most of the soils covered by the standard NF P 11-300 [16 ] will require preparation to achieve the minimum
level of uniformity specified in the sections below for levels H1 or H2. This preparation may be carried out
at the site where the soil is extracted by various stockpiling, screening or mixing operations. The guide
therefore requires the deposit to be assessed in order to characterize the uniformity of the soil in situ and
decide whether it is necessary to perform preparation operations to make it uniform. The uniformity
classification of the soil described in section 2.3.2 therefore relates to its final state before treatment for use
in a pavement base layer.
Table 3 shows the factors which are usually considered in order to decide on the content of a soil treatment
study.
Stage of project
Content of study Expected outcome
normally involved
Gathering the available documentary data (geological maps, Technical possibility of considering the use of the
geotechnical and meteorological data sheets, design documents treated soil in pavement base layers.
from similar works, etc.).
Collection of local expertise, particularly with regard to the possible
presence of inhibitors in the soil. In the absence of successful local
experience, evaluation of the suitability of the soil for treatment by
means of accelerated swelling tests as specified in the standard Preliminary study
NF EN 13286-49 [68] supplemented by indirect tensile strength
tests according to the standard NF EN 13286-42 [65] on another
series of specimens prepared and conditioned in accordance to the
standard NF EN 13286-49 [68].
Analysis and summary of this information with a view to the soil
treatment for the pavement base layer works in question.
General characterization of the deposit intended for the pavement Confirmation that the soil in the deposit intended for
base layer on the basis of the information from the general the pavement base layer is suitable for treatment.
geological and geotechnical survey of the route. Assessment:
If necessary, a number of additional samples should be taken - of the volumes of usable soils;
(using an auger or a shovel, for example) for more detailed
characterization of the deposit. - of the construction techniques and equipment
required; Draft design
All this data should be summarized.
- of the most suitable product (s) and the quantities
that will probably be necessary in order to carry out a
preliminary design for the solution covering technical
and economic aspects and the construction time
frame.
Finalization of the characterization of the deposit, production of The drawing up of rules for the proportions to be used
representative specimens and performance of a full mix design as a function of the nature and state of the soils and
study in order to specify the proportioning with reference to the the targeted level of mechanical performance.
target performance and, if relevant, the anticipated states of Characterization and localization of deposits. Design (*)
humidity (a variable proportion of these mix design studies may be
postponed until the construction design phase that takes place Information about the most technically appropriate
during the works, response times permitting). construction equipment and methods.
(*) The conduct of the “Design” stage studies takes between 3 months to 1 year depending on the prior level
of knowledge of the soil and the regional use of this soil in pavement base layers.
Table 3: Content of studies and anticipated outcomes as a function of the stage of the project.
It is indispensable for this study procedure to be applied in full in the case of works where there are major
technical and economic stakes and for which a soil treatment solution is considered in the tender invitation
documents (DCE).
In the case where the contract allows for alternatives, the DCE must specify that the contractor must provide
details about the characterization of the deposit and the mix design study as specified in the Design stage in
Table 3 to support its tender.
The batches of uniform soil that are ready for use are then identified using a Soil Data Sheet (annexes A and
B). This distinguishes 2 levels of soil uniformity, H1 and H2. Level H3 describes the limits to use.
1.3.1 - Minimum features of the geotechnical survey
On the basis of the test borings and visual observation of the removed materials, it is possible to make a
preliminary classification on the basis of geological groups of materials which are visually similar.
Each of these groups is then characterized by a minimum number of geotechnical identification tests which
depends on the volume of material to be used.
In the absence of other instructions, this minimum number can be evaluated using Table 4.
(V) volume of the Minimum number of tests to characterize each group of soils
pavement layer to
be constructed Nature of soil State of humidity
(m³)
V 104 9 16
Relative range
Relative
of the VBS or
Level of range of the
Ip Possible use in pavement base layers
uniformity ρd NPO (er)
measurements
(*)
(er) (*)
Sub-base layer with traffic ≤ T1
H1 er ≤ 4 %
er < 40% Road base layer with traffic ≤ T3
Sub-base layer with traffic ≤ T2
H2 4 < er ≤ 6 %
er < 40% Road base layer with traffic ≤ T4
(*) er is the ratio between the range of the measurements and their average.
Table 5: classification and use of class A1 and A2 treated fine soils according to their level of uniformity
Uniformity criteria
Level of Possible uses in pavement Fraction passing an e* of fraction
er** de VBS (1)
uniformity base layers 80 μm screen passing a
2mm
mean e* screen***
Sub-base layer for traffic ≤ T1 ≤ 15 % ≤6%
H1 ≤ 40 % and and ≤ 20 %
Base for traffic ≤ T3 > 15 % ≤8%
≤ 15 % >8%
Not usable in pavement base
H3 > 40 % and or > 30 %
layers
> 15 % > 12 %
* e is the range of measurements
** er is the ratio between the range of the measurements and their average.
*** only in the case of gravelly soils or medium or coarse sandy soils
(1)
only applies when VBS is equal to or less than 0.2 er
Table 6: classification and use of treated sandy or gravelly soils according to their uniformity
The scope of application of these materials will then be decided on the basis of Table 7.
Traffic class
Type of soil Pavement layer
< or = T4 T3 T2 T1
Fs < 50 Fs < 50
Sub-base layer
Sandy soils
Base
Sub-base layer E E E D
Gravelly soils
Base E D
Table 7: intrinsic characteristics (XP P 18-545) [76]
The study must fix the proportion of hydraulic binder, the proportion of lime when pretreatment is necessary,
the bulk density and the compaction moisture content required for the works. It also gives the mechanical
characteristics used for design, the water content of the mix and estimates its frost resistance. If previous
studies have not revealed the sensitivity of the performance of the mix to dispersion in the mix design
parameters, this analysis should be conducted in the course of the mix design study.
The methodological standard that is applicable for the soils covered by this guide is NF P 98-114-3 [32].
Two types of study are defined by the standard NF P 98-114-3 [32]: the full study and the limited study
which is used for mixes that are well tried and tested. Nevertheless, above traffic level ≥ T3, a full study
must be performed for tried and tested mixes if experience is insufficient to predict their performance with
this level of traffic.
1.4.2 - Need for pretreatment with lime
When soil treatment is applied to the capping layer, but even more when it is applied to pavement base layers
for which a higher level of performance is required, the role of lime is not limited to controlling the hydric
condition of the soil to be treated. The regulation phase, which is extremely important, should already have
been performed during the creation of stockpiles of uniform usable materials.
The function required of lime in this document is to prepare the clayey soil to form a stable mixture with a
hydraulic binder. To do this, the attempt is made to achieve an optimal level of flocculation of the clayey
colloids, which makes the soil change from a compact state (stacking of flakes of clay) to a well-spaced or
flocculated state (disordered arrangement), which is much more compatible with the uniformity required of
the mix. The attempt is therefore made above all to achieve the most intimate mixture possible between the
clayey soil and the lime and not simply to coat soil aggregates, even if the fineness of the soil before
pretreatment appears visually satisfactory (with agglomerates < 20 mm).
The pretreatment of low plasticity soils is also necessary, unless a laboratory study has shown otherwise.
However, it is frequently advisable to specify an optimum content that should not be exceeded at the risk of
limiting, or even impairing, the mechanical performance.
1.4.3 - Choice of binder for the mix design study
Generally, the mix design study should be conducted by the contract manager during the project design
stage. As it is quite often not possible to know what binder the contractor will use to perform the works, it is
recommended to choose a standardized cement from a local cement plant. As a rule, the binder consists of a
CEM II A or B 32.5 binder as described in the standard NF EN 197-1 [57]. The choice of a hydraulic road
binder for this study is therefore only justified if there is a considerable amount of experience of its use with
the soil in question and it is in frequent use locally. The studies performed with the cement or the selected
hydraulic road binder provides a means of verifying that the mechanical class used in the design calculation
is obtainable. Moreover, this design mechanical class will be used later in order to evaluate alternatives
proposed by the contractors, in accordance with Part 25 of the General Technical Specifications (CCTG) [1].
1.4.4 - Soil specimen used for the study
The mix design study is to be conducted on a specimen of soil or a mixture of soils which are representative
of the deposit(s) that are being considered (see section 2.3), that have been identified and whose uniformity
is known.
This sample should be subjected to testing to establish its suitability for treatment using the accelerated
swelling tests as specified in the standard NF EN 13286-49 [68] supplemented by indirect tensile strength
tests as described in the standard NF EN 13286-42 [65] conducted on another series of specimens that have
been manufactured and conserved in accordance with the standard NF EN 13286-49 [68]. This test should
take place at the earliest possible stage in the project in order to identify any risks of swelling or setting
failure. It is desirable to perform it during the preliminary studies or the draft design stage adopting the
approach described in Table 3 in Section 2.2. The results are to be interpreted on the basis of the criteria set
out in Table 8.
When the verdict of the test is “suitable”, the study must nevertheless be continued. When the results are
considered to be “doubtful”, the continuation of the study depends on the construction site context (the
treatment study may be continued if there is some hope of bringing about an improvement by increasing the
spread rate, selecting other binders or pretreatment of the soil). In the case where treatment is “unsuitable”,
the studied solution will be abandoned.
1.4.5 - Complete study
The complete study, which is required for all mixtures for which experience is limited, includes:
• identification of the studied soil sample and, if applicable, the other constituents;
• identification of the binders, lime and activators;
• study of the compacting references using the modified Proctor test according to the standard NF EN
13286-2 [64] or the standard Proctor test according to the standard NF P 94-093 [25];
• study of the immediate stability by determining the on-site bearing ratio (IPI) according to the standard NF
EN 13286-47 [67];
• determining the age at which construction site traffic is permitted;
• measuring the workability time according to the standard NF EN 13286-45 [66] (Studies are currently in
progress to specify a suitable test procedure for fine soils);
• evaluation of the water resistance and frost resistance;
• study of long-term mechanical performance;
• study of the effect of dispersion in composition on mechanical performance;
• determination of the basic mix design.
Data about lime pretreatment operations: if construction site conditions (see § 4.2.3) give the impression
that the proportion of lime will have to be changed, it is essential to perform, in addition to the mix design
study, a study of sensitivity to the proportion of lime that includes minimum and maximum limits for
pretreatment. In this case, the study may be conducted using the method described in the standard NF P 98-
114-3 [32] or in Table 14 in this guide.
The limited study, which is only performed in the case of mixes that have already been tested (as defined in
the standard NF P 98-114-3 [32], omits the determination of the age at which construction site traffic is
permitted, the workability time and frost resistance. As the tests are only performed on one mix design, it is
not possible to modify the proportions in order to specify a different basic formula.
Although the standard does not require determination of the water sensitivity, doing so is recommended
during the limited studies: it is frequently the only criterion that indicates whether preliminary treatment with
lime is required, particularly in the case of A1, B5 and B6 soils.
1.4.7 - Identification of the constituents
Soils
The sample that is used, which is in conformity with the FTS of the soil batch which it represents (see § 2.3
and annex A), should be identified, in particular on the basis of its origin and its classification according to
NF P 11-300 [16] and by any other necessary test (for example, chemical or mineralogical analysis).
Binders and limes
These are identified and verified according to the applicable standards (NF EN 459-1 [58] and NF EN
14227-11 [72] for limes, NF EN 197-1 [57] for cements and NF P 15-108 [17], awaiting publication of the
European standard NF EN 13282 [63] that is currently being prepared, , for hydraulic road binders) or on the
basis of the CFTR technical assessments or similar documents.
1.4.8 - Reference tests for compaction
The reference standards are NF EN 13286-2 [64] for the modified Proctor test and NF P 94-093 [25] for the
standard Proctor test.
Depending on the type of soil study, the following compaction energy will be applied:
• The modified Proctor energy for sands with less than 35% of particles smaller than 80µm. In the case of
some sands, it is difficult to achieve the modified Proctor density on site (lamination, insufficient
cohesion). If construction site data are available, the conditions under which specimens are prepared in the
laboratory may be adjusted;
• the standard Proctor energy for most other soils. It is however possible to use the modified Proctor test for
some gravelly soils with a low clay content, on condition that experience has shown that the dry density
which is normally achieved during works with these treated soils is compatible with this test.
1.4.9 - Study of the immediate stability
The determination of the on-site bearing ratio (IPI) is conducted as described in NF EN 13286-47. The
bearing capacity thresholds given in Table 9 apply to treated materials with the water content in the study
formula.
Minimum on-site bearing
Type of soil
ratio (IPI)
A1, A2 20
B sandy 30
B gravelly 50
Table 9: minimum values of the on-site bearing ratio (IPI) for treated materials
1.4.10 - Specimens
Preparation of mixtures
The dimensions of the specimens are selected on the basis of the D of the studied soil or mixture of studied
soils. The correspondence is given in Table 10. The dimensions given in bold in the table are to be preferred
(over the dimensions given in normal italic characters).
Ø5 × h 5 cm (**) Ø5 × h 5 cm (**)
Ø5 × h 10 cm (**) Ø5 × h 10 cm (**)
A1, A2
Ø 10 × h 10 cm Ø 10 × h 10 cm
Ø 10 × h 20 cm Ø 10 × h 20 cm
Ø 16 × h 16 cm
B gravelly
Ø 16 × h 32 cm
Ø5 × h 5 cm (**)
Ø5 × h 10 cm (**)
Ø 10 × h 10 cm
B sandy
Ø 10 × h 20 cm
Ø 16 × h 16 cm
Ø 16 × h 32 cm
(1) D is the maximum screen size for which the passing fraction is between 80 % and 99 %
(see Table 2 in chapter 2).
(*) tests conducted on the 0-6 mm fraction.
(**) only for the measurement of Rt
Table 10: specimen dimensions
In order to take account of the difficulties of compaction that occur in thick layers, two cases are considered.
Case 1: a layer with a thickness ≤ 30 cm. In order to be consistent with the standards relating to
methodologies for studying treated gravels and sands for pavement base layers, specimens for unconfined
compression tests or tensile tests (direct or by diametral compression) are compacted to a dry density of
98.5% of ρde at the OPN or 97 % of ρde at the OPM depending on the studied soil (see § 2.4.7). Table 11
shows the specimen preparation procedure to be followed.
Case 2: a layer with a thickness > 30 cm or a single combined capping layer and roadbase. The
specimens for the unconfined compression tests are compacted to a dry density of 98.5% of ρde at the OPN
or 97 % of ρde at the OPM depending on the studied soil. Tensile tests (direct or by diametral compression)
performed on specimens that have been compacted to a dry density of 96% of the OPN or 95% of the OPM
depending on the studied soil. Table 12 shows the specimen preparation procedure to be followed.
1.4.11 - Conservation
1.4.12 - Performance
Criteria Thresholds
Rc at the age of the treated soil when it is open Rc ≥ 1.0 MPa (*) for aggressiveness of level A (***)
Age at which construction site traffic is
to traffic depending on the aggressiveness of Rc ≥ 1.2 MPa (*) for aggressiveness of level B (***)
permitted
the traffic (see Table 34)
Rc ≥ 1.5 MPa (*) for aggressiveness of level C (***)
≥ 0.80 if VBS ≤ 0.5
Water sensitivity Ratio: Rc (28j + 32 i )/ Rc 60 j
≥ 0.70 if VBS > 0.5
Rit at the age of the soil at the probable first
Frost resistance > 0.25 MPa
occurrence of frost
Classification according to
Long term performance Rt or Rit and E after at least 90 days (**) NF EN 14227-10 [71]
or NF P EN 14227-13 [74 ]
(*) The temperature of conservation is normally 20°C. However, if the works are to take place towards the end of the year, the average local temperature may
be used. The 1.2 MPa threshold may be raised in certain cases.
(**) And also perhaps after 28 and/or 60 days, in particular in order to evaluate frost resistance.
(***) See Table 34
0.8 le le 1.2 le
0.9 we
95 % ρde we X
1.1 we
0.9 we X
ρde we X X X
1.1 we X
0.9 we
102 % ρde we X
1.1 we
Where ρde , we and le are the density, bulk density, the water content and the binder
content of the studied formula..
If the deposit or the mixture of soils which is intended for use exhibits variations in water content which
exceed the extremes considered in Table 14 above, the water content ranges may be extended on the basis of
local experience, on condition that the bearing capacity and the density objectives are achieved during the
works.
The results obtained are to be entered in the design chart of the standard NF P 98-114-3 [32]. Exploitation of
these results in accordance with the standards using linear interpolation, makes it possible to specify the
basic mix design for the intended performance class. If no result achieves the intended class, a new study
must be performed. The proportioning of the new study formula may be defined by extrapolating the results
of the sensitivity study.
2 - Design
Treated soil structures are to be designed using the technical guide “Conception et le dimensionnement des
structures de chaussées” Sétra-LCPC 1994 [3] (referred to below as the 1994 Technical Guide for the Design
of Pavement Structures). This method consists of comparing the tensile stress (σt) at the base of the layer of
treated soil, calculated using the Burmister model, to the allowable stress of the material (σad), calculated
using the formulae below.
σad = σ6 . ( NE /106 )b . kc . kd . kr . ks
kr= 10-ubδ and δ= ( (SN2 + (Sh.c/b)2 )1/2
where:
• σ6 is the stress for which the tensile failure of a 360 day old specimen is obtained after 106 cycles (MPa);
• NE is the number of equivalent standard axle loads for the PL traffic;
• b is the fatigue slope of the material expressed as a bi-logarithmic equation;
• kc is a calibration coefficient;
• kd is a coefficient that takes account of the discontinuities in rigid structures, taken as 1 for the structures
covered by this guide;
• kr is a coefficient which adjusts the allowable deformation or stress value with reference to the design risk
and the dispersion factors;
• ks is a coefficient that takes account of local variations in the bearing capacity of the underlying unbound
layer;
• SN is the standard deviation of the logarithm of the number of cycles that results in fatigue failure;
• Sh is the standard deviation of the thickness in the layer of laid materials (m);
• c is a coefficient that links the variation in deformation to the random variation in pavement thickness
(cm–1);
• u is a random variable of the reduced centred normal distribution for the risk r (the values of u with
reference to the design risk rc are provided in the checklist in the annex of the 1994 Technical Guide for the
Design of Pavement Structures [3]);
• rc is the design risk.
N.B. As the materials covered by this document are highly sensitive to water, particular care must be paid to
pavement design in order to avoid water ingress and ponding (see § 3.4.5).
The design hypotheses to be applied are those given in the 1994 Technical Guide for the Design of Pavement
Structures, subject to the conditions stated below.
Two classifications will be considered in order to evaluate the traffic carried by a road:
• The Ti traffic class which corresponds to the total number of PLs with a total gross weight equal to or
over 35 kN, per day and for each traffic direction when the road is opened to traffic;
• this classification is used in order to choose the geometrical characteristics of the road and the pavement
materials;
• The TCi traffic class which corresponds to the cumulative number of PLs for each direction on the most
highly trafficked lane that the pavement is expected to carry during its design life;
Table 15 sets out the Ti traffic classes on opening of the road, as a function of the average annual daily
traffic (AADT) for PLs on the most highly trafficked lane.
For pavement design, it is necessary to evaluate the total number of PLs the road will have to withstand
during its service life.
⎡ t x d x (d - 1) ⎤
TC = 365 x N x ⎢d + ⎥⎦ x r
⎣ 2
N is the number of PLs with a total gross weight ≥ 35 kN per day and for each direction on opening of the
road
r is the coefficient that represents the transverse distribution of PLs on the carriageway
– two-way roads with a width ≥ 6 m : r=1
– two-way roads with a width of 5 to 6 m: r = 1.5
– two-way roads with a width < 5 m: r=2
In general, for the roads where these techniques are applied, the service life can be considered to be 20 years
with a traffic growth rate of 0.02 per year.
Table 16 shows, under these conditions, the cumulative traffic classes (TCi) that have been selected, for two-
way roads with a width of more than 6 metres carrying different Ti traffic classes on opening.
In order to take account of these differences, a coefficient of average aggressiveness (CAM) is determined on
the basis of the distribution spectrum of the PLs using the pavement.
This coefficient can be used to calculate the number of equivalent standard axles (NE) using the formula NE
= TCi.CAM.
When the type of PL traffic is known, the CAM is calculated using the method described in the 1994
Technical Guide for the Design of Pavement Structures [3].
For roads where precise data on the distribution of the types of PL is lacking, the CAM values shown in
Table 17 will be used for treated soils.
For the design of treated soil pavement layers, the minimum long-term bearing capacity classes, which vary
depending on the traffic, are as follows:
• Ti traffic < T3 traffic: subgrade bearing capacity ≥ PF1
• Ti traffic ≥ T3 traffic: subgrade bearing capacity ≥ PF2
N.B.
The 1998 Sétra LCPC catalogue of standard new pavement types [7], which applies to the national road
network specifies a minimum subgrade of PF2.
In the case of PF1 subgrades, the bearing capacity of the subgrade when the pavement layers are constructed
must be equal to or greater than 35 MPa in order to permit adequate compaction of the treated layer.
In the case when the use of in-situ treated soils in pavement layers still does not permit acceptance of the
pavement subgrade, it is necessary to estimate the bearing capacity of the subgrade on the basis of the
geotechnical characteristics of the materials or to measure the bearing capacity at the top of the layer to be
treated before any treatment operation.
Section 2.1 defines two types of soil on the basis of the identification of the initial material:
• fine or sandy soils,
• gravelly soils.
During treatment design, a material quality class (SOIL Ti) is defined on the basis of the pair of values E - Rt
as defined in the standards NF EN14227-10 [71] or NF EN14227-13 [74].
As design is performed on the basis of characteristics after 360 days and the values of Rt and the moduli are
frequently obtained after 90 days or 180 days, in the absence of specific results, the values measured at a
minimum age of 90 days are to be applied without correction.
For information only, the values of the E – Rt value pairs obtained during the studies that have been
performed have been plotted on the graph in the standard that defines the quality class of treated soils (see
Table 18 and Graph 1).
Résistance en traction Rt (MPa) à 90 jours minimum: Tensile strength Rt –MPa after a minimum of 90 days
• Module élastique E (103 MPa) à 90 jours minimum: Elasticity modulus E (103 MPa ) after a minimum of
90 days
• Sols fins et sableux: Fine sandy soils
• Sols graveleux: Gravelly soils
• Droite sols fins et sableux: Line for fine sandy soils
• Droite sols graveleux: Line for gravelly soils
The threshold values in Table 19 have been used for the examples given in Section 3.6. They may also be
used in order to create an initial design for a catalogue of regional structures.
The value of E and Rt that are obtained for specimens in the laboratory are reduced in a way that reflects the
differences between the performance obtained in the laboratory and on site.
The two levels of quality AC1 and AC2 are defined in the section on Implementation (see § 4.3.1.).
Treatment in a plant is only a possibility if it is guaranteed that the materials will flow correctly through the
different units in the plant (class B soils and class A soils that have been pretreated with lime).
Table 20 gives the reductions to be applied to the moduli E and strengths Rt measured in laboratory as a
function of the quality of the treatment.
The transition from Rt to σ6 used for design is obtained by using the equation σ6 = 0.95 Rt.
Other design parameters
On the basis of fatigue studies (see Bulletins de liaison des laboratoires des Ponts et Chaussées n° 133 [77]
and 134 [78]) leads to the adoption of the following values for treated soils:
• slope of the fatigue line 1/b
1/b = - 11
• standard deviation of the fatigue law SN
Fine soils SN = 0.8
Sandy soils SN = 0.8
Gravelly soils SN = 1.0
These values are identical to those stated in the 1994 Technical Guide for the Design of Pavement Structures
[3].
• Standard deviation of thicknesses Sh
Sh depends on the type of treatment and the type of material. Table 21 gives the values to be applied.
Type of treatment Imported materials (1) Materials treated in-situ
Type of material
Fine or sandy soils 0.025 m 0.04 m
Gravelly soils 0.03 m 0.05 m
(1) values obtained from the 1994 Technical Guide for the Design of Pavement Structures
Table 21: standard deviation of thicknesses
• Calibration coefficient kc
kc = 1.4
• Risk value rc
Risk value rc
Cumulative traffic class Tci TC1 and TC0 TC2 TC3 TC4 TC5
Semi-rigid structures 20 % 12.5 % 10 % 7,5 % 5%
Foundations 50 % 50 % 35 % 20 % 10 %
Composite structures
Table 22: risk values rc
• Other coefficients
The other coefficients that are involved in design are identical to those defined in the 1994 Technical Guide
for the Design of Pavement Structures [3].
2.3.2 - The interface conditions
Il all cases, particular attention must be paid to protecting the surface of the treated soil and promoting
bonding with the overlying layer (see § 4.5)
The treated soils covered by this guide may be used in road base layers for traffic up to level T3 and in sub-
base layers for traffic up to level T1.
2.4.2 - Minimum qualities
The minimum quality class for treated soils depends on the envisaged use (road base layer or sub-base layer)
and the traffic the pavement carries.
The minimum necessary quality classes are set out in Table 24.
Traffic class Ti trafficT5 trafficT4 trafficT3 trafficT2 trafficT1
Road base layer SOIL T2 SOIL T2 (*) or SOIL T3 SOIL T3 (**) (**)
Sub-base layer SOIL T1 SOIL T1 SOIL T2 SOIL T2 SOIL T3
(*)A class of SOIL T2 may be accepted only for sandy and gravelly soils.
(**) Use in a road base layer for T2 or T1 traffic may be envisaged in the context
of a project that trials techniques that improve the quality of the interface between pavement base layers and the surfacing.
When the treated materials are used in sub-base layers, different types of road base layers can be considered
resulting in the following types of structures:
• composite structures;
• semi-rigid structures with a road base layer consisting of imported materials bound with hydraulic. The
case where treated soils are imported for use in a road base layer can be assimilated to this type of
structure;
• other semi-rigid structures with a thick asphaltic road base layer but which cannot be classified as a
composite structure;
• inverted structures with a layer of unbound graded aggregate covered with bituminous materials;
• cement concrete structures. In this case, it is necessary to lay a first layer of asphalt concrete in the case of
high traffic levels, followed by a cement concrete wearing course.
2.4.4 - Surfacing layers
Table 25 gives the total thickness of the asphalt layers to be laid on top of the layers of treated soil.
Cumulative traffic TCi Traffic TC0 Traffic TC1 Traffic TC2 Traffic TC3
Type of soil
Fine soils 6 cm 6 cm 10 cm 12 cm
Sandy soils Surface 6 cm 8 cm 10 cm
dressing
Gravelly soils Surface Surface dressing 8 cm 10 cm
dressing
In the case of use in car parks and similar areas, a 6 cm asphalt concrete
surfacing layer is necessary in all cases even in the absence of PLs.
Table 25: thickness of the surfacing
In all cases, the mix design of the asphaltic layer must provide a maximum amount of waterproofing
(flexible asphalt concrete).
The usual rules for designing surfacing layers as a function of the type of road base layer used are applicable.
2.4.5 - Constructional measures
As the materials covered by this guide are very sensitive to water, particularly care must be paid to
pavement design in order to avoid the ingress and stagnation of water.
This method may be simplified by not considering mechanical protection and by using the simplified method
for calculating the thermal protection provided by the pavement structure.
In accordance with this guide, any pavement with a value of Rit ≥ 0.25 MPa is considered not to be frost
susceptible.
The first design is for a semi-rigid structure made from fine or sandy treated soil of quality AC1 laid on a
PF2 subgrade.
Three materials, corresponding respectively to the classes SOIL T3, SOIL T2, and an intermediate class
corresponding to the hypotheses for treated soil in the catalogue of structures for Ile de France (the Greater
Paris Region).
The mechanical performance design values that are applied for these materials are as follows:
SOIL T3 E ≥ 6200 MPa Rt ≥ 0,80 MPa
SOIL T2 E ≥ 4000 MPa Rt ≥ 0,44 MPa
Treated IdF soil E ≥ 5333 MPa Rt ≥ 0,56 MPa
These mechanical performance hypotheses are at the bottom of the class for SOIL T3 and SOIL T2 classes
and in the middle of the class for IDF treated soil.
Other hypotheses:
• Slope of the fatigue line 1/b = − 11
• Standard deviation of fatigue SN = 0.8
• Standard deviation of thickness Sh= 0.025
• Calibration coefficient kc = 1.4
• Risk see § 3.3.1.2, Table 22
• Interface hypotheses:
– bonded sub-base layer on subgrade
– semi-bonded road base layer on a treated soil sub-base
Cumulative traffic
class over a period of
20 years TCi
and number of SOIL T3 SOIL T2 Treated IDF soil
equivalent standard
axles NE used for
design
12 cm B
traffic TC3
Not used Not used
28 cm as a road base layer as a road base layer
NE = 0.6 106 Eq
10 cm B 10 cm BB 10 cm BB
traffic TC2
In 2
26 cm 43 cm 30 cm
layers
NE = 0.2 106 Eq
6 cm B 6 cm BB 6 cm BB
traffic TC1
In 2
26 cm 42 cm 30 cm
layers
NE = 0.1 106 Eq
6 cm BB
6 cm B 6 cm BB
traffic TC0
35 cm
25 cm 28 cm
NE =0.05 106 Eq
Table 26: example of quality AC1 imported treated soil laid on a PF2 subgrade
To provide an illustration, the calculation is given in detail for the following configuration:
• traffic class TC2 (cumulative traffic of 0.2.106 equivalent standard axles – Eq);
• a class PF2 subgrade;
• a treated soil of class SOIL T3.
For a SOIL T3, with the parameters described above, the allowable stress at the base of the treated soil is
obtained with the following equation:
b
⎛ NE ⎞
σad = σ 6 x ⎜ 6 ⎟ x kc x kd x kr x ks
⎝ 10 ⎠
where:
• σ6 = 0.57 MPa
• NE = 0.2 106
• b = - 1/11
• kc = 1.4
• kd =1
• kr = 10-ubδ
• ks = 1/1.1
from which:
0,210 6 − 1 / 11 1
σad = 0.57 x ( 6
) x 1,4 x 1 x 0,792 x = 0,664 MPa
10 1,1
26 cm
treated soil
E = 4650 MPa
bonded interface
PF2 E = 50 MPa
This modelling leads to the stresses and strains set out in matrix 1.
εt Base of asphalt
- 130.7 -1 - 65.85
concrete
σt Base of the layer
- 0.792 - 0.514 - 0.653
of treated soil (MPa)
εz Base of the layer
450.9 271.5 361.2
of treated soil
Matrix 1: deformation stresses calculated using the Alizé software [79]
The structure with 26 cm of class SOIL T3 treated soil and the semi-bonded hypothesis leads to a σt of 0.653
MPa, which is slightly below the allowable value of 0.664 MPa.
The εt values of the asphaltic materials and the εz values at the surface of the subgrade are also well
validated.
2.6.2 - Second example (Table 27)
This is a semi-rigid structure consisting of in-situ treated fine or sandy soils of quality AC2. The in-situ soil
(prior to treatment) provides a subgrade with a bearing capacity of PF1.
Three materials have been selected corresponding to the classes SOIL T3, SOIL T2, and an intermediate
class exhibiting the hypotheses adopted for treated soil in the catalogue of structures for Ile de France (the
Greater Paris Region).
The mechanical performance design values that are applied for these materials are as follows:
These mechanical performance hypotheses are at the bottom of the class for SOIL T3 and SOIL T2 classes
and in the bottom third of class SOIL T2 the IDF treated soil.
Other hypotheses:
• Slope of the fatigue line 1/b = − 11
• Standard deviation of fatigue SN = 0.8
• Standard deviation of thickness SH = 0.04
• Calibration coefficient kc = 1,4
• Risk see § 3.3.1.2, Table 22
– bonded sub-base layer on subgrade
– semi-bonded road base layer on a treated soil sub-base
– semi-bonded asphaltic material on a road base layer.
• Cumulative traffic used for structural design:
– traffic TC0
– traffic TC1
– traffic TC2
– traffic TC3
Cumulative traffic
class over a period of SOIL T3 SOIL T2 Treated soil from IDF
20 years TCi
and number of
equivalent standard
axles NE used for
design
12 cm B
traffic TC3
37 cm Not selected for Not selected for
NE = 0,6 106 Eq Road base layers Road base layers
10 cm B 10 cm BB 10 cm BB
traffic TC2
In 2 In 2
35 cm 48 cm 45 cm
layers layers
NE = 0,2 106 Eq
6 cm B 6 cm BB 6 cm BB
traffic TC1
In 2 In 2
34 cm 47 cm 44 cm
layers layers
NE = 0,1 106 Eq
6 cm BB
6 cm BB 6 cm BB
traffic TC0
In 2
45 cm In 2
layers
33 cm 42 cm
NE =0,05 106 Eq layers
Table 27: example of structures with quality AC2 treated soil In-situ treated soil on a PF1 subgrade
3 - Implementation
3.1 - Foreword
The widespread use of treated soils in capping layers has resulted in gradual technological improvements
which mean that the use of this type of material can be envisaged in pavement base layers. The use of treated
soils in pavement base layers is therefore primarily the application of an “earthworks” technique (even if
nowadays the boundary between the capping layer and the sub-base layer is sometimes very unclear).
There are therefore major differences between the manufacturing and laying “chain” for works involving
treated soil for use in a pavement base layer and for conventional works for pavement layers, for example
with regard to the following points:
• the uniformity of the “raw” material is variable;
• this material may have been pretreated with lime, a varying length of time before use;
• the material generally retains a degree of water sensitivity;
• unlike with granular material, there is not always a stockpile;
• manufacturing usually takes place by mixing in-situ and more rarely in a plant. Consequently, the water
content and particle size distribution are more difficult to control.
The success of a treated soil pavement base layer will consequently depend to a very great extent on the
quality of the operations which transform the raw material deposit into the completed treated soil layer.
The fundamental points to which the participants in such works must pay attention include:
• the material must have uniform grading and moisture content and a Dmax value of less than 31.5mm;
• the binder(s) must be added in the correct amounts regularly and taking into account of the fact that
manufacturing and laying will give results that differ from the laboratory performance study;
• the mix design should enable the works to be conducted under normal climatic conditions in spite of the
material’s residual sensitivity;
• compliance with the laying thickness and degree of compaction specified by the studies must be obtained;
• the interfaces must provide the best possible bonding between the layers.
Finally, the techniques used provide must allow the above result to be achieved in the case of both small-
scale and large-scale works.
The sections which follow take stock of the rules that have been developed on the basis of various operations
involving different materials: sands with moderate clayey contents, low plasticity silts, granitic sands, etc.
The end of the section on laying contains a general flow chart of soil treatments for pavement base layers
(Figure 1) which summarizes the various stages that are required for the scenarios considered in this guide
(treatment in situ, in a plant, etc.).
However, the experience that has been acquired cannot be considered as definitive; a range of variations may
be encountered during these works and before any operation is performed analysis of all the potentially
influential parameters must be conducted.
An economic study has been performed (see annex C) in order to see how each item contributes to the total
cost of a treated soil used in pavement base layers. This analysis has revealed that the cost of design and
testing are marginal compared with the total cost of treatment.
In what follows a number of soil preparation techniques which may help achieve the quality required for
pavement base layers are described.
3.2.1 - Sorting of the material
The aim of this is to remove any undesirable materials that are mixed with the deposit of soil to be treated. It
is performed applying the techniques which are normally used in earthworks and makes intermediate
stockpiling necessary.
3.2.2 - Removing aggregate above a certain size
As has already been mentioned in the section on Design, the Dmax of the treated soils used in road
foundations must comply with the values set out in Table 2 in the section on Design (see § 2 .1).
To achieve this, one or more of the following may be necessary, depending on the nature of the soils to be
treated:
• pretreatment of clayey materials with lime;
• soil loosening using a plough in order to bring blocks to the surface where they are grouped together,
collected and, if necessary, crushed;
• in-situ size reduction using special machinery; if in-situ size reduction requires several passages of
machinery, intermediate compaction between each passage will improve the effectiveness of the operation;
• screening the materials;
• etc.
3.2.3 - Pretreatment with lime
The proportion of lime (a minimum of 1%) must be that decided on during the treatment study. If the soil has
a high moisture content, the proportions may be changed on the basis of the hydric condition, unless this has
been rejected by the study. If the meteorological conditions (heat, drought) mean that it is necessary to add
water, an alternative solution may be envisaged, for example the use of slaked lime, which uses less water, or
milk of lime, which, in contrast, provides a slight degree of moistening if required. The most common
solution is to moisten the soil more before the treatment operations in order to take account of the drying of
the soil caused by the lime. Failure to comply with the proportions of lime which are recommended by the
study is likely to lead to variations in:
• Proctor reference density;
• mechanical performance.
Mixing must be performed with a horizontal shaft soil pulverizer. It should be borne in mind that the speed
of travel of this equipment can have a direct impact on the fineness which is obtained. The finest possible
result should be sought, at most 0/20 mm.
In all cases, closure of the treated surface by compaction as the work progresses is indispensable.
After pretreatment with lime, it is necessary to wait for at least 12 hours before treatment with hydraulic
binders.
3.2.4 - Creation of stockpiles and rehandling
The creation of a stockpile or temporary depot can help to improve the uniformity of a soil if appropriate
construction methods and equipment are used.
The methods that are usually used to create stockpiles of materials are applicable to the creation of
provisional stockpiles of soils:
• preparing storage areas and creating slopes or ditches at the base of the future slopes to permit drainage of
water from the stockpile thus avoiding the build-up of water within it;
• laying an anti-contamination geotextile at the base of a stockpile if necessary;
• building up the stockpile in single layers whose thickness will depend on the nature of the materials and
equipment used;
• creating slopes with sufficient gradients with levelling, if necessary, and light compaction in order to
guarantee the stability of the stockpile and limit water ingress;
• careful shaping of the slopes;
• creating berms which can be used by construction site traffic if necessary;
• in the case of granular soils which are prone to segregation, the materials should be dumped on the layer
which is in the process of being laid and spread using a bulldozer as work progresses;
• materials should be rehandled using a method which is compatible with the way in which the stockpile has
been built up. If the stockpile has been created in thin layers (< 0.60 m) rehandling is best performed from
the front (loader, shovel) but if the stockpile consists of continuous heaps dumped by tipcarts and trucks in
large thicknesses, rehandling in thin layers should be preferred (scraper);
• when rehandling stops, it is advisable to leave a small thickness of material to avoid contamination
between the underlying soil and the stockpiled materials .
When performed in this way, rehandling of the stored materials helps to improve their uniformity with regard
to particle size distribution and water content.
The stockpiling and rehandling operations may also be used to moisten the materials.
The uniformity provided by these operations is measured in the same way as the uniformity of a deposit.
3.2.5 - Moistening
The aim of this is to give the soil a water content that means that after treatment with a hydraulic binder the
mixture achieves the water content which has been specified by the mix design study, to within 1%. The
operation must take account of the water content of the soils and the losses which may occur during
treatment (evaporation, addition of dry materials). The free water in the soil must be uniformly distributed
within the soil agglomerates and immediately around them, which means a soak time which will depend on
the clay content of the soil is required.
If the water content needs to be corrected by less than 1%, this may be done immediately before the binder is
spread or during mixing.
If a correction of more than 1% is required, pre-moistening should performed in one or more stages.
Depending on the nature of the soils, the minimum time intervals between two moistening/mixing sequences
are set out in Table 28:
A1,A2 4 hours
B5, B6 2 hours
B2,B4 30 minutes
B3 0
Each moistening operation, which is limited to 2%, must be performed on material that has been scarified to
a depth of at least two-thirds of the thickness of the layer in order to limit the accumulation or flow of water
on the surface. Each moistening operation must be followed by mixing throughout its thickness.
The quantity of water added must be controlled, which means that it is necessary to use:
• pumps whose flow is coupled to the vehicle’s travel speed;
• flow meters;
• systems which provide good cross-sectional regularity (water spray bars, nozzles, plough systems).
The quality of the water must meet the requirements set out in NF P 98-100 / type 1 (or possibly type 2 after
verification by a specific study).
3.2.6 - Validity of the selected methods
All soil preparation procedures must undergo validation tests to show that the uniformity objectives specified
in the section on Studies (see § 2.3.2), as a function of the type of layer and the forecast anticipated traffic,
will be achieved.
3.3 - Manufacture
The technological progress made by equipment manufacturers, the technical specifications produced by
administrations and the know-how of contractors have made it possible to develop effective equipment
which is increasingly well suited to soil treatment, whether it is performed in situ or in a plant.
To facilitate selection of the right equipment, the contract manager and the contractor can refer to:
• The standards that lay down the terminology and the principal technical specifications;
• The technical assessments published by the CFTR and, in the case of some equipment, certificates of
technical capacity (CATM published by the CFTR) which state the suitability and performance levels
which may be attained.
The manufacture of treated soil mixes involves the following specific operations:
Adding binder
For in-situ treatment, the binder can be added in powdered form to the surface of the layer to be treated,
using a spreader.
It may be possible to add the binder in the form of a suspension (water + hydraulic binder) prepared in a
mobile mixer and injected directly into the mixing chamber.
In the case of treatment in a plant, the binder is carried by the auger feeder from the silo either to the
conveyor belt that transports the materials or directly into the mixer.
Environmental protection, in particular with regard to binder dust emissions, must be taken into account: the
appropriate measures for each type of equipment must be applied, perhaps with low dust emission binders.
Mixing
For in-situ treatment, mixing must be performed with horizontal shaft soil pulverizers.
This makes it possible to disperse the binder within the entire volume of the material to be treated and
achieve the desired fineness.
The quality of mixing will depend on the direction and the speed of rotation of the rotor, the travel speed of
the machinery, the shape and the number of the tools, how they are arranged on the rotor, their state of wear
as well as the volume of material in the mixing chamber and the position of the paver shutters.
The quality of mixing will depend on the linear speed of the tools, their shape, their number, how they are
arranged on the rotor (reverse paddles), their state of wear and the volume in the mixing chamber as
determined by the position of the retention trap.
As the mixing plant does not generally increase the fineness of fine clayey soils, it may be necessary to
prepare the soils specifically (loosening, pretreatment with lime). The desired grading of the manufactured
mix (Dmax) may be obtained by placing grids on the feed hoppers to remove large particles.
3.3.1 - The level of quality of the treatment equipment for pavement base layers
General comment: only speed-related spreaders are permitted for the treatment of soils for pavement base
layers are. They may be fitted with a system that provides information about the surface area treated every
day in order to check the daily spread rate as a function of the tonnage of binder that is spread.
The specification and acceptance of the equipment for a given in-situ treatment project with a hydraulic
binder may be performed on the basis of 2 criteria for powdered binder spreaders, one criterion relating to
sprinklers and four criteria to soil pulverizers.
CRITERION
3 2 1
Sprinklers
• W: quality of sprinkling
Table 30 shows the ratings that are applied for this criterion:
Rating of the criteria for sprinkling
CRITERION
3 2 1
Table 31: shows the ratings that are applied for this criterion:
N.B.
The standard NF P 98-115 [33] for the construction of pavement foundations stipulates that the machine
must have a horizontal rotor and possess a working depth display. The spraying systems (for water or
slurries) must be accurate to within 2%. For example, a coefficient of variation Cv greater than 5 % for the
depth (criterion E) is equivalent, at the structural level, to a reduction in thickness of approximately 10%.
Manufacturing plant
Depending on their dosing, control and automation systems, manufacturing plants may be classified into two
levels; level 2 corresponds to a plant with better performance than level 1.
Table 32, which has been taken from the standard NF P 98-732-1 [47], sets out the requirements for each
level for each function.
Checking of the moisture content of the Continuous (1) ,with results taken into account by the
mixture or the sand automatic data acquisition system
Data acquisition Data acquisition unit (2)
Automatic control All or nothing detector on each doser Compliance with the functions described in the article on
(aggregate and powder) “automatic control” in NFP 98-732-1 [47]
Proportioning of water Coupled to the mix design and the continuous
measurement of the water content of the constituents (3)
Proportioning of additives Coupled to the mix design
Variation in overall flow rate A conjugator that modifies the flow of all the constituents
(4)
(1) this specification is to be applied as soon as the necessary equipment has been developed
(2) a terminal or a computer socket must permit the connection of an additional data acquisition unit in compliance with the standard NF P 98-772-1 [47]
(3) the specification concerning the automatic consideration of the water content of aggregate will be applied as soon as the necessary equipment has been
developed
(4) the specification concerning the coupling of the conjugator to the water flow will be applied as soon as the necessary equipment has been developed
Table 32: requirements to be met according to the level of the mixing plants
Two levels of treatment quality (AC) are considered for the use of treated soils in pavement base layers.
The AC1 quality level (better than the level of quality AC2) requires the use of machinery with the minimum
characteristics set out in Table 33 (the unshaded part of the Table).
Rating or level 3 2 1
C or L
V
H
E
W or I
Manufacturing plant (1)
(1)
No level 3 manufacturing machinery currently exists.
Table 33: definition of the level of the quality of treatment AC1
For example, equipment with a coefficient CVHEW of 23233 has a quality level of AC1.
The AC2 quality level requires the use of equipment with the minimum characteristics set out in Table 34
(unshaded part of the table).
Rating or level 3 2 1
C or L
V
H
E
I or W
Manufacturing plant(1)
(1) )
No level 3 manufacturing machinery currently exists.
Table 34: definition of the level of the quality of treatment AC2
Treatment must be performed on the pavement base layer. It must be carried out as follows:
• preliminary moistening of the materials in accordance with the rules in § 4.2.5;
• determination of the surface density of binder to be spread (for example expressed per m2), according to
the density of the in-situ soil and the desired spread rate;
• spreading of the binder with a sprayer whose “C and V” ratings will determine the quality that is likely to
be achieved (AC1 or AC2);
• mixing performed with equipment whose ratings will determine whether class AC1 or AC2 is attained.
Mixing is continued until a soil/binder mixture of uniform colour is achieved whose fineness complies
with requirements (particles smaller than 20 mm). The water content may also be adjusted if necessary.
N.B.
Currently, treatment with hydraulic binders at the borrow pit or the stockpile is in principle not
recommended except for specific applications (in particular when access is difficult for treatment machinery,
for example in areas where space is lacking and around inspection chambers, poles, obstacles, etc.).
In most cases, in order to pass through a plant elements that are larger than 31.5 mm (clumps, agglomerates,
…) to be reduced in size.
The techniques used to crush clumps and agglomerates depend on the nature of the materials:
• the simplest technique is to crush them under the tracks of a bulldozer or the bucket of a shovel (when
enough time is available);
• the most sophisticated techniques use mixing equipment (soil pulverizers) or clod breaking equipment.
The second group of techniques involves materials that are pretreated with lime in particular: in-situ
densification, the loss of water and setting may produce agglomerates which have to be reduced in size when
materials are rehandled at a stockpile.
In all cases, any coarse elements that remain must be eliminated by installing an easily unclogged grid on the
hoppers.
When the stockpile is remote, a buffer stockpile which is sufficiently large for one or two day’s work must
be created at the mixing plant site. It is imperative for this to be protected to avoid variations in water content
(slope, closure of the surface, covering with tarpaulins…).
Manufacture
The manufacturing plant must be designed to take account of the fineness and bulk density of the materials
to be treated to reduce the risks of clogging, jamming, etc..
This means that allowance must be made, as early as the estimate of pricing, for a 30 to 50% reduction in the
nominal rate of the mixing plant (usually determined for treating graded aggregate).
The performance and the running of the plant must make it possible to respond to the following specific
requirements:
• Permit a high proportion of binder
As the binder proportion is usually high compared with treated graded aggregate, the number of silos must
be increased.
It is essential for the binder to be distributed throughout the width of the conveyor belt that transports the
material to the mixer.
• Ensure good flow
Even after pretreatment with lime, some soils (A1, A2, B5, B6…) remain sticky. In order to limit
problems with regard to flow, the following modifications are recommended:
– hoppers should have sides that are more vertical without constrictions and be covered in teflon or
stainless steel plates. An anti-arching device and appropriately positioned vibrators should assist the flow
of materials;
– installing scrapers on the belt scales and conveyor belts in order to reduce fouling.
At the start of works, the proportioning must be calibrated several times during the day’s work in order to
determine the average settings to be used when the plant is in full operation.
• Control of mixing
In view of the cohesive nature of fine soils, a satisfactory mixing time, which is generally longer than that
needed for treated sands and graded aggregate, is required.
For these soils, long shaft mixers are the most effective. With normal mixers, it is necessary to adjust the
vertical angle, the height of the retention trap and sometimes fit some reverse paddles.
New types of mixers which are specifically intended for soil treatment are currently being designed and
developed.
Adjustment of the water content in the mixer must not exceed 1%. Beyond this amount, pre-moistening
must be performed at the stockpile to ensure that the water has enough time to penetrate throughout the
material.
If a retarder needs to be used, it can be proportioned with the same equipment used for graded aggregate
bound with a hydraulic binder.
In order to eliminate the risk of contamination from materials whose workability time has been exceeded and
thereby avoid a reduction in transport capacity or imbalances during lifting, the containers must be scraped
and cleaned after each round trip.
If the substrate is used for construction site traffic (capping layer or sub-base layer), it is also important to
make sure that the tyres are clean so as to avoid subsequent problems with regard to the interface conditions.
3.4.2 - Laying
The aim of spreading is to distribute the imported material to facilitate preliminary levelling.
Preliminary levelling consists of achieving an additional thickness of 10 to 25% more than the thickness of
the loosened material. This additional thickness, which is removed during the final levelling process,
minimizes lamination of the surface and avoids the risk of low zones. The required extra thickness is to be
determined by constructing a test strip or on the basis of experience from previous works.
In this case, the imported soil must imperatively be precompacted and preliminary levelling performed
before treatment so that the treated depth can be controlled. The height to which the initial levelling should
be performed is to be specified by means of a test strip.
After treatment, the operations will be performed as described in the previous section.
Partial compaction
To ensure the accuracy of the final altimetric adjustment, during partial compaction it is recommended to
apply approximately 80 % of the compaction energy that is required to achieve the final densification target,
or 100% of this energy in the case of materials that are susceptible to lamination.
Type V4 and V5 vibratory compactors (as defined in the standard NF P 98-736 [48]) are not recommended
when the depths of material for compaction are low (to avoid the risk of lamination) and allow the use of
lower energy compactors.
Vibratory tamping roller compactors may be used in the case of soils with a tendency to laminate.
Nevertheless, a preliminary test strip is required to ensure that no imprints are left on the surface.
Maintaining the hydric condition of the surface
This is achieved by spraying water on the surface (using a fine jet water spray bar), during laying or before
the surface protection is applied according to the meteorological conditions.
It does not lengthen the workability time nor correct the water content of the mixture in the mass.
Final levelling
This operation consists of removing the additional thickness left on the entire surface of the layer after partial
compaction.
The materials removed during the final levelling must be taken away from the site and not reused in
pavement base layers.
It should be noted that, in the case of laminated sheet materials, the currently recommended method is to
remove part of the laminated zone produced during partial compaction during the precise levelling phase,
and then to close the surface with tyred compactors.
Final compaction
The aim of this is to provide the additional compaction which is necessary to achieve the final densification
target and/or redensify the upper part of the compacted surface which may have been disturbed by the final
levelling operation.
Choice of a suitable surface protection will depend on the roles assigned to it, the nature of the treated soils,
and the mechanical and climatic stresses to which it is subjected.
3.5.1 - Characteristics related to the nature of the treated soils
In the case of a bituminous surface dressing laid on fine and sandy treated soils, embedment (1) is frequently
essential in order to ensure the surface protection is well anchored in the treated soil.
For treated soils with a good granular skeleton after compaction, no specific measure is generally necessary
to assist bonding of the surface protection.
3.5.2 - Mechanical stresses
Depending on the cumulative traffic carried during the works, the mechanical stresses can be classified by
order of increasing aggressiveness as shown in Table 35.
B 20 to 500 PLs
Table 35: aggressiveness classes according to the traffic carried by the treated layer before laying of the next layer
In cases A and B, the level of aggressiveness is increased by one class if speeds exceed 60 km/h and on bends.
Before being covered by the next pavement layer, treated soils which are covered by the surface protection
are exposed to climatic stresses.
(1)
embedment consists of spreading and setting entirely crushed chippings (code Ang.1 according to the standard XP P 18-545[76] in the surface of
the treated layer, after final compaction. The chippings should have good hardness characteristics (Los Angeles value less than or equal to 30), be
large (14/20 mm or more) and have a spread rate such that approximately 30 to 50% of the surface area is covered. Embedment must be performed
before the end of the workability time by 2 or 3 compactor passes and may be assisted by spraying water over the surface (approximately 1 litre/m²).
About half of the height of the chippings should be set into the material.
As for traffic, a classification of exposure levels in order of increasing severity is given in Table 36.
The types of surface protection are mainly the same as those described in the GTS. They are shown in
Table 37.
2nd layer:
1.5 kg of emulsion*
6 to 7 litres of 4/6 chippings**
Pre-chipped surface
dressing 8 to 9 litres of 10/14 chippings **
(EP) + This protection is comparable to that obtained by applying
a single surface dressing on a subgrade in which
2 kg of emulsion*
chippings have been embedded beforehand.
+
6 to 7 litres of 4/6 chippings**
* The surface density for a cationic emulsion with a bitumen content of 65%.
**The Los Angeles value of the chippings must be ≤ 30 and their cleanliness (fraction passing a 63 micron screen) ≤ 2 %
Table 37: types of surface protection
The effectiveness of these surface protections with respect to their possible roles is summarized in Table 38.
Roles
Sealing coat ES = = - = = +
Dust emissions from a treated soil pavement layer are a sign of deterioration: a non-confomance report must
be issued.
3.5.5 - Choice of the type of surface protection
In order to guarantee the durability of the protection while the layer is exposed, the types of surface
protection set out in Tables 39 and 40 are used, depending on the level of aggressiveness of the traffic, the
climatic exposure and the nature of the layer (sub-base layer or road base layer).
Sub-base layer
Level of climatic exposure
Level of aggressiveness
of construction site 0 1 2 3 4
traffic
A ES
B ES ES EM EM EM
C ES EM EM* or EB EB EB or EP**
* on gravelly soils
** on sandy soils without embedment
Table 39: choice of type of surface protection for sub-base layers
Sub-base layer
Level of climatic exposure
Level of aggressiveness
of construction site 0 1 2 3 4
traffic
A EM
B EM
C EM EM EB* or EP** EB* or EP** EB* or EP**
* prefer EB for waterproofing, particularly in the case of fine soils
** on sandy soils without embedment
Table 40: choice of type of surface protection for road base layers
It should be noted that the surface must be sprayed with water before any bitumen emulsion-based surface
protection is applied and that a certain time interval is required before the treated layer is opened to traffic.
1st case Treatment with a hydraulic binder in a plant of a natural soil or a soil that has been pretreated with
lime prior to laying.
2nd case Importation of natural soil or the lime-pretreated soil for in-situ treatment with a hydraulic binder.
3rd case Double in-situ treatment with lime and a hydraulic binder.
ARROS: Sprinkling of the water on the mixture to adjust the water content
CLOU Embedment
MALAX: Mixing the soil with a treatment product and, if necessary, moistening under the mixing bell
PREPAR: extraction and preparation of the soil (homogenization in situ or at the stockpile, breaking clods if
necessary,…)
PRE-REG: preliminary levelling of the subgrade (between 10 and 25 % above the final level)
SCAR: Scarification
This operation is not systematic and depends on the conditions at the construction site
This is because the quality of the pavement base layers, where the highest mechanical stresses are concentrated
(vertical deformation and tensile stress at the base of the treated layer) are concentrated, determine the
pavement’s service life.
This explains why this guide, while describing the technical choices and obligations, lays so much emphasis on
the minimum content of the quality assurance checks, in order to provide the most rigorous possible framework
for the performance of works.
Quality management plays a role from project design to acceptance of the works, particularly with regard to the
following points:
• Geotechnical surveys: these must determine or confirm:
– the soil classification (NF P 11-300 [16]),
– its class of uniformity,
– the current hydric conditions,
– the quantities of uniform soils that are genuinely available.
• Treatment products: these must be standardized or be covered by a technical assessment (or a similar
procedure);
• Treatment study: the aim of this is to determine the design of the “soil + binders” mixture which provides
the mechanical characteristics that are to be applied during design;
• Design: the mechanical characteristics of the treated soil – tensile strength (Rt) and modulus of elasticity (E) –
must be correctly measured (and, above all, not overestimated);
• The fatigue and interface conditions to be considered are those specified in this guide;
• Construction equipment: this must be compatible with the laboratory hypotheses and the required quality;
• Interface quality: the quality of bonding depends above all on the care taken when performing works.
Maintaining the hydric condition of the surface of the treated layers, avoiding dirt, reducing surface lamination
and the appropriate choice of surface protection greatly reduce the risk of debonding in the long term.
Table 41 (Construction site checks) guides decision-makers and contractors through the practical actions that
must be performed for each stage in the construction of treated soil pavement layers.
When these recommendations are identical with those in the standard NF P 98-115 [33] or in part C3 of the
technical guide "Traitement des sols à la chaux et/ou aux liants hydrauliques" (GTS - January 2000) [4], they
have not been repeated in detail in this table.
Rigorous application of this table will greatly help to guarantee the quality of the structure.
PRODUCT
Principal documents required for
APPROVAL:
decision-making:
conformance of the data sheet
BINDERS Decision taken by the project manager, on the
standards (NF mark if any)
Lime, Cement basis of:
mix design studies
Hydraulic binder the terms of the contract requirements
BEFORE 1 approval for every product and every source
EXECUTION OF THE the request for approval presented by the
WORKS contractor (accompanied by the documents
needed to make the decision).
- PREPARATION OF OTHER PRODUCTS Product data sheet
CONSTRUCTION Chippings for surface standards
SITE dressings, emulsion or
surface dressing binder data sheet (for each type of emulsion)
CONSTRUCTION
Data necessary for decision-making:
EQUIPMENT:
Decision by the project manager, based on: Appropriateness of type of equipment to the goals 1 acceptance for every machine
the terms of the contract and and construction technique (on condition that subsequent validation is performed after the
ACCEPTATANCE OF
documents proposed by the contractor Equipment data sheet suitability control test)
CHOICE
Dimensioning of plant
PRODUCTS Checking the conformance of the acceptance Periodic checks by the supplier (in conformity with 1 supplier internal checksheet
PREPARATION OF DELIVERED: sheet its PAQ) results sent to the contractor systematic checks of the product delivery sheets
SUITABILITY Regularity and precision of the rate of spread: The measurement method may be based on that Other equipment, must have been It must be repeated if the
coefficients of variation described in Annex 6 of the G.T.S [4] checked within the 12 months equipment is changed (or
- Cv (Tolerance in NF P 98-115 [33]) Cv < 10 % before the works repaired in a way that might
e≤5% alter its characteristics).
- precision: e
Binder spreader
Speading width To be measured and described if width variable
Mixer Condition of tools (teeth, blades) visual check
Mixing depth measurement and calibration (visible reference)
PREPARATION OF Sprinkler Regularity and precision of the rate of The measurement method may be based on that
THE spreading (flow meters and control system in described in Annex 6 of the G.T.S [4]
PERFORMANCE OF the case of a sprinkler-plough)
WORKS Mixing plant Adjustment and control of devices: Measurement of:
NF P 98-115 [33] (article 8.2.1.3) - regularity and precision of the rate of spread
(CCTG - part 25) NF P 98-744.1 [49] to 744.5 [50 to 53] - speed of the conveyor belts (materials, binders,
[1] water)
chaussées neuves") Altimetry of the substrate Topographical survey 3 tests: centre + edges
for 250 m2 for 150 m2
CHECKING Final levelling after treatment and compaction 2 points per profile (centre + 3 points per profile (centre +
staggered measurements at edges) R + L edges
TCi Cumulative traffic class corresponding to the cumulative number of heavy vehicles in each direction
on the most travelled lane that the pavement will have to withstand during its design life. It is used
for pavement design.
Vchaussée Volume of pavement materials
VBS Methylene blue value of a soil (this is expressed as the mass of methylene blue that can be absorbed
by 100 g of soil; the higher the clay content of the soil the higher its value), expressed in g of
methylene blue per 100g of soil.
W Moisture content
We Design moisture content of the soil or material expressed in %
WOPN Standard Proctor Optimum moisture content of the soil or material (this is the moisture content that
provides the ρdOPN when the soil or a material is compacted with Standard Proctor energy),
expressed in %
5 - Bibliography
General regulations
[1] Cahier des clauses techniques générales (CCTG) – fascicule 25 - Exécution des couches de chaussées.
(General Technical Specifications (CCTG) –Part 25 – Construction of Pavement Layers.
National guides
[2] Manuel de conception des chaussées neuves à faible trafic, guide technique
(Design manual for low traffic roads, technical guide),
[3] Conception et dimensionnement des structures de chaussées, guide technique
(Technical Guide for the Design of Pavement Structures)
[4] Traitement des sols à la chaux et/ou aux liants hydrauliques – Application à la réalisation des remblais et
des couches de forme, Guide technique, Sétra/LCPC, 2000 (referred to as the GTS),
(Treatment of soils with lime and/or hydraulic binders – Application to the construction of embankments and
capping layers, Sétra/LCPC Technical Guide.
[5] Réalisation des remblais et des couches de forme (dit GTR), guide technique (fascicules 1 et 2),
Sétra/LCPC, 2éme édition, juillet 2000, réf. : D9233.
(Construction of embankments and capping layers (known as the GTR), Technical Guide, Parts 1 and 2), 2nd
Edition, July 2000, ref. D9233).
[6] Retraitement en place à froid des anciennes chaussées, guide technique, Sétra/CFTR 2003, réf. D0309
(Cold in-situ retreading of existing pavements, Sétra/CFTR Technical Guide, 2003, ref. D0309
[7] Catalogue des structures types de chaussées neuves-guide technique, Sétra/LCPC 1998
(Catalogue of New Standard Pavement Structures, Sétra/LCPC Technical Guide 1998).
Regional guides
[8] Utilisation des matériaux de Haute-Normandie, guides techniques et monographies, guides techniques
« Les limons », « Les granulats marins », mars 2000, Région Haute-Normandie, UNICEM Normandie,
Préfecture Haute-Normandie, SPRIR Normandie, CETE Normandie-Centre, DRE de Haute Normandie.
(Use of the materials of Haute-Normandie, Technical Guides and Monographs, Technical Guides “Silts”,
“Marine Aggregate», March 2000, Région Haute-Normandie, UNICEM Normandie, Préfecture Haute-
Normandie, SPRIR Normandie, CETE Normandie-Centre, DRE de Haute Normandie).
[9] Utilisation des matériaux de Haute-Normandie, guides techniques et monographies , Monographies « Les
sables albiens », mars 2000, Région Haute Normandie, UNICEM Normandie, Préfecture Haute-
Normandie, SPRIR Normandie, CETE Normandie-Centre, Dre de Haute Normandie.
(Use of the Materials of Haute-Normandie, Technical Guides and Monographs, Monographs “Albian
sandstones”, March 2000, Région Haute Normandie, Unicem Normandie, Préfecture Haute-Normandie, SPRIR
Normandie, CETE Normandie-Centre, DRE de Haute Normandie).
[10] Guides Techniques pour l’utilisation des matériaux régionaux d’Ile-de-France, guides techniques « Les
limons », « Les sablons », décembre 1996, ARENE d’Ile de France, Préfecture d’Ile de France, Conseil
régional d’Ile de France, UNICEM Ile de France, SPRIR Ile de France.
(Technical Guides for the Re-use of the Regional Materials of the Paris Region, Technical Guides “Silts”,
“Fine sands”, December 1996, ARENE d’Ile de France, Préfecture d’Ile de France, Conseil régional d’Ile de
France, UNICEM Ile de France, SPRIR Ile de France).
[11] Guides Techniques pour la réutilisation des matériaux régionaux d’Ile-de-France, catalogue des
structures de chaussées de décembre 2003, ARENE d’Ile-de-France, Préfecture d’Ile-de-France, Conseil
régional d’Ile de France, UNICEM Ile-de-France, Sprir Ile-de-France.
(Technical Guides for the Re-use of the Regional Materials of the Paris Region, Catalogue of Pavement
Structures, December 2003, ARENE d’Ile-de-France, Préfecture d’Ile-de-France, Conseil régional d’Ile de
France, UNICEM Ile-de-France, SPRIR Ile-de-France).
Standards
[16] NF P 11-300 : Exécution des terrassements - Classification des matériaux utilisables dans la construction
des remblais et des couches de forme d’infrastructure routière.
(Earthworks – Classification of materials for use in the construction of road embankments and capping
layers).
[17] NF P 15-108 : Liants hydrauliques - Liants hydrauliques routiers - Composition, spécifications et critères
de conformité.
(Hydraulic binders – hydraulic road binders - composition, specifications and conformance criteria).
[18] NF P 18-576 : Granulats. Mesure du coefficient de friabilité des sables.
(Aggregates - Measurement of the friability coefficient of sands).
[19] NF P 94-049-1 : Sols - Reconnaissance et essais - Détermination de la teneur en eau pondérale des
matériaux – Partie 1 – Méthode de la dessiccation au four à micro-ondes.
(Soils - Investigation and testing - Determination of moisture content by weight - Part 1: microwave oven
drying method).
[20] NF P 94-049-2 : Sols - Reconnaissance et essais - Détermination de la teneur en eau pondérale des
matériaux - Partie 2 - méthode à la plaque chauffante ou panneaux rayonnants.
(Soils - Investigation and testing - Determination of moisture content by weight - Part 2: heating plate or
radiating panel method).
[21] NF P 94-050 : Sols - Reconnaissance et essais - Détermination de la teneur en eau pondérale des
matériaux – Méthode par étuvage.
(Soils - Investigation and testing - Determination of moisture content - Oven drying method).
[22] NF P 94-051 : Sols - Reconnaissance et essais - Détermination des limites d’Atterberg – Limite de
liquidité à la coupelle – Limite de plasticité au rouleau.
(Soils - Investigation and testing - Determination of the Atterberg limits - Plastic limit test using the
Cassagrande apparatus – Plastic limit test on rolled thread).
[23] NF P 94-056 : Sols - Reconnaissance et essais - Analyse granulométrique – Méthode par tamisage à sec
après lavage.
(Soils - Investigation and testing - Particle size analysis - Dry screening method after washing)
[24] NF P 94-068 : Sols - Reconnaissance et essais - Mesure de la capacité d’absorption de bleu de méthylène
d’un sol ou d’un matériau rocheux - Détermination de la valeur de bleu de méthylène d’un sol ou d’un
matériaux rocheux par l’essai à la tâche.
(Soils - Investigation and testing - Measuring the methylene blue adsorption capacity of a rocky soil or
material- Determination of the methylene blue value of a soil of rocky material by means of the stain test).
[25] NF P 94-093 : Sols - Reconnaissance et essai de compactage Proctor – Détermination des références de
compactage d’un matériau- Essai Proctor modifié - Essai Proctor normal.
(Soils - Investigation and testing. Determination of the compaction characteristics of a soil - Modified Proctor
test - Standard Proctor test).
[26] NF P 94-117-1 : Sols - Reconnaissance et essais - Portance des plates-formes - Partie 1 : Module sous
chargement statique à la plaque (EV2)
(Soils - Investigation and testing - Subgrade bearing capacity - Part 1: plate test static deformation modulus
(EV2)).
[27] NF P 94-114-2 : Sols - Reconnaissance et essais - Portance des plates-formes - Partie 2 : Module sous
chargement dynamique.
(Soils - Investigation and testing - Subgrade bearing capacity - Part 2 Modulus under dynamic loading).
[28] NF P 98-082 : Chaussées - Terrassements - Dimensionnement des chaussées routières - Détermination
des trafics routiers pour le dimensionnement des structures de chaussées.
(Pavements – Earthworks - Road pavement structural design. Road traffic evaluation for pavement structural
design).
[29] NF P 98-100 : Assises de chaussées - Eau pour assises - Classification.
(Road foundations. Water for pavement base layers. Classification).
[30] NF P 98-105 : Assises de chaussées - Fabrication en continu des mélanges-contrôle de fabrication des
graves et sables traités aux liants hydrauliques ou non traités en centrale de malaxage continu.
(Pavement base layers - Continuous manufacture of mixtures - Production control of granular materials and
sands bound with cementitious binders or of untreated granular materials and sands in a continuous mixing
plant)
[31] NF P 98-114 -2 : Méthodologie d’étude en laboratoire des matériaux traités aux liants hydrauliques -
Partie 2 : Sables traités aux liants hydrauliques.
(Road foundations - Methodology for the laboratory study of materials treated with hydraulic binders. Part 2 :
sands treated with hydraulic binders)
[32] NF P 98-114 -3 : Méthodologie d’étude en laboratoire des matériaux traités aux liants hydrauliques -
Partie 3 : Sols traités aux liants hydrauliques associés à la chaux.
(Road foundations - Methodology for the laboratory study of materials treated with hydraulic binders - Part 3
: soils treated with hydraulic binders possibly combined with lime)
[33 ] NF P 98-115 : Assises de chaussées - Exécution des corps de chaussées - Constituants - Composition des
mélanges et formulation - Exécution et contrôle.
(Road foundations - Construction of pavement structures - Components. Mix components and formulae -
Performance and control)
[34] NF P 98-160 : Revêtement de chaussée - Enduit superficiel d’usure - Spécifications.
(Wearing courses - Surface dressing - Specifications)
[35] NF P 98-200 : Essais relatifs aux chaussées - Mesure de la déflexion
(Pavement testing - Measurement of rolling load deflection).
[36] NF P 98-200-1: Essais relatifs aux chaussées. Mesure de la déflexion engendrée par une charge roulante.
Partie 1 : Définitions, moyens de mesure, valeurs caractéristiques.
(Pavement testing - Measurement of rolling load deflection - Part 1: definitions, measurements, specific
values)
[37] NF P 98-200-2 : Essais relatifs aux chaussées - Mesure de la déflexion engendrée par une charge roulante
- Partie 2 : Détermination de la déflexion et du rayon de courbure avec le déflectomètre Benkelman
modifié.
(Pavement testing - Measurement of rolling load deflection - Part 2: determination of deflection and curvature
values with a modified Benkelman beam).
[38] NF P 98-200-3 : Essais relatifs aux chaussées - Mesure de la déflexion engendrée par une charge roulante
- Partie 3 : Détermination de la déflection avec le déflectographe 02
(Pavement testing. (Measurement of rolling load deflection - Part 3: determination of deflection values using a
deflectograph 02).
[39] NF P 98-200-4 : Essais relatifs aux chaussées - Mesure de la déflexion engendrée par une charge roulante
- Partie 4 : détermination de la déflection avec le déflectographe 03
(Pavement testing - Measurement of rolling load deflection - Part 4: determination of deflection values using a
deflectograph 03).
[40] NF P 98-200-5 : Essais relatifs aux chaussées - Mesure de la déflexion engendrée par une charge roulante
- Partie 5 : Détermination de la déflexion avec la déflectographe 04.
(Pavement testing - Measurement of rolling load deflection - Part 4: determination of deflection values using a
deflectograph 04).
[41] NF P 98-200-6 : Essais relatifs aux chaussées - Mesure de la déflexion engendrée par une charge roulante
- Partie 6 : Détermination de la déflection avec le déflectographe béton. 03
(Pavement testing. Measurement of rolling load deflection. Part 4: determination of deflection values using a
concrete deflectograph)
[42] NF P 98-200-7 : Essais relatifs aux chaussées - Mesure de la déflexion engendrée par une charge roulante
- Partie 7 : détermination de la déflexion et du rayon de courbure avec un curviamètre.
(Pavement tests. Measurement of rolling load deflection. Part 7 : determination of deflection and curvature
values using a curviameter).
[43] NF P 98-230-3 : Essais relatifs aux chaussées - Préparation des matériaux traités aux liants hydrauliques
ou non traités - Partie 3 : Fabrication en laboratoire de mélange de graves ou de sables pour la confection
d’éprouvettes.
(Pavement tests - Preparation of materials that are bound with hydraulic binders or unbound - Part 3 :
Laboratory manufacture of gravel or sand mixtures for use in test specimens)
[44] NF P 98-275-1 : Essais relatifs aux chaussées - Détermination du dosage en liant répandu - Partie 1 :
Essai in situ de dosage moyen et de régularité transversale.
(Pavement tests - Determination of the rate of binder spread rate - Part 1: measurement of the mean spread
rate and transverse uniformity)
[45] NF P 98-276-1 : Essais relatifs aux chaussées - Mesure du dosage en granulats d’un enduit superficiel -
Partie 1 : Essai à la boîte doseuse.
(Pavement tests - Measurement of chipping aggregates rate - Part 1: test using a rate box)
[46] NF P 98-276-2 : Essais relatifs aux chaussées - Mesure du dosage en granulats d’un enduit superficiel -
Partie 2 : Détermination de la régularité transversale.
(Pavement tests - Measurement of the proportion of aggregate in a surface dressing - Part 2 : determination of
transverse regularity).
[47] NF P 98 732-1 : Matériels de construction et d’entretien des routes - Fabrication des mélanges - Partie1 :
Centrale de malaxage pour matériaux traités aux liants hydrauliques ou non traits
(Road construction and maintenance equipment - Manufacture of mixtures and quality control - Part 1 :
mixing plants for hydraulically treated or untreated materials
[49] NF P 98-744-1 : Matériels de construction et d’entretien des routes - Calibrage et vérification des réglages
sur chantier des doseurs continus des centrales de production de matériaux - Partie 1 : Débitmètre de
bande pour courroie transporteuse.
(Road construction and maintenance equipment - Calibration and verification of the on site settings of the
continuous dosing apparatus of material production units - Part 1: belt flow meter for belt conveyor).
[50] NF P 98-744-2 : Matériels de construction et d’entretien des routes - Calibrage et vérification des réglages
sur chantier, des doseurs continus des centrales de production de matériaux - Partie 2 : Doseur pondéral à
granulats.
(Road construction and maintenance equipment - On-site calibration and verification of the settings of the
continuous dosing apparatus of material production plants - Part 2: aggregate weighing dosing machine)
[51] NF P 98-744-3 : Matériels de construction et d’entretien des routes - Calibrage et vérification des réglages
sur chantier, des doseurs continus des centrales de production de matériaux - Partie 3 : Doseur
volumétrique à granulats.
(Road construction and maintenance equipment - On-site calibration and verification of the settings of the
continuous dosing apparatus of material production plants - Part 3: volumetric aggregate dosing machine)
[52] NF P 98-744-4 : Matériels de construction et d’entretien des routes - Calibrage et vérification des réglages
sur chantier, des doseurs continus des centrales de production de matériaux - Partie 4 : Doseur pondéral à
pulvérulent - Essai par prélèvement sur courroie.
(Road construction and maintenance equipment - On-site calibration and verification of the settings of the
continuous dosing apparatus of material production plants - Part 4: dry bulk weighing dosing machine -Belt
sampling test).
[53] NF P 98-744-5 : Matériels de construction et d’entretien des routes - Calibrage et vérification des réglages
sur chantier, des doseurs continus des centrales de production de matériaux - Partie 5 : Doseur pondéral à
pulvérulent - Essai par pesée matière.
(Road construction and maintenance equipment - On-site calibration and verification of the settings of the
continuous dosing apparatus of material production plants - Part 5: dry bulk weighing dosing machine -
Substance weighing test).
[61] NF EN 1097-1 : Essais pour déterminer les caractéristiques mécaniques et physiques des granulats -
Partie 1 : Détermination de la résistance à l’usure (micro-DEVAL).
(Tests for determining the mechanical and physical properties of aggregates - Part 1: determination of the
resistance to wear (micro-DEVAL)).
[62] NF EN 1097-2 : Essais pour déterminer les caractéristiques mécaniques et physiques des granulats -
Partie 2 : Méthodes pour la détermination de la résistance à la fragmentation.
(Tests for determining the mechanical and physical properties of aggregates - Part 2: methods for determining
resistance to fragmentation).
6 - Annexes
6.1 - Annex A
SOIL DATA SHEET
FOR SOILS USED IN PAVEMENT BASE LAYERS
Deposit/Stockpile:
Identification of soil:
Fine soil Gravelly soil Sandy soil Level of uniformity: H1 H2
Volume of deposit or stockpile v (m3) :
Date of classification :
2- TEST RESULTS:
FINE SOILS
Clay content % passing
ρd OPN
VBS IP D(mm)= Dmax(mm)=
Max
Average m
Min
Range e
Relative range (er = 100 e/m)
SANDY SOILS
Clay content % passing
FS
VBS 0.08 mm 2 mm* D (mm) = Dmax (mm) =
Max
Average m
Min
Range e
GRAVELLY SOILS
Clay content % passing
LA MDE
VBS 0,08 mm 2 mm* D (mm) = Dmax (mm) =
Max
Average m Code according to
Min XP P 18-545
Range e
6.2 - Annex B
6.2.1 - Specifications for soils used in pavement base layers
Fs Ls = 50
* in the case of gravelly, sandy or coarse soils as defined in the foreword to NF EN 14227-1
Traffic class ≤ T4 T3 T2 T1
Surface
An economic analysis can show how each item contributes the total cost of a treated soil. However, the costs
may vary considerably from one construction site to another and according to the economic circumstances.
We shall therefore present an example of a breakdown of the costs of the treated soil for a construction site with
the following characteristics :
• pavement works requiring 8,000 tonnes of treated soil ;
• thickness of the layer 30 cm ;
• in-situ treatment of the materials at the site, at a rate of 1,500 tonnes per day ;
• 1.5 % of lime ;
• 7 % of hydraulic road binder.
The results are presented in Diagrams 1 and 2 which show, respectively, the contribution of each item to the
cost of the treated soil in question and the contribution of each machine to the cost of manufacture and laying of
the treated soil in question.
It is therefore pointless to make savings on works by neglecting these items, in particular because an
examination of previous works shows that neglecting them results, in the short and medium terms, in major
deterioration in structures with treated soil pavement base layers.
Consequently, it is essential for the client and the project manager to ensure that the recommendations in this
guide are followed and that particular attention is paid to preliminary design and to external checks.
As the quality of the interface is vital for the good performance of the structure, the rules of good practice must
be strictly applied with regard to :
• keeping the surface of the material moist ;
• the absence of lamination ;
• precise levelling without the addition of thin layers ;
• the construction of an appropriate protection layer within the required amount of time.
This requires :
• the presence of all the necessary machines in good working condition ;
• the correct use of these machines by staff who have received sufficient training and precise instructions about
works of this type.
6.3 - Annex C
6.3.1 - The contribution of each item to the cost of the treated soil in question
Diagram 1: The contribution of each item to the cost of the treated soil in question
Graphique 1 : INCIDENCE DE CHAQUE POSTE DANS LE COÛT DU SOL TRAITÉ CONSIDÉRÉ
Contrôle
Liant chaux Liant chaux
Etudes préalables
Enduit de protection Liant hydraulique
Fabrication et mise en oeuvre
Enduit de protection
Fabrication et mise en Etudes préalables
oeuvre
Liant hydraulique Contrôle
niveleuse
6.4 - Annex D
Treated soils in pavement base layers
As the technique of soils treated with lime and hydraulic binders has been applied a great deal in Picardie and
Haute-Normandie, the investigation concentrated on sites in these regions.
Visits were therefore made to twelve sites where fine treated soils had been used, mostly silts treated with lime
and hydraulic binders (LTCC):
• in sub-base layers, and occasionally in road base layers ;
• under moderate to heavy traffic (T3 to T0) ;
• between 6 and 18 years of age, most of them between 10 and 12 years of age ;
• most of the pavements had been monitored during manufacturing and laying, with their long-term
performance being monitored once or several times on the basis of deflexion measurements, strength
measurements conducted on core samples and ovalization tests which measure in situ the deformations that
occur in pavement layers under loading.
The total length of the works was 140 km, with the individual sites measuring 0.5 at 51 km. The total observed
length was approximately 40 km.
The structures at these sites are as follows, with systematic presence of an LTCC capping layer :
• 5 structures entirely consisting of LTCC : road base / sub-base / capping layer (Table 1) ;
• 4 structures with a GB road base / LTCC sub-base / LTCC capping layer (Table 2) ;
• 2 structures with a GH sub-base/ LTCC road base / LTCC capping layer (Table 3).
Principal observations
The thickness of the structures entirely constructed from LTCC was generally between 60 and 90 cm, including
the capping layer. The thickness of the sub-base road base layer generally varied between 20 and 40 cm, and
was usually between 25 and 30 cm.
The surface deflections measured on these pavements are still very low : 15 to 25 1/100 mm, except at some
specific points where a value of 100 1/100 mm may occur (zones with crazing).
The GH/treated soil structures exhibit classical transverse cracking which cannot be blamed solely on the treated
soil sub-base layer.
The structures entirely made from LTCC – sub-base, road base layers and capping layers- behave in a very
satisfactory manner, with the following observations at specific points :
• Visual appearance
– In addition to the classical transverse cracks in hydraulic pavement base layers (occurring between every 7
to 15 m), at some sites transverse cracks have been observed to ramify, with the beginning of formation of
depressions and potholes in the wheel tracks.
Lessons
The LTCC structures generally have durable mechanical performance, varying from classes SOIL 1 to SOIL 3.
These are semi-rigid materials which exhibit the same type of transverse cracking as cement-bound pavement
base layers.
The observation of core samples has shown that LTCC is almost always fractured 1 to 2 cm below its interface
with the BB. The interfaces between the LTCC layers are almost always debonded.
The mechanical operation of structures consisting entirely of LTCC, on condition that the minimum rules have
been applied during laying, never correspond to the bonded interface mode, but even if the interface is
physically debonded, the real mechanical performance is unlikely to be very poor. The semi-bonded hypothesis
in the current version of the guide can probably be accepted..
It is very important for the surface layer to be waterproof in order to ensure the material retains its mechanical
performance. Consequently, the surface protection of the road base layer must be improved. Moreover, the
surface course must be thick (a minimum of 10 cm in two layers) and regularly maintained.
The constructional measures must, in particular, take account of the need to prevent water from entering the
structure (drainage ditches that are deeper than the structure or even draining edge screens) or minimize the
harmful effects of water ingress at the edge of the structure, for example by laying material over a greater width
than the cross section and waterproofing it with a surface dressing. It is also advisable to slightly increase the
gradient of verges (while still meeting safety requirements), for example to 5%.
5 structures made entirely from LTCC - road base layer / sub-base layer / capping layer
After 16 years:
Sub-base layer: boundary between soils A1 and A2 After one year: Sub-base layer:
10 BB 20 1.5 % CaO + 7 % Cem III (ex CLK) Rt = 0.63 MPa Rt = 0.28 MPa
RD 930 St T2 then T LTCC 25
0.4 1984 E = 6200 MPa E = 2600
Quentin 1 LTCC 35
LTCC Road base layer : soil A1, boundary with A2 (specimens moulded at 95 % of Road base layer:
1.5 % CaO + 7 % Cem III (ex CLK) OPN Ds) Rt = 0.49 MPa
E = 3800 MPa
Table 1: Summary of the characteristics of inspected works (structures made entirely from LTCC)
5 structures with an GB road base / LTCC sub-base layer / LTCC capping layer
Table n° 2: Summary of the characteristics of inspected works (structures with a GB road base layer, an LTCC sub-base layer and an LTCC capping layer)
2 structures with a bound graded aggregate road base layer / LTCC Sub-base layer LTCC / LTCC capping layer
Table n° 3: Summary of the characteristics of inspected works (Structures with a GH road base layer, an LTCC sub-base layer and an LTCC capping layer)
The first part of the document explains the types of soils involved and
the specifications for uniformity. It details the content of studies and
how they change in nature from geological surveys to laboratory tests.
The second part describes the design of treated soil pavement base
layers. It states the traffic classes for which these materials may be
used and explains, with regard to the design method, the parameters
that are specific to treated soils, in particular the mechanical
characteristics measured in a laboratory weighted on the basis of the
conditions at the site and the state of the interface. It ends with
examples of design using fine treated soils.
The third part explains how works and the monitoring of the materials
should be performed, the ways the materials should be prepared at the
construction site, defines the levels of quality on the basis of the
equipment used (in-situ and in a plant), the conditions of transport and
laying, the surface protection to be applied on the basis of forecast
stresses and the quality control procedures.
This document ends with a series of annexes dealing with the soil data
sheet and the specifications of soils used in pavement base layers,
some economic factors and, finally, a summary of the survey that was
carried out on treated soil structures constructed in France.
Service d'études sur les transports, les routes et leurs aménagements The Sétra belongs
to the scientific and
46, avenue Aristide Briand – BP 100 – 92225 Bagneux Cedex – France technical network
téléphone : 33 (0)1 46 11 31 31 – télécopie : 33 (0)1 46 11 31 69 of the French Public
Work Ministry (RST)
This document is available and can be downloaded on Sétra website:
http://www.setra.equipement.gouv.fr
The Sétra authorization is required for reproduction of this document (all or even part)
© 2008 Sétra - Reference: 0857w - ISRN: EQ-SETRA--08-ED34--FR+ENG