Advertisement

Performance of Pond Ash and Rice Husk Ash in Clay: A Comparative Study

  • Deepak Gupta
  • Arvind Kumar
  • Vikas KumarEmail author
  • Akash Priyadarshee
  • Vaibhav Sharma
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering book series (LNCE, volume 32)

Abstract

Use of admixtures for improvement of the engineering behavior of soils is one of the popular techniques in ground improvement. Different wastes ashes like fly ash, pond ash, etc., are available as an option for the improvement of the soil properties. In this paper, a series of the unconfined compressive strength tests were conducted on the kaolin clay mixed with rice husk ash and pond ash, and comparison of performance improvement is done. The content of rice husk ash and pond ash was varied as 10–50%. The results have shown that both rice husk and pond ash have the potential to improve the load-carrying capacity of the clay. But the impact of the rice husk ash on the load-carrying capacity of the clay is more significant than the pond ash. Optimum rice husk content is found to be 10%, while for pond ash, optimum moisture content is found around 40%.

Keywords

Pond ash Rice husk ash Kaolin clay Load carrying capacity Optimum content 

References

  1. ASTM D 2166 (2006) Standard test method for unconfined compressive strength of cohesive soil. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PAGoogle Scholar
  2. ASTM D 2487 (2006) Standard practice for classification of soils for engineering purposes (unified soil classification system). ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PAGoogle Scholar
  3. ASTM D 4221 (2005) Standard test method for dispersive characteristics of clay soil by double hydrometer. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PAGoogle Scholar
  4. ASTM D 854 (2006) Standard test methods for specific gravity of soil solids by water pycnometer. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PAGoogle Scholar
  5. Babu SGL et al (2008) Use of coir fibers for improving the engineering properties of expansive soil. J Nat Fibersc 5(1):61–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Balan K (1995) Studies on engineering behaviour and uses of geo-textiles with natural fibers. Ph.D. thesis submitted to Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  7. Bera AK, Ghosh A (2007) Behaviour of model footing on pond ash. Geotech Geol Eng 25:315–325.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-006-9112-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bera AK, Ghosh D (2016) Behavior of cement stabilized fiber-reinforced pond ash, rice husk ash-soil mixtures. Geotext Geomembr 44(3):466–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chand SK, Subbarao C (2007) Strength and slake durability of lime stabilized pond ash. J Mater Civil Eng 19:601–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Havanagi VG et al (2011) Design and stability analysis of pond ash Railway embankment. In: Proceedings of Indian geotechnical conference, 15–17 December 2011, KochiGoogle Scholar
  11. Jayasree PK et al (2015) Volume change behaviour of expansive soil stabilized with coir waste. J Mater Civ Eng 27:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kumar A, Gupta D (2016) Behaviour of cement stabilized fiber-reinforced pond ash, rice husk ash-soil mixtures. Geotext Geomembr 44(3):466–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Malik V, Priyadarshee A (2017) Compaction and swelling behaviour of black cotton soil mixed with different non-cementitious materials. Int J Geotech Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1080/19386362.2017.1288355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Martin JP et al (1990) Properties and use of fly ashes for embankments. J Energy Eng 116(2):71–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mehta PK (1986) Concrete structure, properties and materials. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJGoogle Scholar
  16. Misra A et al (2005) Physico-mechanical behaviour of self-cementing class C fly ash-clay mixture. Fuel 84:1410–1422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Pandian NS (2004) Fly ash characterization with reference to geotechnical applications. J Indian Inst Sci 84:189–216Google Scholar
  18. Paya J et al (2001) Determination of amorphous silica in rice husk ash by rapid analytical method. Cem Concr Res 31:212–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Priyadarshee A et al (2015) Comparitive study on performance of tire crumbles with fly ash and kaolin clay. Int J Geosynth Ground Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-015-0033-3
  20. Roy TK, Chattopadhyay BC (2008) A study on the effect of cement on alluvial soil strengthened with pond ash and rice husk ash for construction of road subgrade. In: The 12th international conference of international association for computer methods and advances in geomechanics, 1–6 October 2008, GoaGoogle Scholar
  21. Sarkar R et al (2012) A comparative study of geotechnical behaviour of lime stabilized pond ashes from delhi region. Int J GEOMATE 1(3):273–279Google Scholar
  22. Sharma RS et al (2008) Engineering behaviour of remoulded expansive clay blended with lime calcium chloride and rice husk ash. J Mater Civ Eng 20(8):509–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Deepak Gupta
    • 1
  • Arvind Kumar
    • 1
  • Vikas Kumar
    • 1
    Email author
  • Akash Priyadarshee
    • 1
  • Vaibhav Sharma
    • 1
  1. 1.Civil Engineering DepartmentMadan Mohan, Malaviya University of TechnologyGorakhpurIndia

Personalised recommendations