Reference Library

Soilworks products are the industry’s top standard due to our insistence on creating high performance soil stabilization and dust control products that stand up to rigorous testing – both in the lab and in the field. Our commitment to quality and performance has led to our involvement and testing in hundreds of real-world situations. The following library of reports, presentations, specifications, approvals and other similar documents provide you, our customer, the transparency and dependable assurance that is expected from Soilworks.

VDOT Use of Soil Stabilizers on Highway Shoulders (TPD0507012)


A presentation to JCOTS July 19, 2005

BACKGROUND: This study was undertaken at the behest of the General Assembly (2004 Budget Bill). Based on positive preliminary results using soil stabilizers on higher volume gravel roads, they felt soil stabilizers showed substantial promise to reduce the occurrence of shoulder drop-off at a reasonable cost.

PURPOSE: To study the use of soil stabilizers in highway shoulders with the objective of finding a method of substantially reducing the occurrence of pavement/shoulder drop-off at a reasonable cost.


  • Field study only, with no laboratory analysis or investigation.
  • At locations based on documented past experience with low shoulders.
  • Soil stabilizers from three groups: acrylics, soybean/soy lecithin, and salts.
    • Soiltac (vinyl acetate copolymer emulsion)
    • Centrophase AD (soy/lecithin emulsion)
    • Magnesium chloride (salt) –
  • Use test and control evaluation.


Working – The addition of stabilizers to the shoulder material did affect the strength of the material Null – The addition of stabilizers to the shoulder material did not affect the strength of the material

(as measured by its stiffness and bearing capacity)



  • Dynamic Cone Penetration – Measures penetration and correlates to bearing strength
  • Geogauge – Measures stiffness or material’s resistance to movement.
  • Visual inspection


  • Statistically speaking, on no occasion were test section data better than the control section data
  • The February 8th data supports the visual inspection finding that the control section was firmer than either test section.
  • Overall, the data supported the null hypothesis


  • Equipment normally used for road stabilization is not effective or efficient for stabilization of narrow shoulders.
  • Soil stabilizers mixed with crusher run stone do not increase the stiffness or bearing strength of the material or prolong the period of optimum stiffness and bearing strength.
  • There is insufficient evidence to determine if soil stabilizers improve a shoulder’s short-term resistance to erosion due to the action of water or traffic.
  • The cost of using soil stabilizers as short-term surface stabilizers for crusher run stone shoulders is greater than the benefit received.


  • Shoulders should be designed for the anticipated traffic load.
  • Soil stabilizers should not be used with crushed stone with the intent of improving or prolonging the CBR of shoulder material.
  • Consider additional study of soil stabilizers as a short-term solution to shoulder erosion.

Picture Placeholder

Control Section

Picture Placeholder

Soiltac-treated Section

Picture Placeholder

Centrophase-treated Section

Picture Placeholder

Entrance 2/8/2005

Chart Graph Placeholder

DCP Penetration Readings for Sample C-6, by Date

Chart Graph Placeholder

DCP Penetration Data 2/8/2005

Complete the form below to download this document now.