Advertisement

Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy

, Volume 19, Issue 1, pp 63–75 | Cite as

Engineering and environmental evaluation of spent coffee grounds stabilized with industrial by-products as a road subgrade material

  • Teck-Ang Kua
  • Arul ArulrajahEmail author
  • Suksun HorpibulsukEmail author
  • Yan-Jun Du
  • Cherdsak Suksiripattanapong
Original Paper

Abstract

Current construction technology increasingly seeks the sustainable usage of waste by-products as a resource material. This paper evaluates the viability of utilizing spent coffee grounds (CG), a highly organic beverage waste, to be stabilized as a road subgrade material. The additives used in this research incorporates industrial by-products such as fly ash (FA), ground granulated blast-furnace slag (S) as well as traditional binders such as portland cement (PC) and hydrated lime (L). CG collected from a coffee roaster were mixed with controlled additive content ratios by mass to assess the effects of these common engineering stabilizers towards the load-bearing capacity of CG. The additive contents of FA and S were 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 % whereas the PC and L additive contents were 3 and 5 % by dry unit weight. Modified proctor compaction tests, 7-days unconfined compressive strength (UCS) tests, and California bearing ratio (CBR) tests were carried out to determine the optimum moisture content and bearing strength of the different mixes produced. It found that as the proportion of additives in the specimen increased, the optimum moisture content of the additive-stabilized CG specimens subsequently decreased. Regardless of the type of stabilizers used, the UCS strength increases were found to be nominal. FA and S mixes above the 20 % additive contents satisfied the requirements for subgrade materials; however, the low PC and L contents were insufficient to meet subgrade requirements. The research findings indicate that instead of being disposed of into landfills, stabilized CG has the potential to be used as a subgrade material. Such a sustainability driven approach for reuse of CG will have the potential to divert CG from landfills and at the same time utilize CG as a viable construction material.

Keywords

Coffee grounds Cement Lime Fly ash Slag Subgrade 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The third and last authors acknowledge the Suranaree University of Technology, the Office of Higher Education Commission under NRU project of Thailand and the Thailand Research Fund under the TRF Senior Research Scholar program Grant No. RTA5680002.

References

  1. Abu-Farsakh M, Dhakal S, Chen Q (2015) Laboratory characterization of cementitiously treated/stabilized very weak subgrade soil under cyclic loading. Soils Found 55:504–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahmaruzzaman M (2010) A review on the utilization of fly ash. Prog Energy Combust Sci 36:327–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Akpokodje EG (1985) The stabilization of some arid zone soils with cement and lime. Q J Eng Geol 18:173–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arulrajah A, Disfani MM, Suthagaran V, Bo MW (2013) Laboratory evaluation of the geotechnical characteristics of wastewater biosolids in road embankments. J Mater Civ Eng 25:1682–1691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arulrajah A, Disfani MM, Horpibulsuk S, Suksiripattanapong C, Prongmanee N (2014a) Physical properties and shear strength responses of recycled construction and demolition materials in unbound pavement base/subbase applications. Constr Build Mater 58:245–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Arulrajah A, Maghoolpilehrood F, Disfani MM, Horpibulsuk S (2014b) Spent coffee grounds as a non-structural embankment fill material: engineering and environmental considerations. J Clean Prod 72:181–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Arulrajah A, Piratheepan J, Disfani MM (2014c) Reclaimed asphalt pavement and recycled concrete aggregate blends in pavement subbases: laboratory and field evaluation. J Mater Civ Eng 26:349–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Arulrajah A, Disfani MM, Haghighi H, Mohammadinia A, Horpibulsuk S (2015a) Modulus of rupture evaluation of cement stabilized recycled glass/recycled concrete aggregate blends. Constr Build Mater 84:146–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Arulrajah A, Disfani MM, Maghoolpilehrood F, Horpibulsuk S, Udonchai A, Imteaz M, Du Y-J (2015b) Engineering and environmental properties of foamed recycled glass as a lightweight engineering material. J Clean Prod 94:369–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. AS (1997) AS 4439: wastes, sediments and contaminated soils, AS 4439.3-1997: Preparation of leachates—bottle leaching procedures. Standards Australia, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  11. ASTM (2006) D2216-98: standard test method for laboratory determination of water (moisture) content of soil and rock by mass. ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  12. ASTM (2007) D442-63: standard test method for particle-size analysis of soils. ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  13. ASTM (2012a) C618–12a: standard specification for coal fly ash and raw or calcined natural pozzolan for use in concrete. ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  14. ASTM (2012b) D1557-12: standard test methods for laboratory compaction characteristics of soil using modified effort. ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  15. ASTM (2014) D1883-14: standard test method for California bearing ratio (CBR) of laboratory-compacted soils. ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  16. Azam A, Cameron D (2013) Geotechnical properties of blends of recycled clay masonry and recycled concrete aggregates in unbound pavement construction. J Mater Civ Eng 25:788–798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Barišić I, Dimter S, Rukavina T (2014) Strength properties of steel slag stabilized mixes. Compos B Eng 58:386–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Brooks R, Udoeyo F, Takkalapelli K (2010) Geotechnical properties of problem soils stabilized with fly ash and limestone dust in Philadelphia. J Mater Civ Eng 23:711–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ching SL, Yusoff MS, Aziz HA, Umar M (2011) Influence of impregnation ratio on coffee ground activated carbon as landfill leachate adsorbent for removal of total iron and orthophosphate. Desalination 279:225–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cristelo N, Glendinning S, Fernandes L, Pinto AT (2013) Effects of alkaline-activated fly ash and portland cement on soft soil stabilisation. Acta Geotech 8:395–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Disfani MM, Arulrajah A, Suthagaran V, Bo MW (2013) Long-term settlement prediction for wastewater biosolids in road embankments. Resour Conserv Recycl 77:69–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Du Y, Hayashi S (2006) A study on sorption properties of Cd 2 + on Ariake clay for evaluating its potential use as a landfill barrier material. Appl Clay Sci 32:14–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Du YJ, Hayashi S, Liu SY (2005) Experimental study of migration of potassium ion through a two-layer soil system. Environ Geol 48:1096–1106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Du Y-J, Shen S-L, Liu S-Y, Hayashi S (2009) Contaminant mitigating performance of Chinese standard municipal solid waste landfill liner systems. Geotext Geomembr 27:232–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Du Y-J, Jiang N-J, Liu S-Y, Jin F, Singh DN, Puppala AJ (2013) Engineering properties and microstructural characteristics of cement-stabilized zinc-contaminated kaolin. Can Geotech J 51:289–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Du Y-J, Horpibulsuk S, Wei M-L, Suksiripattanapong C, Liu MD (2014a) Modeling compression behavior of cement-treated zinc-contaminated clayey soils. Soils Found 54:1018–1026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Du Y-J, Wei M-L, Reddy KR, Liu Z-P, Jin F (2014b) Effect of acid rain pH on leaching behavior of cement stabilized lead-contaminated soil. J Hazard Mater 271:131–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Du Y, Liu S, Qin X, Wei M, Wu J (2014c) Field investigations on performance of calcium carbide residues stabilized over-wet clayey soils used as highway subgrade materials. J Southeast Univ (Nat Sci Ed) 44:375–380Google Scholar
  29. Du YJ, Jiang N-J, Liu S, Horpibulsuk S, Arulrajah A (2015) Field evaluation of soft highway subgrade soil stabilized with calcium carbide residue. Soils Found 49(1):85–98Google Scholar
  30. EPA(AU) (2007) Information update for EPA 996. Environmental Protection Agency, VictoriaGoogle Scholar
  31. EPA(AU) (2009) Solid industrial waste hazard categorization and management. Environmental Protection Agency, VictoriaGoogle Scholar
  32. EPA(USA) (1999) National primary drinking water standards. Environmental Protection Agency, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  33. Gomes T, Pereira JA, Ramalhosa E, Casal S, Baptista P (2013) Effect of fresh and composted spent coffee grounds on lettuce growth, photosynthetic pigments and mineral composition. Agroingeniería VII and Iberian Congress of Horticultural Science, MadridGoogle Scholar
  34. Hagan EB (1997) The use of stabilized soil to enhance rural housing. Build Res Inf 25:210–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hammond G, Jones C, Lowrie F, Tse P (2011) Embodied carbon: the inventory of carbon and energy (ICE). BSRIAGoogle Scholar
  36. Holland JE, Griffin C (1980) Cement and lime stabilisation of Melbourne pavement subgrade soils. In: Environmental conference, proceedings of the technical association of the pulp and paper industry 1(1):191–195Google Scholar
  37. Horpibulsuk S, Katkan W, Naramitkornburee A (2009) Modified Ohio’s curves: a rapid estimation of compaction curves for coarse- and fine-grained soils. Geotech Test J 32:64–75Google Scholar
  38. Horpibulsuk S, Phetchuay C, Chinkulkijniwat A (2012) Soil stabilization by calcium carbide residue and fly ash. J Mater Civ Eng 24:184–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Horpibulsuk S, Munsrakest V, Udomchai A, Chinkulkijniwat A, Arulrajah A (2014) Strength of sustainable non-bearing masonry units manufactured from calcium carbide residue and fly ash. Constr Build Mater 71:210–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hoyos L, Puppala A, Ordonez C (2011a) Characterization of cement-fiber-treated reclaimed asphalt pavement aggregates: preliminary investigation. J Mater Civ Eng 23:977–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hoyos LR, Puppala AJ, Ordonez CA (2011b) Characterization of cement fiber-treated reclaimed asphalt pavement aggregates: preliminary investigation. J Mater Civ Eng ASCE 23:977–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Jiang N-J, Du Y-J, Liu S-Y, Wei M-L, Horpibulsuk S, Arulrajah A (2015) Multi-scale laboratory evaluation of the physical, mechanical, and microstructural properties of soft highway subgrade soil stabilized with calcium carbide residue. Can Geotech J 52:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kogbara RB, Al-Tabbaa A (2011) Mechanical and leaching behaviour of slag-cement and lime-activated slag stabilised/solidified contaminated soil. Sci Total Environ 409:2325–2335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kondamudi N, Mohapatra SK, Misra M (2008) Spent coffee grounds as a versatile source of green energy. J Agric Food Chem 56:11757–11760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ktnuthia JM, Wild S (2001) Effects of some metal sulfates on the strength and swelling properties of lime-stabilised kaolinite. Int J Pavement Eng 2:103–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kuder K, Lehman D, Berman J, Hannesson G, Shogren R (2012) Mechanical properties of self consolidating concrete blended with high volumes of fly ash and slag. Constr Build Mater 34:285–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Malhotra V (2008) Role of FA in reducing greenhouse gas emissions during the manufacturing of portland cement clinker. In: 2nd international conference on advances in concrete technologies in the Middle East DubaiGoogle Scholar
  48. Mir BA, Sridharan A (2013) Physical and compaction behaviour of clay soil-fly ash mixtures. Geotech Geol Eng 31:1059–1072CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Mussatto S, Machado ES, Martins S, Teixeira J (2011) Production, composition, and application of coffee and its industrial residues. Food Bioprocess Technol 4:661–672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Osinubi K (2006) Influence of compactive efforts on lime-slag treated tropical black clay. J Mater Civ Eng 18:175–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Patel MA, Patel H (2012) Experimental study to correlate the test results of PBT, UCS, and CBR with DCP on various soils in soaked condition. Int J Eng (IJE) 6:244Google Scholar
  52. Perná I, Hanzlíček T (2015) The setting time of a clay-slag geopolymer matrix: the influence of blast-furnace-slag addition and the mixing method. J Clean Prod 112:1150–1155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Phetchuay C, Horpibulsuk S, Suksiripattanapong C, Chinkulkijniwat A, Arulrajah A, Disfani MM (2014) Calcium carbide residue: alkaline activator for clay-fly ash geopolymer. Constr Build Mater 69:285–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Plowman C, Cabrera JG (1996) The use of fly ash to improve the sulphate resistance of concrete. Waste Manag 16:145–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Poon CS, Chan D (2006) Feasible use of recycled concrete aggregates and crushed clay brick as unbound road sub-base. Constr Build Mater 20:578–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Puppala AJ, Hoyos LR, Potturi AK (2011) Resilient moduli response of moderately cement-treated reclaimed asphalt pavement aggregates. J Mater Civ Eng ASCE 23:990–998CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Rahman MA, Imteaz M, Arulrajah A, Disfani MM (2014) Suitability of recycled construction and demolition aggregates as alternative pipe backfilling materials. J Clean Prod 66:75–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Rai AP, Paul B, Singh G (2010) A study on backfill properties and uses of fly ash for highway embankments. J Adv Lab Res Biol 1:110–114Google Scholar
  59. Rees W (2003) Economic development and environmental protection: an ecological economics perspective. Environ Monit Assess 86:29–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sharma N, Swain SK, Sahoo U (2012) Stabilization of a clayey soil with fly ash and lime: a micro level investigation. Geotech Geol Eng 30:1197–1205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Singh SP, Tripathy DP, Ranjith PG (2008) Performance evaluation of cement stabilized fly ash–GBFS mixes as a highway construction material. Waste Manag 28:1331–1337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Snelson DG, Kinuthia JM, Davies PA, Chang SR (2009) Sustainable construction: composite use of tyres and ash in concrete. Waste Manag 29:360–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Soga K, Chau C, Nicholson D, Pantelidou H (2011) Embodied energy: soil retaining geosystems. KSCE J Civ Eng 15:739–749CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Taha R, Al-Harthy A, Al-Shamsi K, Al-Zubeidi M (2002) Cement stabilization of reclaimed asphalt pavement aggregate for road bases and subbases. J Mater Civ Eng 14:239–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Tam VW, Tam C (2006) A review on the viable technology for construction waste recycling. Resour Conserv Recycl 47:209–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Veith G (2000) Essay competition. Green, ground and great: soil stabilization with slag. Build Res Inf 28:70–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Vicroads (2013) RC 500.22: selection and design of pavements and surfacings, VictoriaGoogle Scholar
  68. Wartman J, Grubb D, Nasim A (2004) Select engineering characteristics of crushed glass. J Mater Civ Eng 16:526–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Yi H, Xu G, Cheng H, Wang J, Wan Y, Chen H (2012a) An overview of utilization of steel slag. Proc Environ Sci 16:791–801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Yi Y, Liska M, Al-Tabbaa A (2012b) Initial investigation into the use of GGBS-MgO in soil stabilisation, grouting and deep mixing 2012. American Society of Civil Engineers, pp 444–453Google Scholar
  71. Yi Y, Gu L, Liu S (2015) Microstructural and mechanical properties of marine soft clay stabilized by lime-activated ground granulated blastfurnace slag. Appl Clay Sci 103:71–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Yu B, Du Y, Jin F, Liu C (2016) Multi-scale study of sodium sulfate-soaking durability of low plastic clay stabilized by reactive magnesia-activated ground granulated blast-furnace slag. J Mater Civ Eng ASCE. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0001517 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil and Construction EngineeringSwinburne University of TechnologyMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.School of EngineeringSuranaree University of TechnologyNakhon RatchasimaThailand
  3. 3.Institute of Geotechnical EngineeringSoutheast UniversityNanjingChina
  4. 4.Department of Civil EngineeringRajamangala University of Technology IsanNakhon RatchasimaThailand

Personalised recommendations