Kim, W S; Minh Tam, N and Jung, D H (2005) Experimental study on strength of cement stabilized clay. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 3(2), pp. 116-126. ISSN 1726-0531
Abstract
This paper describes the effect of factors on the strength characteristics of cement treated clay from laboratory tests performed on cement mixed clay specimens. It is considered that several factors such as soil type, sample preparing method, quantity of binder, curing time, etc. can have an effect on strength characteristics of cement stabilized clay. A series of unconfined compression tests have been performed on samples prepared with different conditions. The results indicated that soil type, mixing method, curing time, dry weight ratio of cement to clay (Aw), and water-clay to cement (wc/c) ratio were main factors which can have an influence on unconfined compressive strength, modulus of elasticity, and failure strain of cement stabilized clay. Unconfined compressive strength of soil-cement samples prepared from dry mixing method was higher than those prepared from wet mixing method.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cement stabilized clay; deep mixing method; failure strain; modulus of elasticity; soft clay; unconfined comprehensive strength |
| Index terms: | experiment, compressive strength, laboratory, modulus of elasticity, curing, compression |
| Subjects: | research management, material properties and characteristics, data collection methods, material analysis and testing, concrete and cementitious materials |
| Topics: | Construction Materials, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here