Advertisement

The Effects of Meta-Kaolin on pH, Electric Conductivity (EC) and Ca2+ Ions Consumption of Lime-Treated Laterite

  • Gideon M. Limunga
  • Yun-zhi Tan
Conference paper
Part of the Environmental Science and Engineering book series (ESE)

Abstract

Lime treated lateritic soils are among the commonly applied construction materials in tropical and subtropical regions where they are widely distributed, due to the humid climate. However, the long-term performance of this material has been greatly influenced by the changes in the geoenvironment, for instance, under the action of contaminants lime-treated laterite may not perform as well as it would have in their absence. To characterize the changes in the geoenvironment, determining the degree of its acidity or alkalinity i.e. pH has been adopted by most scholars, and it has been shown that pH has a profound effect on the solubility of contaminants. In order to observe these issues experimental setups where established to monitor the effect of aggregate size, and addition of Meta-Kaolin (MK) on pH, Electrical conductivity (EC) and calcium ion (Ca2+) concentration of lime treated laterite. The results show that MK lowers the pH slightly in the short term and tends to maintain a very narrow range in the long term. Moreover, this property significantly influences the erosional and permeability properties. It was also observed that for the same percentage of lime a sample with 5 mm maximum aggregate had a pH slightly higher than the one with 0.5 mm maximum aggregate size sample. Further, a decrease in the amount of Ca2+ concentration, inevitably translates into a decrease in pH values and EC for a lime-laterite mixture.

Keywords

pH Electrical Conductivity (EC) Ca2+ concentration Meta-Kaolin Lime-treated laterite 

References

  1. 1.
    Attoh-Okine NO (1995) Lime treatment of laterite soils and gravels - revisited. Constr Build Mater 9(5):283–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Millogo Y, Morel JC, Traoré K, Ouedraogo R (2012) Microstructure, geotechnical and mechanical characteristics of quicklime-lateritic gravels mixtures used in road construction. Constr Build Mater 26(1):663–669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Millogo Y, Hajjaji M, Ouedraogo R, Gomina M (2008) Cement-lateritic gravels mixtures: microstructure and strength characteristics. Constr Build Mater 22(10):2078–2086CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Arabi M, Wild S (1986) Microstructural development in cured soil-lime composites. J Mater Sci 21(2):497–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wang Y, Cui Y, Tang AM, Benahmed N (2016) Aggregate size effect on the water retention properties of a lime-treated compacted silt during curing. Appl Clay Sci 11013:1–4Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cherian C, Arnepalli DN (2015) A critical appraisal of the role of clay mineralogy in lime stabilization. Int J Geosynth Gr Eng 1:8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ciancio D, Beckett CTS, Carraro JAH (2014) Optimum lime content identification for lime-stabilised rammed earth. Constr Build Mater 53:59–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Al-Mukhtar M, Lasledj A, Alcover JF (2014) Lime consumption of different clayey soils. Appl Clay Sci 95:133–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Boardman DI, Glendinning S, Rogers CDF (2001) Development of stabilisation and solidification in lime-clay mixes. Géotechnique (6):533–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mathur S Understanding the Benefits of High Reactivity MetakaolinGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Siddique R, Khan MI (2011) Supplementary Cementing Materials, vol 3. Springer, Heidelberg, p 287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shi Z, Geiker R, De Weerdt K, Østnor TA, Lothenbach B, Winnefeld F et al (2017) Role of calcium on chloride binding in hydrated Portland cement–metakaolin–limestone blends. Cem Concr Res 95:205–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wianglor K, Sinthupinyo S, Piyaworapaiboon M, Chaipanich A (2017) Effect of alkali-activated metakaolin cement on compressive strength of mortars. Appl Clay Sci 141:272–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pavlík V, Užáková M (2016) Effect of curing conditions on the properties of lime, lime-metakaolin and lime-zeolite mortars. Constr Build Mater 102:14–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Silva AS, Gameiro A, Grilo J, Veiga R, Velosa A (2014) Long-term behavior of lime-metakaolin pastes at ambient temperature and humid curing condition. Appl Clay Sci 88–89:49–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rahman M, Nahar TT (2015) Effect of pH on shear strength behavior of granular soil 15(1)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Attoh-Okine NO, Fekpe ESK (1996) Strength characteristics modeling of lateritic soils using adaptive neural networks. Constr Build Mater 10(8):577–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Khattab SA, Al-Mukhtar M, Fleureau J-M (2007) Long-term stability characteristics of a lime-treated. J Mater Civ Eng 19(4):358–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rao SM, Shivananda P (2005) Role of curing temperature in progress of lime-soil reactions. Geotech Geol Eng 23(1):79–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dojkov I, Stoyanov S, Ninov J, Petrov B (2013) On the consumption of lime by metakaolin, fly ash and kaoline in model systems. J Chem Technol Metall 48(1):54–60Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.China Three Gorges UniversityYichangChina

Personalised recommendations