The effects of different percentages of one traditional additive—hydrated lime—and two by-products—Class C fly ash (CFA) and cement kiln dust (CKD)—on the resilient modulus (Mr) of four different clay subgrades were investigated. It was found that at lower application rates (3% to 6%), the lime-stabilized soil specimens showed highest enhancement in the Mr values. At higher application rates (10% to 15%), however, CKD treatment provided maximum improvements. Three log-log and one semi-log stress-based models were evaluated. Validation of selected models was conducted by using additional soil data. Overall, a semi-log deviatoric and confining stress model was found to show the best acceptable performance. Additional analyses were performed to develop correlations of Mr with compacted specimen characteristics and soil and additive properties. To illustrate the application of the semi-log model, the AASHTO flexible pavement design methodology was used to design asphalt concrete pavement sections.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ACAA's CCPs Production and Use Survey.American Coal Ash Association, Alexandria, Va., 2004.
2.
User Guidelines for Waste and By-Product Materials in Pavement Construction. FHWA-RD-97-148. FHWA Turner Fairbank Highway Research Center, U.S. Department of Transportation, McLean, Va., 1998.
3.
ChangD. T. -T.Resilient Properties and Microstructure of Modified Fly Ash-Stabilized Fine-Grained Soils. In Transportation Research Record, No. 1486, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1995, pp. 88–96.
4.
AchampongF.Evaluation of Resilient Modulus for Lime and Cement Stabilized Synthetic Cohesive Soils. PhD dissertation. Wayne State University, Detroit, Mich., 1996.
5.
MisraA.Stabilization Characteristics of Clays Using Class C Fly Ash. In Transportation Research, Record No. 1611, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1998, pp. 46–54.
6.
LittleD. L.Evaluation of Structural Properties of Lime Stabilized Soils and Aggregates: Mixture Design and Testing Protocol for Lime Stabilized Soils. National Lime Association Report, Arlington, Va., Vol. 3, 2000.
7.
MillerG. A., and AzadS.Influence of Soil Type on Stabilization with Cement Kiln Dust. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 14, 2000, pp. 89–97.
8.
QubainB. S., SeksinskyE. J., and LiJ.Incorporating Subgrade Lime Stabilization into Pavement Design. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1721, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2000, pp. 3–8.
9.
ParsonsR. L., and MilburnJ. P.Engineering Behavior of Stabilized Soils. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1837, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2003, pp. 20–29.
10.
KimD., and SiddikiN. Z.Lime Kiln Dust and Lime—Comparative Study in Indiana. Presented at 83rd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2004.
11.
AroraS, and AydilekA. H.Class F Fly-Ash-Amended Soils as Highway Base Materials. ASCE Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol. 17, No. 6, 2005, pp. 640–649.
12.
HilbrichS. L., and ScullionT.A Rapid Alternative for Laboratory Determination of Resilient Modulus Input Values on Stabilized Materials for the AASHTO Mechanistic–Empirical Design Guide. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2026, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2006, pp. 63–69.
13.
OsinubiK. J., and NwaiwuC. M. O.Compaction Delay Effects on Properties of Lime-Treated Soil. ASCE Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol. 18, No. 2, 2006, pp. 250–258.
14.
PeethamparanS., OlekJ., and DiamondS.Physicochemical Behavior of Cement Kiln Dust-Treated Kaolinite Clay. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2059, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2008, pp. 80–88.
15.
LingJ., XieH., and GuoR.Method to Predict Resilient Modulus of Lime and Lime-Cement Stabilized Soils Used in Highway Subgrade. Presented at 87th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2008.
16.
ARA, Inc., ERES Consultants Division.Guide for Mechanistic–Empirical Design of New and Rehabilitated Pavement Structures.Final report, NCHRP Project 1–37A. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2004. http://www.trb.org/mepdg/guide.htm.
17.
AASHTO.Guide for Design of Pavement Structures.Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1993.
18.
NCHRP.Laboratory Determination of Resilient Modulus for Flexible Pavement Design.NCHRP Web Document 14 for Project 1–28. Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1997.
19.
AndreiD., WitczakM. W., SchwartzC. W., and UzanJ.Harmonized Resilient Modulus Test Method for Unbound Pavement Materials. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1874, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2004, pp. 29–37.
20.
JonesM. P., and WitczakM. W.Subgrade Modulus on the San Diego Test Road. In Transportation Research Record 641, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1977, pp. 1–6.
21.
PingW. V., YangZ., LiuC., and DietrichB.Measuring Resilient Modulus of Granular Materials in Flexible Pavements. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1778, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2001, pp. 81–90.
22.
Huang, Y. H.Pavement Analysis and Design.Prentice Hall, Englewood, Cliffs., N.J., 2004.
23.
Bin-ShafiqueS., EdilB., BensonC. H., and SenolA.Incorporating a Fly-Ash Stabilised Layer into Pavement Design. Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 157, 2004, pp. 239–249.
