Advertisement

Characterization of building derived materials for partial replacement of pavement subgrade layer

  • Ashok Kumar Suluguru
  • M. Jayatheja
  • Anasua GuhaRayEmail author
  • Arkamitra Kar
  • Anurag Anand
Technical Paper
  • 35 Downloads

Abstract

This study investigates the potential of BDM in its virgin state for enhancing the geotechnical and mechanical properties of soft non-swelling soil with low shear strength. A series of material and geotechnical tests carried out on soil replaced with different percentages of BDM include specific gravity, water absorption, standard Proctor’s test, permeability test, aggregate impact test (AIV), Los Angeles abrasion test, and large shear box test. The results indicated that an optimum of 18–23% of BDM by weight can be added to soil to improve its mechanical and geotechnical properties such as shear strength and compaction. This study also evaluates the compatibility of BDM in soils from sites surrounding chemical plants. For this purpose, the BDMs are exposed to sulfuric, hydrochloric, and nitric acid solutions to identify the effects of these acids on the BDM behavior. It is observed that the strength of BDM decreases after their exposure to these solutions, with maximum effect manifested by nitric acid and least by hydrochloric acid. The results of AIV and LA abrasion test on BDM exposed to chemicals show that the performance of the BDM deteriorates in the presence of chemicals. The results obtained from the proposed study can be used to promote the practical use of BDM in geotechnical applications. However, necessary precautions must be adopted for their practical application in ground improvement based on soil conditions.

Keywords

Building derived materials Subgrade layer Ground improvement Sustainability Acid attack 

Notes

Funding

This work is supported by the Department of Science and Technology, Science and Engineering Research Board (SERB), Govt. of India (Project ID: ECR/2016/000522).

References

  1. 1.
    Centre for science and environment (2014) Construction and demolition waste. C Centre for Science and Environment, New Delhi. http://www.cseindia.org/userfiles/Construction-and%20-demolition-waste.pdf. Accessed 20 Mar 2016
  2. 2.
    EPA Victoria (2017) Recycling construction and demolition material, guidance on complying with the occupational health and safety (asbestos) regulations 2003. https://www.worksafe.vic.gov.au/news/notices/new-ohs-regulations-now-apply. Accessed 24 Feb 2018
  3. 3.
    USEPA (2015) Lifecycle challenge competition seeks new ideas to reduce construction and demolition debris. http://www3.epa.gov/region9/waste/solid/construction/. Accessed on 2 Feb 2017
  4. 4.
    WorkSafe-Victoria (2006) Recycling construction and demolition material, guidance on complying with the occupational health and safety (asbestos) regulations 2003. WorkSafe, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bhattacharyya SK, Minocha AK, Garg M, Singh J, Jain N, Maiti S, Singh SK (2013) GAP0072 (DST Project) demolition wastes as raw materials for sustainable construction products. CSIR CBRI News Lett 33(2):1–2Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Meyer C (2004) Concrete materials and sustainable development in the USA. Struct Eng Int 14(3):203–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Victoria S (2005) Annual survey of Victorian recycling industries 2004–2005, pp 1–28Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Arulrajah A, Piratheepan J, Ali YMM, Bo MW (2012) Geotechnical properties of recycled concrete aggregate in pavement sub-base applications. Geotech Test J 35(5):1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    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
  10. 10.
    The Hindu, construction waste recycling plants soon (2017). http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-telangana/work-on-recycling-plants-to-start-soon/article20007457.ece. Accessed 9 Nov 2017
  11. 11.
    Rao A, Jha KN, Misra S (2007) Use of aggregates from recycled construction and demolition waste in concrete. Resour Conserv Recycl 50(1):71–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Huang WL, Lin DH, Chang NB, Lin KS (2002) Recycling of construction and demolition waste via a mechanical sorting process. Resour Conserv Recycl 37(1):23–37.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-3449(02)00053-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chung SS, Lo CWH (2003) Evaluating sustainability in waste management the case of construction and demolition, chemical and clinical wastes in Hong Kong. Resour Conserv Recycl 37(2):119–145.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S09213449(02)00075-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Arulrajah A, Piratheepan J, Aatheesan T, Bo MW (2011) Geotechnical properties of recycled crushed brick in pavement applications. J Mater Civ Eng 23(10):1444–1542.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000319 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Melton JS (2015) Recycled base aggregates in pavement applications—part III of VI (AWI051611). Sustainable Geotechnical Applications, Webinar hosted by ASCE 24 JulyGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Edil TB (2015) Tire derived aggregate in geotechnical and environmental applications—part V of VI (AWI062811). Sustainable geotechnical applications, Webinar hosted by ASCE, 24 JulyGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lee JH, Salgado R, Bernal A, Lovell CW (1999) Shredded tires and rubber-soil as light weight backfill. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 125(2):132–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zuquan J, Wei S, Yunsheng Z, Jinyang J, Jianzhong L (2007) Interaction between sulfate and chloride solution attack of concretes with and without fly ash. Cem Concr Res 37(8):1223–1232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kupwade-Patil K, Allouche E (2011) Effect of alkali silica reaction (ASR) in geopolymer concrete. In: World of coal ash (WOCA) conference, 9–12 May, DevnverGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kar A, Ray I, Halabe UB, Unnikrishnan A, Dawson-Andoh B (2014) Characterizations and estimation of alkali activated binder paste from microstructures. Int J Concr Struct Mater 8(3):213–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mindess S, Young JF, Darwin D (2003) Concrete. Pearson Education, Inc., HobokenGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Suluguru AK, Jayatheja M, Kar A, GuhaRay A, Surana SR, James N (2017) Experimental studies on the microstructural, physical and chemical characteristics of building derived materials to assess their suitability in ground improvement. Constr Build Mater 156:921–932CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    IS 2386-3 (2011) Methods of test for aggregates for concrete, part 3: specific gravity and water absorption. Bureau of Indian Standards, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    ASTM D854-06e1 (2016) Standard test methods for specific gravity of soil solids by water pycnometer. ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    IS 2386-Part 4 (2011) Methods of test for aggregates for concrete, part 4: mechanical properties. Bureau of Indian Standards, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    ASTM C131/C131M-14 (2006) Standard test method for resistance to degradation of small-size coarse aggregate by abrasion and impact in the Los Angeles machine. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PAGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    IS: 2720-Part 4 (1985) Methods of test for soils part 4 grain size analysis. Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    ASTM D6913/D6913 M-17 (2017) Standard test methods for particle-size distribution (gradation) of soils using sieve analysis. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PAGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    ASTM D2434-68 (2006) Standard test method for permeability of granular soils (constant head) (withdrawn 2015). ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    IS 2720-Part 17 (1986) Method of test for soils: laboratory determination of permeability. Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), New Delhi (Reaffirmed 2002) Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    IS 2720-Part 7 (1980) Method of test for soils: determination of water content—dry density relation using light compaction. Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), New Delhi (Reaffirmed 2011) Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    ASTM D698-12e2 (2012) Standard test methods for laboratory compaction characteristics of soil using standard effort (12 400 ft-lbf/ft3 (600 kN-m/m3)). ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    IS 2720-Part 39 (1979) Method of test for soils: direct shear test for soils containing gravel. Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), New Delhi (Reaffirmed 2002) Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    ASTM D3080/D3080M-11 (2011) Standard test method for direct shear test of soils under consolidated drained conditions. ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mamo BG, Dey A (2016) Strain rate and scale effects on stress-strain behavior of sand. In: International conference on the advancements of science and technology in civil and water resources engineering (ICAST-CWRE 2016)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    U. S. geological survey open-file report 01-041 (2016) A laboratory manual for X-ray powder diffraction. http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/of01-041/htmldocs/links.htm. Accessed 7 Sept 2016
  37. 37.
    Yildirim M, Kipcak AS, Senberber FT, Asensio MO, Derun EM, Piskin S (2015) The determination of the potassium nitrate, sodium hydroxide and boric acid molar ratio in the synthesis of potassium borates via hydrothermal method. World Acad Sci Eng Technol Int J Chem Mol Nucl Mater Metall Eng 9(5):597–600Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.BITS Pilani Hyderabad CampusSecunderabadIndia

Personalised recommendations