Strength determination of some soil stabilizer mulches

Document Type : Complete scientific research article

Author

MSc of Desert Region management of Shiraz University

Abstract

Strength determination of some soil stabilizer mulches
Background and objectives:
Mulching is one of the most common ways to soil stabilization, prevent wind erosion and control dusts. Some types of mulches is not economically practical choices, thus use of inexpensive and safe industrial wastes in the mulch compositions have both economically and environmentally importance(waste recycling). Therefore, a key objective of this research is use two types of industrial waste for preparation of mulch. Since Proctor method has been considered to test and compare the strength of mulches, so another purpose of this research is simplification of Proctor method to estimate the strength of soil stabilizer mulches under the influence of wind erosion.
Materials and methods:
Based on the results of previous studies and pre-treatments, some mulches were tested. These mulches were non-living composed of different percentages of stone powder, converter sludge, clay soil, and sandy soil. Instron device was used to measure the compressive strength of the mulch. Considering applying of the Proctor method for working with Instron device, simplification of the procedure was also performed. These two methods were called as “Proctor” and “simplified Proctor” methods, whose results were compared as the criterion for utilizing the simplified method. The treatments included five types of mulch in three replications, where their compressive strength was measured by the two methods of “Proctor” and “simplified Proctor” and were compared by the random factorial designs.
Results:
Reducing the clay percentage from 80 to 50 and increasing the percentage of sand from 20 to 50 in the treatments containing clay and sand in both methods resulted in compressive strength reduction of mulches. Increasing the percentage of the stone powder from 5 to 25 and simultaneous reduction of clay percentage from 85 to 65 together with constant percentage of converter sludge led to decreased compressive strength through the simplified Proctor method. The differences between the results of the two Proctor and simplified Proctor methods were not significant, but the simplified Proctor method had specific order in the results.
Conclusion:
Compressive strength reduction with reduced clay percentage and increased stone powder percentage was showed in the comparison of the treatments containing clay and stone powder through the simplified Proctor method. However, the results of the Proctor method lacked a logical order. The comparison of the treatments containing clay and sand indicated that in both methods, as the clay decreases and the sand increases, compressive strength reduced. Compressive strength test results using Instron device was compared in both simplified Proctor and Proctor methods, therefore it was showed that these two methods do not have a significant statistic difference, although orderly changes of the simplified Proctor method results was found. Considering the simplicity and time reduction in the simplified Proctor method, this method is recommended for mulch comparisons in wind erosion.

Keywords


1.Abbaspoor, A., Kalbasi, M., and Shariatmadari, H. 2005. Application converter sludge
(Steel plant waste) as iron fertilizer in calcareous soils. J. Sci. Tech. Agric. Nat. Res.
8: 61-71. (In Persian)
2.Afzali, S.F. 2011. Soil erosion, dust and carbon dynamics, Total articles of first international congress concerning dust and how to challenge its harmful effects, 15-17 Feb. 2012, Ahwaz, Pp: 967-973. (In Persian)
3.Ahmadi, H. 2009. Applied geomorphology. Tehran University Press, Tehran, 706p.
(In Persian)
4.Ahmadi, H., Ekhtesasi, M.R., Feiz Niya, S., and Ghane`e Bafeghi, M.J. 2003. Wind erosion control methods for railway protection: Case study Bafg area. J. Natur. Res. 342: 55-327.
(In Persian) 
5.American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. 1982. AASHTO Materials, Part II, Washington, D.C.
6.American Society for Testing and Materials. 1982. ASTM Standards, Part 19, Philadelphia, pa.
7.Bowles, J.E. 1982. Engineering properties of soil and their measurement. McGraw-Hill.
New York. 213p.
8.Chepil, W.S., and Milen, R.A. 1941. Wind erosion of in relation to roughness of surface. J. Soil Sci. 52: 417-433.
9.Chepil, W.S. 1953. Factors that influence cold structure and credibility of soil by wind. J. Soil Sci. 75: 473-483.
10.Choi, S., Sang, S., Jae, E., and Paulo, J.M.M. 2010. Properties of alkali-activated systems with stone powder sludge. J. Mat. Cycles Waste Manage. 12: 4. 275-282.
11.Diouf, B., Skidmore, E.L., Layton, J.B., and Hagen, L.J. 1990. Stabilizing fine sand by adding clay: Laboratory wind tunnel study. Soil Technol. 3: 1. 21-31.
12.Faghihiniya, M., Afzali, S.F., Masoudi, M., and Fallah Shamsi, S.R. 2012. Effect of wind erosion on soil carbon losses: Case study Dezhgah areas of Fars province. Total articles of first international congress concerning dust and how to challenge its harmful effects, 15-17 Feb. 2012, Ahwaz, Pp: 975-982. (In Persian)
 
13.Grini, A.G., Myhre Zender, C.S., Sundet, J.K., and Isaksen, I.S.A. 2003. Model simulations of dust source and transport in the global troposphere: Effects of soil credibility and wind speed variability. Institute Report Series No. 124. Norway, University of Oslo, Department of Geosciences.
14.Hakimi Bafeghi, S., and Afzali, S.F. 2012. The effect of mulch produced from cutting stone waste materials on wind erosion rate; Total articles of first international congress concerning dust and how to challenge its harmful effects, 15-17 Feb. 2012, Ahwaz, Pp: 975-982.
(In Persian)  
15.Harper, R.J., Gilkes, R.J., Hill, M.J., and Carter, D.J. 2009. Wind erosion and soil carbon dynamics in south-western Australia. Aeolian Res. 1: 3. 129-141.
16.Hazirei, F., and Zare Ernani, M. 2013. Investigation of Effect of Clay-Lime Mulch for Sand Dunes Fixation. J. Water Soil. 27: 2. 373-380.
17.Kanellopoulos, A., Demetrios, N., and Michael, F.P. 2014. Mechanical and durability properties of concretes containing recycled lime powder and recycled aggregates. Constr. Build. Mater. 53: 253-259.
18.Koopaee Niya, M.A., and Afzali, S.F. 2015. Examining Some Desert Conditions on Some Non Alive Waste Industrial Mulches for Controlling Wind Erosion. Ecol. Environ. Cons.
21: 1. 15-23.
19.Majdi, H., Karimian Eghbal, M., Karimzadeh, H., and Jalalian, A. 2006. The Effect of All Types of Clay Mulches On Windy Erosion Materials Rate. J. Sci. Tech. Agric. Natur. Res. 10: 3. 137-149. (In Persian)
20.Mosaferi, M., Fahiminiya, M., and Taghipoor, H. 2006. Environmental management of
solid waste industry stone: Case study Qom province. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2: 65-74.
(In Persian)
21.Page, A.L. 1982. Methods of soil analysis. American Society of Agronomy, Soil Science Society of America, Madison, Wisconsin, 1159p.
22.Rende, W., Guo, Z., Chang, C., Xiao, D., and Jiang, H. 2015. Quantitative estimation of farmland soil loss by wind-erosion using improved particle-size distribution comparison method (IPSDC). Aeolian Res. (In Press)
23.Song, T.H., Lee, S.H., and Kim, B. 2014. Recycling of crushed stone powder as a partial replacement for silica powder in extruded cement panels. Constr. Build Mater. 52: 105-115.
24.United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and International Soil Research Information Center (ISRIC), 1990. World map of the status of human induced soil degradation.
25.Xiong, Z., Peng, W., and Yuli, W. 2014. Hydration Behaviors of Portland Cement with Different Lithologic Stone Powders. Int. J. Concr. Struct. Mater. 9: 1. 55-60.
26.Xuan, J., Sokolik, I., Hao, J., and Guo, F. 2004. Identification and characterization of source of atmospheric mineral dust in East Asia. J. Atm. Environ. 38: 36. 6239-6252.