Engineering properties improvement of

clayey soil using rice husk ash and coconut

shell for road works
Cite as: AIP Conference Proceedings 2020, 020030 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5062656
Published Online: 05 October 2018

R. Ramli, N. A. A. Shukur, T. I. A. M. Walid, and J. Idrus

ARTICLES YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN

The importance of incorporating hysteresis effect in determining shear strength of

unsaturated soil
AIP Conference Proceedings 2020, 020007 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5062633

The potential of rice husk ash (Rha) and coconut fiber (Cf) as partial replacement of cement
AIP Conference Proceedings 2020, 020061 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5062687

Membrane penetration effects on shear strength and volume change of soil during triaxial test
AIP Conference Proceedings 2020, 020008 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5062634

AIP Conference Proceedings 2020, 020030 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5062656 2020, 020030

© 2018 Author(s).
 Engineering Properties Improvement of Clayey Soil Using
Rice Husk Ash and Coconut Shell for Road Works
R. Ramli1, a), N. A. A. Shukur1, b) , T. I. A.M. Walid1, c) and J. Idrus1, d)
1
Faculty of Civil Engineering, Universiti Teknologi MARA, 13500 Permatang Pauh, Penang, Malaysia.
a)
Corresponding author: rozaini.ramli@ppinang.uitm.edu.my
b)
arina9994@gmail.com
c)
izniaisyah@gmail.com
d)
julianaidrus@ppinang.uitm.edu.my

Abstract. In our country, the volume of waste generated from various ways has increased over years. Due to the large
production of wastes, the world is facing serious problem to manage the disposal usage issue. One of the most attractive
options of managing this problem is by using agricultural waste. These wastes can improve the strength of soil and helps
the environment to be eco-friendly. This study is aimed to investigate the effect of Coconut Shell (CS) and Rice Husk
Ash (RHA) on engineering properties as the expansive soil for roads’ subgrade layer. The untreated soil of subgrade
layer like clay and laterite soil was found to be in a low strength. The materials selected to be used in the road
construction of subgrade must have the adequate strength and at the same time it must be economical and follow
compaction’s requirements. Therefore, this study gives an attempt to investigate the performance of soil mixed with CS
and RHA. The proportion of constant 20% of RHA content mix with 4%, 6%, and 8% of CS correspondingly is
examined with respect to compaction test and California Bearing Ratio (CBR) tests. The results obtained indicate an
increase in optimum moisture content (OMC) and slight drop in the maximum dry density (MDD). The CBR value is
found to increase appreciably with addition of CS and 20 % of RHA. Hence, the use of 20% of RHA and varying
percentage of CS can be an advantage to improve soil engineering properties.

INTRODUCTION
Pavement is the main key for the development of the country. The pavement structure should be able to provide
a surface of acceptable adequate quality riding, skid resistance, less deformation and low noise pollution. Usually,
pavement can be classified based on the structural performance into two types which are rigid pavement and flexible
pavement [1]. The durability and quality of a flexible pavement depends on the strength and stabilization of its
subgrade layer [2]. Subgrade is the residential soil at the site area. Usually, the untreated soil is lack amount of
quality strength like clay and laterite soil. The materials selected to be used in the road construction of subgrade
must have the adequate strength and at the same time it must be economical and follow compaction’s requirements.
Soil improvement could occur either by stabilization or improvement or both. Soil stabilization is the treatment of
soils to enable their durability and strength to be improved such that they become totally suitable for construction
ahead of their original classification [3]. The aim of improvement of the soil is to enhance the soil strength. Right
management for waste material must be encouraged in order to protect the natural resources for future generation.
In Malaysia, RHA is one of the abundant wastes produced in paddy field planting. The potential of RHA has
been broadly studied and proved to improve and strengthening the soil. RHA were produced in the paddy milling
factory which can be found in Paya Keladi, Kedah. During the milling of paddy, about 78% of their weights were
received as rice, broken rice and bran. The remaining 22% of the paddy’s weight was received as husk. RHA
contains around 85%-90% amorphous silica [4]. The silica in the rice husk that obtains from the milling also refers
to be a good pozzolanic material [5]. The chemical composition of rice husk ash (RHA) is tabulated in Table 1.

Advances in Civil Engineering and Science Technology

AIP Conf. Proc. 2020, 020030-1–020030-9; https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5062656
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1738-0/$30.00

020030-1
 TABLE 1. Chemical composition of rice husk ash [5].
Chemical Composition Percentage (%)
Silica (SiO2) 90.80
Aluminium (Al2O3) 3.50
Iron (Fe2O3) 1.32
Calcium (CaO) 1.57
Magnesium (MgO) 1.20
Sodium (Na2O) 0.15
Potassium (K2O) 0.24
Loss on ignition 0.67

Several studies have been carried out on the effectiveness of clay stabilization by RHA admixing. In this context,
Basha et al. [6] studied the stabilization of residual soils by chemically using cement and RHA. CBR value was
found to be at maximum comprising of 4% of cement and 5% of RHA mixtures with the soil. Jha and Gill [7]
studied the effectiveness of RHA to enhance the lime treatment towards soil.
Osei [8] conducted experimental studies on coconut shells as aggregate in concrete and found a potential exists
for the use of coconut shells as replacement of conventional aggregate in both conventional reinforced concrete and
lightweight reinforced concrete construction. The use of coconut shells as partial replacement for conventional
aggregates should be encouraged as an effective phase for environmental protection.
According to Amu et al. [9] , coconut shell usually is hard and not easily disintegrates material. However, if it
were to be crushed to size of fine aggregate, it can also be a potential material to substitute it to sand or coarse
aggregate. At present, coconut shell has also been burnt to produce charcoal and activated carbon for food, filtering
mineral water and carbonated drink. The husk and the shell are sources of energy at suitable temperature, but they
are hardly used for this purpose. As a result, coconut shells have little or almost no economic value. Other than that,
their disposal is not only costly but may also cause environmental problems. Table 2 shows CS compound in dry
basin condition.

TABLE 2. Coconut shell compound in dry basin condition [9].

Compound Percent
K2O 45.01
Na2O 15.42
CaO 6.26
MgO 1.32
Fe2O3 + Al2O3 1.39
P2O5 4.64
SO3 5.75
SiO2 4.64
K2O 45.01

Therefore, in this study CS and RHA were used to enhance the strength of subgrade layer of clayey soil. The
properties of clay soil as a road subgrade layer was analysed and the potential of CS mixed with RHA for pavement
materials stabilizer was also been investigated. CS will act as an aggregate in which to increase the bearing capacity
of the soft soil and RHA will act as cement alike material to blend the mixture. By using natural resources as an
additive material, it will help to lower the cost therefore brought less impact towards the environment.

020030-2
 METHODOLOGY
The main purpose of the study is to evaluate the effect on soil properties especially the strength of soil in regard
to addition of CS and RHA. The experimentation in this research consist of two parts which are (i) preliminary test
to determine the physical properties of soil and (ii) main laboratory test or engineering test. The lab test to determine
physical properties of soil are Moisture Content, Specific Gravity, Particle Size Distribution (Sieve Analysis),
Hydrometer Test, Liquid Limit and Plastic Limit. Next, the main laboratory test would be the CBR.

Soil Sample Collection

The soil samples used in this study were obtained from an existing clay soil located at UDA Land site project
near Permatang Pauh, Pulau Pinang. The soil sample is as shown in Figure 1(a) And Figure 1(b).

(a) (b)
FIGURE 1(a). Soil samples collected from a site in Permatang Pauh.
FIGURE 1(b). Dried soil samples in the laboratory.

The geotechnical properties of soil samples were tested based on British Standard guidelines and the results are
summarized in Table 3.

TABLE 3. Soil properties before stabilization.

Soil Properties Test Results

Moisture Content (%) 73.45
Specific Gravity (Mg/m3) 2.49
Liquid Limit (%) 68
Plastic Limit (%) 32
Plasticity Index (%) 36
Soil Classification CLAY of high plasticity (CH)
Max. dry density (Mg/m3) 1.42
Optimum Moisture content (%) 10.5
California bearing ratio:
i) Unsoaked 4.38
ii) Soaked 0

020030-3
 Material Preparation
Material Sources

The sample of CS as shown in Figure 2 was taken from groceries shop located nearby UiTM Penang. The CS
was left to dry for 7 days in a temperature within 25 to 30°C. Then, CS is broken into small pieces by using manual
method which is by using proper hammer that is provided in the laboratory. Particle Size Distribution Test was
conducted to get the needed size of CS which is passing through 12 mm sieve. The portion of CS which passed
through 12mm sieve was used to carry out the testing. CS is a hard material which is not easily disintegrates when
being crushed. This strong behaviour of CS is expected to mimic the strength of coarse aggregate in pavement
materials.

FIGURE 2. Coconut shell samples.

Meanwhile, the sample of RHA was taken from PadiBeras Nasional Berhad (BERNAS), Penang, Malaysia. It is
being sieved to remove the vegetative and dust particles and later being burnt at high temperature in the BERNAS
factory to get its powdered ash form. Then it was brought to laboratory and was dried in the oven for about 3 hours
to eliminate the water. Figure 3 shows the RHA sample used in this study.

FIGURE 3. Rice husk ash samples.

Mixing Method

To ensure a good field condition, mixing method must take place for combination of the soil, RHA and CS. The
consistent composition of admixture can be achieved by using layer method. Firstly, all the admixtures are weighed
corresponding to their percentage to the weight of dry soil. Next, 1cm thickness of soil was laid on the tray. Then,
1.5 cm thickness of RHA was place on the top of soil’s layer and the researchers then mixed the specimen
moderately. Lastly, corresponding percentages of CS were added into the specimen and were to mix moderately
again. This process was conducted repeatedly for each different soil admixtures.

020030-4
 Table 4 shows the proportion of soil, CS and RHA used in this study. There are three different proportions of CS
and soil. The percentages used for CS is 4%, 6% and 8% calculated based on the dry weight of soil sample. Whereas
for RHA, a constant percentage which is 20% from dry weight of soil sample is used. Next, 100% soil without
additive is also prepared as a control specimen.

TABLE 4. Proportion of coconut shell in soil samples.

Sample Proportion of Sample (%)

CS RHA Soil
1 0 0 100
2 0 20 80
3 4 20 76
4 6 20 74
5 8 20 72

Preparation of specimen (CBR Test)

The experimental setup consists of requirements to meet the specifications required for the standard laboratory
CBR test. For CBR test on the remoulded sample, soil is compacted in the CBR mould with moisture content
corresponding to its Optimum Moisture Content (OMC). In this method, a known quantity of air dried soil that
assorted with different proportion of RHA and CS was mixed accordingly with requisite water to get OMC from the
standard proctor test.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

The basic properties of the soil were determined in the preliminary stage discussed in section 2 earlier. The
main laboratory tests were then conducted by using treated soil with CS and RHA to find its engineering properties.

Compaction
The compaction curve corresponding to the standard proctor effort was determined for each soil specimen
following the procedure in BS 1377-4-1990 [10]. The OMC and MDD of the soil sample for soil, RHA (20%) and
combination RHA with various percentage of CS (4%, 6% and 8%) were determined. Figure 4 shows the
relationship between the MDD and percentages of admixture. The graph shows the maximum dry density range
between 1.173 Mg/m3 to 1.425 Mg/m3.

1.6
Maximum Dry Density (Mg/m3)

1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
None 0% CS + 4% CS + 6% CS + 8% CS +
20% RHA 20% RHA 20% RHA 20% RHA
Percentage of Admixtures
FIGURE 4. The relationship between admixtures and dry density.

020030-5
 Figure 5 shows the relationship between OMC with percentages of admixture. It is clearly shown from the
graph that optimum water content ranging from 10.5% to 17%.

Optimum Moisture Content (%)

18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
None 0% CS + 4% CS + 6% CS + 8% CS +
20% RHA 20% RHA 20% RHA 20% RHA
Percentage of Admixtures
FIGURE 5. The Relationship between admixtures and optimum moisture content.

The increasing values in OMC but was decreasing in MDD was due to the addition of RHA and CS which
contain silica. The silica content may influence the hydration effect and provide more moisture during the chemical
reaction. This statement is supported by a study done by Anupam et al. [11] which discover the similar finding to this
study. The inverse trend between OMC and MDD of the mixtures is deduced due to the increasing volume of CS and
inclusion of RHA, the surface area of the particles is also enlarged which requires more water to lubricate the entire
matrix of the mixture to complete the chemical process of hydration and exchange actions that leads to strength
gaining. Therefore, it is shown that CS and RHA are very helpful to increase absorption of water which also helps to
enhance the mixture strength.

California Bearing Ratio (CBR)

CBR test is the main laboratory works in this study. The CBR test measures the shearing resistance of a soil
under controlled moisture and density conditions for both soaked and unsoaked condition.

CBR Result for Unoaked Condition

Unsoaked CBR test measures the soil strength in a dry condition, and the sample did not require the process of
submerge into the water. This condition was tested to mimic the normal field condition during a dry weather. The
value for the top and the bottom part is presented in the Table 5.

TABLE 5. CBR value for unsoaked samples.

Percentage (%) CBR Value (%)
CS RHA Soil Top Part Bottom Part
0 0 100 3.75 4.38
0 20 80 6.44 7.01
4 20 76 28.75 30.38
6 20 74 35.00 36.13
8 20 72 36.75 40.81

The increase pattern of CBR value with addition of admixture can be seen in Figure 6. This phenomenon was
mainly due to the effect of silica from admixtures that helps to bind the material. It conforms to the study done by

020030-6
Oviya and Manikandan [5] in such that being a pozzolana, it reacts with soil in stabilizing process and provides
sustainable and durable subgrade in roads’ construction. In this study, it is indicated that CS act as an aggregate
while RHA will act as cement.

45
40
35
30
CBR (%)

25 Bottom Part
20 Top Part
15
10 Min CBR
5 Value
0
None 0% CS + 4% CS + 6% CS + 8% CS +
(Control) 20% RHA 20% RHA 20% RHA 20% RHA
Percentage of Admixtures
FIGURE 6. The CBR value of unsoaked samples for top and bottom of soil.

CBR Result for Soaked Condition

Soaked CBR is a test that simulated the worst condition of highway in wet condition. This condition requires
soil sample to be kept submerged in water for at least 4 days before testing. After 4 days, the penetration test was
conducted at the top part and bottom part of the specimen. Therefore, the result for the top and bottom for soaked
CBR testing is shown as Table 6.

TABLE 6. CBR Value for soaked condition at top and bottom part.

Percentage (%) CBR Value (%)

CS RHA Soil Top Part Bottom Part
0 0 100 0 0
0 20 80 3.88 0
4 20 76 5.30 10.42
6 20 74 6.50 16.48
8 20 72 7.25 19.51
0 0 100 0 0

Figure 7 showed that CBR value at bottom part was higher than the top part. This phenomenon happened due to
the specimen was more compact in the bottom part compared to the top part. On the other hand, the specimen 20%
of RHA and 80% of soil has zero CBR value at bottom part because the soil starts to expand during the penetration
test. In soaked condition, the CBR value was found to increase correspondingly with the addition of CS and RHA.

020030-7
 25

20

Bottom Part
CBR (%) 15
Top Part
10

5 Min CBR
value (JKR)
0
None 0% CS + 4% CS + 6% CS + 8% CS +
(Control) 20% 20% 20% 20%
RHA RHA RHA RHA
Percentage of Admixtures
FIGURE 7. The CBR value of Soaked Samples for Top and Bottom of Soil

Comparison between Unsoaked and Soaked CBR Value

The different change of CBR values with different mix proportions in soaked and unsoaked condition were also
presented in Figure 8. The graph showed unsoaked samples has highest reading of CBR value compared to soaked
samples. The CBR value was found to increase appreciably with addition of CS and RHA. Hence, the use of 20% of
RHA and varying percentage of CS can benefit in improving soil engineering properties. This finding was in
accordance to the results found by Shabana et al. [12] which showed improvement in CBR values with the
inclusion of CS. In the study, it was observed that the maximum improvement occurred when 25 grams of CS was
added. Whereas the study by Anupam et al. [10] on RHA mimics a similar finding with this study when RHA
admixing improves the CBR values substantially up to 25% of soil replacement. Therefore, this study was found to
be significant in the field of utilizing natural materials as additive substance in civil works.

45
40
35
30
CBR (%)

25 Unsoaked
20 Soaked
15
10
Min CBR
5
Value
0
None 0% CS + 4% CS + 6% CS + 8% CS +
(Control) 20% RHA 20% RHA 20% RHA 20% RHA
Percentage of Admixtures
FIGURE 8. The Comparison CBR value between Unsoaked and Soaked.

020030-8
 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

From the laboratory test result, the following conclusions can be drawn:
 Treatment soil with admixture like CS and RHA show general increase in OMC and general decrease in
MDD.
 Addition of CS and RHA with soil increases both CBR value for Soaked and Unsoaked condition.
 CS and RHA have high potential to improve the engineering properties for poor subgrade soil.
There are some recommendations that can be made to improve the result such as by adding more CS & RHA
due to the increment of CBR value. Next, using a different size of CS and different percentage of RHA can be
utilize to find the optimum enhancement to subgrade the soil.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to acknowledge Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) for financial support in this
research work.

REFERENCES

1. V. M. Tom and K. V. Krishna, “Introduction to pavement design,” National Programme on Technology

Enhanced Learning. 19.1-19.7 (2007). Retrieved from http://nptel.ac.in/courses/105101087/downloads/Lec-
19.pdf.
2. S. Chakraborty, S. P. Mukherjee, S. Chakrabarti, and B. C. Chattopadhyay, “Improvement of sub grade by lime
and rice husk ash admixtures,” International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and
Technology. 3(4), 11034–11040 (2014).
3. B. S. Kumar and T. V Preethi, “Behaviour of clayey soil stabilized with rice husk ash & lime,” International
Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT). 11(1), 44–48, (2014).
4. D. K. Rao, “Stabilization of expansive soil with rice husk ash, lime and gypsum – an experimental study,”
International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology. 3(11), 8076–8086 (2012).
5. R. Oviya, and R. Manikandan, “Stabilizing the soil using rice husk ash with lime as admixture paper,”
International Journal of Informative & Futuristic Research. 3511- 3519 (2016).
6. E. A. Basha, R. Hashim, H. B. Mahmud, and A. S., Muntohar, “Stabilization of residual soil with rice husk ash
and cement,” Construction and Building Materials. Vol 19, 448 – 453 (2005).
7. J. N. Jha and K.S. Gill, “Effect of rice husk ash on lime stabilization,” Journal of the Institution of Engineers
(India). Vol. 87, 33-39 (2006).
8. D. Y. Osei, “Experimental assessment on coconut shells as aggregate in concrete,” International Journal of
Engineering Science Invention. Vol. 2, pp. 07-11, (2013).
9. O.O. Amu, O. F. Bamisaye and I. A. Komolafe, “The suitability and lime stabilization requirement of some
lateritic soil samples as pavement,” International Journal Pure Applied Science Technology. 2(1), 29–46
(2011).
10. [British Standard 1377: Part 4., “Methods of test for soils for civil engineering purposes. Compaction-related
tests,” (1990).
11. K. A. Anupam, P. Kumar and G. D. Ransinchung, “Use of various agricultural and industrial waste materials in
road construction,” Procedia of Social and Behavioural Sciences. 104, 264 – 273 (2013).
12. K. S. Shabana, C. Anshi,, S. Parambath, T. M. Shyamili, T. M. V. Sruthi and P. Suhaira, “Study on CBR
values of soil with crushed coconut shells,” International Journal on Advance Engineering Technology. Vol. V,
Issue III, 55-58 (2014).

020030-9