An – Najah National University Faculty of Engineering

Civil Engineering Department

Project Group Members:Mohammad FarouqOmar M. Abu-EishehMohammad M. Abu-Eisheh

Supervised by:Dr.Sami Hijjawi

Using Dead Sea WaterAs Soil Improvement Agent

Introduction :::::

1) Graduation project life. 2) Evaluating the whole test results . 3) Analysis and Discussion of the results. 4) The conclusion. 5) Recommendations.

Outlining the presentation :

The project went through three stages:::

1) Brought dead see water. 2) Collected the samples.3) carried out the tests on the samples .

Graduation project life

Brought dead see water

First::Clay (2 samples) A) Tunes Street clay

Collected the samples

B) Al Ataa’ Commercial Mall clay

Second::Base course (1 sample) *Beit Eba base course

Third::Selected fill (1 sample)Al Ata’a Commercial Complex selected fill

1) Sieve Analysis (soil classification). 2) Atterberg Limit Test (Plasticity index). 3) Proctor Compaction Test(maximum dry density and optimum moister content 4) California Bearing Ratio (CBR value). 5) PH meter test (To measure PH for the soil) 6) Chemical Analysis for Dead Sea Water (To determine Cl-, No3 - , Na+, K+ and T.D.S concentrations )

In our graduation project, we carried out these tests :

Evaluating the whole test results :

Sieve analysis

0.01 0.1 1 100

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Al –Ataa’ clay

0% D.S.W 4% D.S.W 6% D.S.W 8% D.S.W

Sieve Size (mm)

% p

assi

ng

0.01 0.1 1 10 1000

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Base Course

0% D.S.W 4% D.S.W 6% D.S.W 8% D.S.W

Sieve Size (mm)

% P

assi

ng

0.01 0.1 1 100

20

40

60

80

100

Al –Ataa’ Selected Fill

0% D.S.W 4% D.S.W 6% D.S.W 8% D.S.W

Sieve Size (mm)

% P

assi

ng

Atterberg Limits results

0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9%0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Base courseSelected FillAl –Ataa’ clayTunis street clay

Proctor Test

7.00 9.00 11.00 13.00 15.00 17.00 19.00 21.00 23.00 25.001.50

2.00 Tunis Street Clay

0% D.S.W 6% D.S.W

% Moisture Content

Dry

Den

sity

(g/

cm3)

5 10 15 20 25 301.50

1.55

1.60

1.65

1.70

1.75

1.80

1.85

1.90

1.95

Al –Ataa’ clay

0% D.S.W 6% D.S.W% Moisture Content

Dry

Den

sity

(g/

cm3)

5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.01.80

1.90

2.00

2.10

2.20

2.30

2.40Base Course

0% D.S.W 6% D.S.W

% Moisture Content

Dry

Den

sity

(g/

cm3)

4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.002.10

2.15

2.20

2.25

2.30

2.35

2.40Selected Fill

0% D.S.W 6% D.S.W% Moisture Content

Dry

Den

sity

(g/

cm3)

CBR (California Bearing Ratio)

0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00

-0.20

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

Tunis Street Clay

0% D.S.W 6% D.S.W Penetration (mm)

Forc

e (k

N)

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.000.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40Al –Ataa’ clay

0% D.S.W 6% D.S.W Penetration (mm)

Forc

e (k

N)

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.000.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

Base Course

0% D.S.W 6% D.S.WPenetration (mm)

Forc

e (k

N)

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.000.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

Selected Fill

0% D.S.W 6% D.S.W Penetration (mm)

Forc

e (k

N)

PH test

0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9%0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Base courseTunis street clayAl –Ataa’ claySelected Fill

Base course: The classification of the base course changes from (A-

1-a) to (A-2-4) when we add 4% D.S.W, and we still have the same classification when we add more percentage of D.S.W.

Selected fill: Same as base course.

Al-Ataa’ clay: The classification does not change when we add D.S.W.

Analysis and Discussion of resultsSieve Analysis:

Base course:

Atterberg Limits:

Selected fill :

Tunis Street clay :

Al –Ataa’ clay:

Base course:

Selected fill:

Al-Ataa’ clay:

Proctor test :

Tunis Street clay:

For all samples

California Bearing:

For all samples :

PH test:

In general, using Dead Sea water causes: For sieve analysis test we do not see any effective change in soil

classification, and we notice an increase in PH for base course and selected fill.

For base course we notice an increase in plasticity index when adding D.S.W. while for selected fill plasticity index will decrease after we add 6% D.S.W, and for clay it will decrease by adding additional amount of D.S.W. depending on clay substances.

Maximum dry density for base course increases by adding D.S.W, while for selected fill it is not affected, and for clay it will increase by adding D.S.W. depending on clay substances.

California Bearing Ratio (CBR) increased for all samples.

The conclusion :

Based on the above discussion we recommend using D.S.W. for pavement purposes, since the addition of D.S.W improves the strength quality of pavement layers.

Moreover we recommend to further study and evaluate the facts obtained in this project.

Recommendations::

Thank You For Listening