Skip to main content

Experimental evaluation of strength and durability characteristics of geopolymer stabilised soft soil for deep mixing applications

Abstract

Vast deposits of high water content soft clays pose severe problems and are not suitable for construction of engineering projects due to their inadequate bearing capacity and inherent large swelling and shrinkage ability. Deep soil mixing (DSM) is one of the widely accepted methods for improving soft soil properties like increase in bearing capacity and reduction in settlement that are of utmost importance for the construction of any structure. In this study, ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS)-based geopolymer was used to investigate its efficiency as a sustainable replacement to cement for DSM applications, thereby reducing the carbon footprint. A total of 27 GGBS-geopolymer mixes and 9 cement-treated reference mixes were cast and tested for strength and durability characteristics. The variables of the study include binder content (10, 20, and 30%), activator/binder ratio (0.5, 0.75, and 1.0), and initial soil moisture content (0.75wL, wL, 1.25wL). Different tests were conducted to explore the properties of stabilised clays, such as unconfined compressive strength, flexural strength, and durability against wetting drying cycles. To meet the requirements of DSM application, binder dosage greater than 10% and A/B ratio greater than 0.5 were recommended. With an increase in initial soil moisture content, the strength of the treated specimens under unconfined compression and flexure reduced and thus increased binder dosage helps to meet the DSM requirements for high water content soils. From the present study, it can be concluded that using slag-geopolymer binder for stabilising soft soil is an effective and sustainable alternative to cement in DSM applications.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

References

  1. 1.

    Broms BB (1991) Stabilisation of soil with lime columns. In: Fang HY (ed) Foundation engineering handbook. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Porbaha A (1998) State of the art in deep mixing technology: part I. Basic concepts and overview. Ground Improv 2:81–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Kitazume M, Terashi M (2013) The deep mixing method. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Puppala AJ, Pedarla A (2017) Innovative ground improvement techniques for expansive soils. Innov Infrastruct Solut 2(1):24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Pourakbar S, Huat BK (2017) A review of alternatives traditional cementitious binders for engineering improvement of soils. Int J Geotech Eng 11(2):206–216

    Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Chai J, Carter JP (2011) Soil-cement columns. In: Ansal A (ed) Deformation analysis in soft ground improvement. Geotechnical, geological and earthquake engineering, vol 18. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Horpibulsuk S, Rachan R, Suddeepong A (2011) Assessment of strength development in blended cement admixed Bangkok clay. Constr Build Mater 25:1521–1531

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Duxson P, Fernández-Jiménez A, Provis JL, Lukey GC, Palomo A, van Deventer JS (2007) Geopolymer technology: the current state of the art. J Mater Sci 42(9):2917–2933

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Palomo A, Krivenko P, Garcia-Lodeiro I, Kavalerova E, Maltseva O, Fernández-Jiménez A (2014) A review on alkaline activation: new analytical perspectives. Mater Constr 64(315):022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Majidi B (2009) Geopolymer technology, from fundamentals to advanced applications: a review. Mater Technol 24(2):79–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Zhang M, Guo H, El-Korchi T, Zhang G, Tao M (2013) Experimental feasibility study of geopolymer as the next-generation soil stabilizer. Constr Build Mater 47:1468–1478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Singhi B, Laskar AI, Ahmed MA (2016) Investigation on soil–geopolymer with slag, fly ash and their blending. Arab J Sci Eng 41(2):393–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Neupane K (2016) Fly ash and GGBFS based powder-activated geopolymer binders: a viable sustainable alternative of portland cement in concrete industry. Mech Mater 103:110–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Yaghoubi M, Arulrajah A, Disfani MM, Horpibulsuk S, Bo MW, Darmawan S (2018) Effects of industrial by-product based geopolymers on the strength development of a soft soil. Soils Found 58(3):716–728

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Arulrajah A, Yaghoubi M, Disfani MM, Horpibulsuk S, Bo MW, Leong M (2018) Evaluation of fly ash-and slag-based geopolymers for the improvement of a soft marine clay by deep soil mixing. Soils Found 58(6):1358–1370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Sargent P, Hughes PN, Rouainia M (2016) A new low carbon cementitious binder for stabilising weak ground conditions through deep soil mixing. Soils Found 56(6):1021–1034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Reddy SRK, Murugan SB (2020) Experimental and microstructural assessment of ternary blended geopolymer concrete with different Na2SiO3-to-NaOH volume ratios. Innov Infrastruct Solut 5(1):1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Bernal SA, San Nicolas R, Provis JL, De Gutiérrez RM, van Deventer JS (2014) Natural carbonation of aged alkali-activated slag concretes. Mater Struct 47(4):693–707

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Song KI, Song JK, Lee BY, Yang KH (2014) Carbonation characteristics of alkali-activated blast-furnace slag mortar. In: Advances in materials science and engineering, 2014

  20. 20.

    Corrêa-Silva M, Miranda T, Rouainia M, Araújo N, Glendinning S, Cristelo N (2020) Geomechanical behaviour of a soft soil stabilised with alkali-activated blast-furnace slags. J Clean Prod 267:122017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Chowdary B, Ramanamurty V, Pillai RJ (2020) Fiber reinforced geopolymer treated soft clay—an innovative and sustainable alternative for soil stabilization. Mater Today Proc. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.03.574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Puppala AJ, Madhyannapu RS, Nazarian S, Yuan D, Hoyos LR (2008) Deep soil mixing technology for mitigation of pavement roughness (No. FHWA/TX-08/0-5179-1)

  23. 23.

    ASTM D1633-17 (2017) Standard test methods for compressive strength of molded soil-cement cylinders. ASTM International, West Conshohocken

  24. 24.

    ASTM D1635/D1635M-19 (2019) Standard test method for flexural strength of soil-cement using simple beam with third-point loading. ASTM International, West Conshohocken

  25. 25.

    ASTM D559/559M-15 (2015) Standard test methods for wetting and drying compacted soil-cement mixtures. ASTM International, West Conshohocken

  26. 26.

    Yip CK, Lukey GC, Van Deventer JS (2005) The coexistence of geopolymeric gel and calcium silicate hydrate at the early stage of alkaline activation. Cem Concr Res 35(9):1688–1697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Olivia M, Nikraz H (2012) Properties of fly ash geopolymer concrete designed by Taguchi method. Mater Des 1980–2015(36):191–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Du YJ, Yu BW, Liu K, Jiang NJ, Liu MD (2017) Physical, hydraulic, and mechanical properties of clayey soil stabilized by lightweight alkali-activated slag geopolymer. J Mater Civ Eng 29(2):04016217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Nath P, Sarker PK (2017) Flexural strength and elastic modulus of ambient-cured blended low-calcium fly ash geopolymer concrete. Constr Build Mater 130:22–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Pacheco-Torgal F, Abdollahnejad Z, Camões AF, Jamshidi M, Ding Y (2012) Durability of alkali-activated binders: a clear advantage over Portland cement or an unproven issue? Constr Build Mater 30:400–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Phetchuay C, Horpibulsuk S, Arulrajah A, Suksiripattanapong C, Udomchai A (2016) Strength development in soft marine clay stabilized by fly ash and calcium carbide residue based geopolymer. Appl Clay Sci 127:134–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Lorenzo GA, Bergado DT (2006) Fundamental characteristics of cement-admixed clay in deep mixing. J Mater Civ Eng 18(2):161–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Jamsawang P, Bergado DT, Voottipruex P (2011) Field behaviour of stiffened deep cement mixing piles. Proc Inst Civil Engineers Ground Improv 164(1):33–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Bushra I, Robinson RG (2013) Effect of fly ash on cement admixture for a low plasticity marine soil. Adv Civ Eng Mater 2(1):608–621

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to V. Bhavita Chowdary.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bhavita Chowdary, V., Ramanamurty, V. & Pillai, R.J. Experimental evaluation of strength and durability characteristics of geopolymer stabilised soft soil for deep mixing applications. Innov. Infrastruct. Solut. 6, 40 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-020-00407-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Deep soil mixing
  • Soft clay
  • Geopolymer
  • Strength
  • Durability