# Research and Application of Slag-Nanosilica Stabilizer for Silt Subgrade
## 4 Results and Discussion
### Stabilizer Mix Ratio Design
#### 4.1.2 Test Results  
The test results of the compaction test and UCS test of nine types of stabilized soil are given in Table 7.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Test No.**} & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Quicklime Content** \\ **A/\%** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{\
\begin{tabular}{c} **Nanosilica Content** \\ **B/\%** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{**Vacant Column**} & \multirow{2}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{c} **Slag Content** \\ **C/\%** \\ \end{tabular} } \\  & & & & \\ \hline A1 & 2 (1) & 0.2 (1) & 0 (1) & 4 (1) \\ A2 & 2 (1) & 0.3 (2) & 0 (2) & 6 (3) \\ A3 & 2 (1) & 0.4 (3) & 0 (3) & 5 (2) \\ A4 & 3 (2) & 0.2 (1) & 0 (2) & 5 (2) \\ A5 & 3 (2) & 0.3 (2) & 0 (3) & 4 (1) \\ A6 & 3 (2) & 0.4 (3) & 0 (1) & 6 (3) \\ A7 & 4 (3) & 0.2 (1) & 0 (3) & 6 (3) \\ A8 & 4 (3) & 0.3 (2) & 0 (1) & 5 (2) \\ A9 & 4 (3) & 0.4 (3) & 0 (2) & 4 (1) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 6: Orthogonal test program.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Test No.**} & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Optimal** \\ **Moisure** \\ **Content** \\ **/\%** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Maximum Dry** \\ **Density** \\ **/(g:cm\({}^{-3}\))** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **28 d** \\ **SCCS/MPa** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{\
\begin{tabular}{c} **7 d** \\ **WCCS/MPa** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{c} **28 d** \\ **WCCS/MPa** \\ \end{tabular} } \\  & & & & \\ \hline A1 & 30.37 & 1.61 & 1.85 & 3.40 & 0.52 & 1.81 \\ A2 & 29.73 & 1.64 & 2.28 & 3.88 & 0.64 & 2.49 \\ A3 & 31.85 & 1.63 & 2.13 & 3.77 & 0.80 & 2.58 \\ A4 & 30.12 & 1.65 & 2.31 & 4.15 & 1.24 & 2.16 \\ A5 & 30.41 & 1.64 & 2.48 & 4.86 & 1.33 & 2.24 \\ A6 & 30.25 & 1.71 & 2.72 & 5.25 & 1.52 & 3.43 \\ A7 & 30.67 & 1.75 & 3.12 & 4.60 & 0.84 & 2.89 \\ A8 & 30.84 & 1.72 & 3.05 & 4.39 & 0.85 & 2.58 \\ A9 & 30.77 & 1.70 & 2.87 & 4.32 & 1.19 & 2.84 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 7: Compaction test and UCS test results.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Level**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Factor**} \\ \cline{2-4}  & **Quicklime Content A/\%** & **Nanosilica Content B/\%** & **Slag Content C/\%** \\ \hline
1 & 2 & 0.2 & 4 \\
2 & 3 & 0.3 & 5 \\
3 & 4 & 0.4 & 6 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 5: Factor level table.  
In the above table, SCCS is standard curing compressive strength and WCCS is water curing compressive strength.  
It can be seen from Table 7 that the addition of SNS-S had no significant effect on the optimum moisture content and maximum dry density of silt. The content of nanosilica in the stabilized soil was small, so the effect on the physical properties of silt was not obvious. Secondly, it takes a long time for the reaction inside the SNS-S, but the compaction tests lasted only 12 h. Therefore, the reaction between the internal stabilizer and the soil was not fully carried out, resulting in a small effect on the test results [27].