3. Ijcseierd - Durability of Cement Stabilized

8/17/2019 3. Ijcseierd - Durability of Cement Stabilized

1/12

www.tjprc.org [email protected]

DURABILITY OF CEMENT STABILIZED POND ASH

RAMANDEEP SINGH CHEEMA1

, DEEPINDER SINGH AULAKH2

& SARVESH KUMAR3

1 Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Ludhiana Group of Colleges, Ludhiana, Punjab, India

2Senior Research Fellow, Department of Civil Engineering, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab, India

3 Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab, India

ABSTRACT

In India, major portion of electricity is produced by burning of coal as a fuel in thermal power plants leaving behind

the residue in the forms of Fly ash, bottom ash and Pond ash. Ash utilization for construction of side embankments of roads,

rivers and railways after improvement in engineering properties is a good solution to manage the ash. In this study, durability

tests were conducted on six mixes of Pond Ash containing 3%, 6%, 9%, 12%, 15% and 18% of cement at 7 and 28 days curing

age. It was observed that durability increases with increase in cement content. It was also observed that with increase in curing

age, the durability increases. By conducting compaction test, it is clear that Optimum Moisture Content (OMC) decreased and

Maximum Dry Density (MDD) increased with increase in cement content.

KEYWORDS: Pond Ash, Durability, Optimum Moisture Content (OMC), Maximum Dry Density (MDD)

Received: Feb 21, 2016; Accepted: Mar 03, 2016; Published: Mar 07, 2016; Paper Id.: IJCSEIERDAPR20163

INTRODUCTION

Coal ash is a silt size non-cohesive material having specific gravity relatively smaller than that of the normal

soils. In India, major portion of electricity is produced in thermal power plants which consume huge amount of coal as a

fuel. The residue outcomes from burning of coal are obtained in the form of Fly ash, Bottom ash and Pond ash. It

requires large land space and cause environmental problems. In situ stabilization methods of the ash deposit as a whole,

converting it to a usable site is a one of the good solution to manage coal ash. Coal ash which is disposed in the ponds by

the action of water in ash ponds is known as POND ASH (PA). It generally contains substantial amounts of silicon

dioxide (SiO2) (both amorphous and crystalline) and calcium oxide (CaO), thus possesses both ceramic and pozzolanic

properties. Ash utilization in cement industries and for construction of road / railway embankments after improvement in

engineering properties is the solutions to manage the ash.

In this study, durability of Pond ash-Cement mixes have been studied, with proportions of cement at 3%, 6%,

9%, 12%, 15% and 18%.

MATERIALS USED

• Pond Ash

Pond ash has been used in this study, as it is readily available and has good cementing properties. Pond ash was

collected from Guru Gobind Singh super thermal power plant (GGSSTP), Ropar (Punjab). The chemical properties were

obtained from record office of Guru Gobind Singh super thermal power plant (GGSSTP), Ropar (Punjab) are listed in

Table 1 and physical properties of the pond ash which were determined in the laboratory are presented in Table 2.

Or i gi n al Ar t i c l e

International Journal of Civil, Structural,

Environmental and Infrastructure Engineering

Research and Development (IJCSEIERD)

ISSN(P): 2249-6866; ISSN(E): 2249-7978

Vol. 6, Issue 2, Apr 2016, 17-28

© TJPRC Pvt. Ltd


2/12

18 Ramandeep Singh Cheema, Deepinder Singh Aulakh & Sarvesh Kumar

Impact Factor (JCC): 5.9234 NAAS Rating: 3.01

Table 1: Chemical Properties of Pond Ash

Constituents present Value (%)

Loss of Ignition 4.52

Silica (SiO2) 56.32

Alumina (AL2O3) 30.87Iron Oxide (FeO2) 4.94

Magnesium Oxide (MgO) 1.58

Calcium Oxide (CaO) 0.70

Table 2: Physical Properties of Pond Ash

S No. Parameter Value

1. Specific Gravity (G) 2.10

2. Plasticity NON PLASTIC

3. Maximum Dry Density (kN/m3) 11.01

4. Optimum Moisture Content (%) 27.4

5. Angle of Internal Friction (φ) 33o

6. Cohesion (kN/m2

) 1

7. Permeability (cm/sec) 1.24 x 10-4

8. Coefficient of Uniformity (Cu) 8.56

9. Coefficient of Curvature (Cc) 1.41

•

Ordinary Portland Cement

OPC of 53 grade manufactured by ACC brand is used in the study. Physical properties of cement are shown in

Table 3 and Chemical properties obtained from the record office of ACC Pvt. Ltd. Ludhiana are shown in Table 4.

Table 3: Physical Properties of Cement

Characteristic Properties Value

Fineness (m2 /kg) 318

Standard consistency (%) 34

Initial Setting time (minutes) 120

Final setting time (minutes) 585

Specific gravity 3.15

Soundness by Le-Chat Expansion (mm) 0.5

Compressive strength (MPa)

3-days

7-days

28-days

36.5

43

55

Table 4: Chemical Properties of OPC

Contents Range (%)

Lime (CaO) 62-67

Silica (SiO2) 17-25

Alumina (Al2O3) 3-8

Calcium Sulphate (CaSO4) 3-4

Iron oxide (Fe2O3) 3-4

Magnesia Oxide (MgO) 0.1-3

Sulphur (S) 1-3

Alkalies 0.2-1

• Water

Portable water fit for drinking was used throughout the study.


3/12

Durability of Cement Stabilized Pond Ash 19


Mix Proportions

The Pond ash was dried at 1050 C for 24 hours and then thoroughly mixed with cement in proportion given in the

Table 5

Table 5: Mix Proportions

Name of proportion M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6

Pond Ash: Cement 97 : 03 94 : 06 91 : 09 88 : 12 85 : 15 82 : 18

Testing and Results

Following tests were conducted as per the standard procedure given in Indian standards.

• Grain Size Analysis Test:

Grain size analysis test was conducted on the Pond ash. Uniformity coefficient and Coefficient of curvature is

obtained from this test was 8.56 and 1.41 respectively. The results conclude that pond ash is well graded.

• Standard Proctor Test (Compaction Test)

Standard proctor test was conducted on mixes having varying proportions of Pond ash and cement. Results are

shown in Table 6,7,8,9,10,11 and in figures 1,2,3,4,5,6.

Table 6: Moisture-Density for Pond ash: Cement (97:03)

Water Content (w %) 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33

Dry Density (kN/m3) 10.77 10.86 10.98 11.13 11.32 11.37 11.03 10.72

Figure 1 Moisture-Density relationship for Pond ash: Cement (97:03)

Maximum Dry Density = 11.39 kN/m3 & O.M.C = 26%

Table 7: Moisture-Density for Pond Ash: Cement (94:06)

Water Content (w %) 15 18 21 24 27 30

Dry Density (kN/m3) 11.22 11.33 11.48 11.65 11.33 11.03


4/12



Figure 2: Moisture-Density Relationship for Pond Ash: Cement (94:06)

Maximum Dry Density = 11.66 kN/m3 & O.M.C = 23.8%

Table 8: Moisture-Density for Pond Ash: Cement (91:09)Water Content (w %) 15 18 21 24 27 30

Dry Density (kN/m3) 11.39 11.61 11.79 11.85 11.46 11.10




Water Content (w %) 15 18 21 24 27 30

Dry Density (kN/m3) 11.53 11.7 11.96 12 11.57 11.26


Maximum Dry Density = 12.02 kN/m3 & O.M.C = 23%


5/12




Water Content (w %) 15 18 21 24 27 30

Dry Density (kN/m3) 11.63 11.78 12.05 12.07 11.88 11.65

Figure 5: Moisture-Density Relationship for: Pond Ash Cement (85:15)


Table 11: Moisture-Density for Pond ash: Cement (82:18)

Water Content (w %) 15 18 21 24 27 30

Dry Density (kN/m3) 11.69 11.96 12.11 11.76 11.33 -

Figure 6: Moisture-Density Relationship Pond Ash for: Cement (82:18)


Table 12: Maximum Dry Density & Optimum Moisture Content

Proportion M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6

Pond Ash: Cement 97:03 94:06 91:09 88:12 85:15 82:18

MDD (gm/cc) 11.39 11.66 11.86 12.02 12.08 12.13

OMC (%) 26 23.8 23.3 23 22.5 20.5

Durability Test

Wetting & drying method was used to determine durability of stabilized soil. In this method, cylindrical samples

of size 50 mm in diameter and height of 78 mm were prepared with different proportion of cement and Pond ash at

optimum moisture content. These specimens were cured for 7 and 28 days then these cylindrical samples are moistened in

water for 5 hours and oven dried for 42 hours at the temperature 100±50C. The weight of specimens are noted, then


6/12



specimens were brushed with wire brush giving standard strokes 18-20 vertical and 4 strokes at each end with

approximately 1.4 kgf, which complete one cycle. Similar 12 cycles of wetting and drying are given to the specimens.

Results of durability of different Pond Ash: Cement mix proportion at 7 and 28 days of curing period are shown in

Table 13,14,15,16,17,18 and in Table 19,20,21,22,23,24 respectively.

Table 13: Durability of Different Pond Ash: Cement (97:3) Proportions at 7 Days of Curing

1. POND ASH : CEMENT (97 : 03)

Cycle

No.

Wt. of Specimen

(gm) % Loss Cumulative

% Loss

Before

Brushing

After

Brushing

Loss

1 159 154 5 3.14 3.14

2 154 148 6 3.90 7.04

3 148 145 3 2.03 9.07

4 145 142 3 2.07 11.145 142 140 2 1.41 12.55

6 140 137 3 2.14 14.69

7 137 133 4 2.92 17.61

8 133 131 2 1.50 19.11

9 131 129.5 1.5 1.15 20.26

10 129.5 126 3.5 2.70 22.96

11 126 123 3 2.38 25.34

12 123 120 3 2.44 27.78

Total % Loss = 27.78 %

Table 14: Durability of Different Pond Ash: Cement (94:6) proportions 7days of Curing


Cycle

No.

Wt. of Specimen


% LossBefore

Brushing

After

Brushing

Loss

1 179 172 7 3.91 3.91

2 172 164 8 4.65 8.56

3 164 160 4 2.44 11.00

4 160 158.5 1.5 0.94 11.94

5 158.5 153 5.5 3.47 15.41

6 153 149.5 3.5 2.29 17.70

7 149.5 147 2.5 1.67 19.37

8 147 143.5 3.5 2.38 21.759 143.5 142 1.5 1.05 22.79

10 142 140 2 1.41 24.20

11 140 138 2 1.43 25.63

12 138 136.7 1.3 0.94 26.57




Cycle

No.

Wt. of Specimen

(gm) %

Loss

Cumulative

% LossBefore

Brushing

After

Brushing

Loss

1 187 181 6 3.21 3.21

2 181 175.5 5.5 3.04 6.25


7/12



Table 15: Contd.,

3 175.5 172 3.5 1.99 8.24

4 172 168.5 3.5 2.03 10.28

5 168.5 164 4.5 2.67 12.95

6 164 160 4 2.44 15.39

7 160 159.5 0.5 0.31 15.70

8 159.5 157.3 2.2 1.38 17.08

9 157.3 156.2 1.1 0.70 17.78

10 156.2 155.7 0.5 0.32 18.10

11 155.7 154 1.7 1.09 19.19

12 154 152 2 1.30 20.49


Table 16: Durability of Different Pond Ash: Cement (88:12) at 7 Days of Curing


Cycle

No.

Wt. of Specimen

(gm) %

Loss

Cumulative

% LossBefore

Brushing

After

Brushing

Loss

1 204 200 4 1.96 1.96

2 200 193 7 3.50 5.46

3 193 189 4 2.07 7.53

4 189 186 3 1.59 9.12

5 186 184 2 1.08 10.20

6 184 183 1 0.54 10.74

7 183 182 1 0.55 11.29

8 183 182 1 0.55 11.83

9 182 180 2 1.10 12.93

10 180 179 1 0.56 13.49

11 179 178 1 0.56 14.0512 178 177.5 0.5 0.28 14.33




Cycle

No.

Wt. of Specimen

(gm)

%

Loss

Cumulative

% Loss

Before

Brushing

After

Brushing

Loss

1 214 210 4 1.87 1.87

2 210 201 9 4.29 6.15

3 201 200.5 0.5 0.25 6.404 200.5 199 1.5 0.75 7.15

5 199 197.2 1.8 0.90 8.06

6 197.2 196 1.2 0.61 8.66

7 196 195 1 0.51 9.18

8 195 192.5 2.5 1.28 10.46

9 192.5 192 0.5 0.26 10.72

10 192 191.5 0.5 0.26 10.98

11 191.5 191 0.5 0.26 11.24

12 191 190 1 0.52 11.76



8/12





Cycle

No.

Wt. of Specimen

(gm) %

Loss

Cumulative

% LossBeforeBrushing

AfterBrushing

Loss

1 197.5 197 0.5 0.25 0.25

2 197 194 3 1.52 1.78

3 194 188.5 5.5 2.84 4.61

4 188.5 186.5 2 1.06 5.67

5 186.5 184.4 2.1 1.13 6.80

6 184.4 183 1.4 0.76 7.56

7 183 181.5 1.5 0.82 8.38

8 181.5 180 1.5 0.83 9.20

9 180 178.3 1.7 0.94 10.15

10 178.3 178 0.3 0.17 10.32

11 178 177.2 0.8 0.45 10.77

12 177.2 176 1.2 0.68 11.44




Cycle

No.

Wt. of Specimen


% LossBefore

Brushing

After

Brushing

Loss

1 151 146.5 4.5 2.98 2.98

2 146.5 141 5.5 3.75 6.73

3 141 138.5 2.5 1.77 8.51

4 138.5 135 3.5 2.53 11.03

5 135 131 4 2.96 14.00

6 131 127 4 3.05 17.05

7 127 125 2 1.57 18.63

8 125 124 1 0.80 19.43

9 124 122 2 1.61 21.04

10 122 120.7 1.3 1.07 22.10

11 120.7 118 2.7 2.24 24.34

12 118 116 2 1.69 26.04




Cycle

No.

Wt. of Specimen


% LossBefore

Brushing

After

Brushing

Loss

1 181 176.5 4.5 2.49 2.49

2 176.5 171 5.5 3.12 5.60

3 171 168.5 2.5 1.46 7.06

4 168.5 165 3.5 2.08 9.14

5 165 161 4 2.42 11.57

6 161 158 3 1.86 13.43

7 158 156 2 1.27 14.69

8 156 155 1 0.64 15.349 155 153 2 1.29 16.63


9/12



Table 20: Contd.,

10 153 150.7 2.3 1.50 18.13

11 150.7 148 2.7 1.79 19.92

12 148 146 2 1.35 21.27




Cycle

No.

Wt. of Specimen

(gm) %

Loss

Cumulative

% LossBefore

Brushing

After

Brushing

Loss

1 197 194 3 1.52 1.52

2 194 189 5 2.58 4.10

3 189 181 8 4.23 8.33

4 181 175.5 5.5 3.04 11.37

5 175.5 172.5 3 1.71 13.086 172.5 166 6.5 3.77 16.85

7 166 165.4 0.6 0.36 17.21

8 165.4 164.9 0.5 0.30 17.51

9 164.9 164.3 0.6 0.36 17.88

10 164.3 163 1.3 0.79 18.67

11 163 162.7 0.3 0.18 18.85

12 162.7 162 0.7 0.43 19.28




Cycle

No.

Wt. of Specimen

(gm) %

Loss

Cumulative

% LossBefore

Brushing

After

Brushing

Loss

1 204 200 4 1.96 1.96

2 200 195 5 2.50 4.46

3 195 191 4 2.05 6.51

4 191 189.5 1.5 0.79 7.30

5 189.5 187 2.5 1.32 8.62

6 187 186.5 0.5 0.27 8.88

7 186.5 183.5 3 1.61 10.49

8 183.5 182 1.5 0.82 11.31

9 182 181 1 0.55 11.8610 181 180 1 0.55 12.41

11 180 179 1 0.56 12.97

12 179 177.5 1.5 0.84 13.81



10/12





Cycle

No.

Wt. of Specimen


% LossBeforeBrushing

AfterBrushing

Loss

1 214 212 2 0.93 0.93

2 212 201 11 5.19 6.12

3 201 200.5 0.5 0.25 6.37

4 200.5 199 1.5 0.75 7.12

5 199 197.2 1.8 0.90 8.02

6 197.2 196 1.2 0.61 8.63

7 196 195 1 0.51 9.14

8 195 192.5 2.5 1.28 10.43

9 192.5 192 0.5 0.26 10.69

10 192 191.5 0.5 0.26 10.95

11 191.5 191 0.5 0.26 11.2112 191 190 1 0.52 11.73




Cycle

No.

Wt. of Specimen


% LossBefore

Brushing

After

Brushing

Loss

1 215.5 215 0.5 0.23 0.23

2 215 211 4 1.86 2.09

3 211 210 1 0.47 2.57

4 210 209.5 0.5 0.24 2.80

5 209.5 206 3.5 1.67 4.48

6 206 204 2 0.97 5.45

7 204 203 1 0.49 5.94

8 203 200 3 1.48 7.41

9 200 199.6 0.4 0.20 7.61

10 199.6 198.5 1.1 0.55 8.17

11 198.5 197.6 0.9 0.45 8.62

12 197.6 197 0.6 0.30 8.92


Table 25: Loss in Weight after 7 Days and 28 Days Curing

Name of

Proportion

Pond Ash:

Cement

% loss in Weight

After 7 days After 28days

M1 97 : 03 27.78 26.04

M2 94 : 06 26.57 21.27

M3 91 : 09 20.49 19.28

M4 88 : 12 14.33 13.81

M5 85 : 15 11.76 11.73

M6 82 : 18 11.44 8.92


11/12



Figure 19 shows graph between loss in weight Vs cement content at 7 and 28 days of curing age.

Figure 19: Loss in Weight Vs Cement Content

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of investigation, the following conclusions have been drawn:

•

Optimum Moisture Content (OMC) decreased and Maximum Dry Density increased with increase in cementcontent. Maximum value of OMC was observed at Mix M1 (i.e. POND ASH: CEMENT = 97: 03) and maximum

MDD was observed at Mix M6 (i.e. POND ASH: CEMENT =82: 18).

• It was observed that Durability of a specimen of 82: 18 (POND ASH: CEMENT) mix at 28 days of curing was

maximum. It is clear that with increase in cement content, the durability increases.

• There is reduction in percentage loss in weight with addition of cement for both 7 and 28 days curing age. Hence

we can say that durability increases with increase in cement content.

• Percentage loss in weight of all mixes was more at 7 days curing age when compared to 28 days curing age.

Hence, with increase in curing age the durability increases.

REFRENCES

1. Baghdadi, Z.A. and Shihata, S.A. (1999), “On the Durability and Strength of Soil-Cement”, Ground Improvement, 3:1–6.

2. Bell, F.G. (1996), “Lime stabilization of clay minerals and soils”, Engineering Geology, 42, 223–237..

3. Consoli, N.C., Prietto, P.D.M. and Ulbrich, L.A. (1999), “Behaviour of a Fibre Reinforced Cemeted Soil”, Ground

Improvement, No. 3, pp. 21–30.

4. Kaniraj, S.R. and Havanagi, V.G. (1999a), “Geotechnical Characteristics of Fly Ash-Soil Mixtures”, Geotechnical

Engineering Journal, 30(2):129–146.


12/12



5. Kaniraj, S.R. and Havanagi, V.G. (1999b), “Compressive Strength of Cement Stabilized Fly Ash-Soil Mixtures”, Cement and

Concrete Research, 29: 673–677.

6. Kaniraj, Shenbaga R. and Havanagi, Vasant G. (2001), “Behavior of Cement-Stabilized Fibre-Reinforced Fly Ash-Soil

Mixtures”, Journal of Geotechnical and Geo-Environmental Engineering, pp. 574–584.7. Lo, S.R. and Wardani, S.P.R. (2002), “Strength and Dilatancy of a Silt Stabilized by a Cement and Fly ash Mixture”,

Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 39:77–89.

8. Maria A.C. Gollmann, Márcia M. da Silva, Ângela B. Masuero, João Henrique Z. dos Santos (2009) “Stabilization and

solidification of Pb in cement matrices” Original Research Article Journal of Hazardous Materials, Volume 179, Issues 1–

3, 15 July 2010, Pages 507-514

9.

R Cioffi, L Maffucci, L Santoro, F.P Glasser (2001) Stabilization of chloro-organics usig organophilic bentonite in a cement-

blast furnace slag matrix Waste Management, Volume 21, Issue 7, 2001, Pages 651-660

10.

S. Kolias, V. Kasselouri-Rigopoulou, A. Karahalios (2009) Stabilization of clayey soils with high calcium fly ash and cement

Original Research Article Cementand Concrete Composites, Volume 27, Issue 2, February 2005, Pages301-313

11.

U.E. John, I. Jefferson, D.I. Boardman, G.S. Ghataora, C.D. Hills(2011) Leaching evaluation of cement

stabilization/solidification treated kaolin clay Engineering Geology, Volume 123, Issue 4, 21November2011, Pages315-3

Documents

3. Ijcseierd - Durability of Cement Stabilized