Study on mechanical properties and mechanism of soda residue-fly ash stabilised marine clay based on orthogonal matrix method
Source abstract
Abstract
Improving the engineering and mechanical properties of marine clay (MC) by modifying it with soda residue (SR) and fly ash (FA), and stabilising with cement and /or lime to create Soda residue-Fly ash stabilised soil (SRFSS). Using the orthogonal design, the mechanical properties of SRFSS were analyzed, recommending a basic proportion of 70% SR + 20% FA + 10% MC. Results showed SR significantly impacted optimum water content (OWC), unconfined compressive strength (UCS), and water absorption quality. FA influenced the maximum dry density (MDD), while cohesion (c) was mainly affected by lime and cement. Cement had a higher unit contribution rate to mechanical indices than lime, except for MDD and OWC. The excellent properties of SRFSS were derived from good gradation and the cementation action of the materials. This research provides a solution for improving MC properties and promoting solid waste reutilisation.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Grouting, Rheology, and Soil Mechanics · Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization · Concrete and Cement Materials Research
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Jiangsu Ocean University
Jiangsu Ocean Engineering Research Center for Intelligent Infrastructure Construction
Tongji University
Funding
National Natural Science Foundation of China · Primary Research & Development Plan of Jiangsu Province · Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province · Natural Science Foundation of the Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions of China · Lianyungang City Key Technology Project · Postgraduate Research & Practice Innovation Program of Jiangsu Province
References (86)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.32310.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.323 ↗
2. ASTM D1632-17. (2017). Standard practice for making and curing soil-cement compression and flexure test specimens in the laboratory. American Society for Testing and Materials.
3. ASTM D 1883-21. (2020). Standard test method for California bearing ratio (CBR) of laboratory-compacted soils. ASTM International.
4. ASTM D3080/D3080M-23. (2023). Direct shear test of soils under consolidated drained conditions. ASTM International.
5. ASTM D698. (2021). Standard test methods for laboratory compaction characteristics of soil using standard effort. ASTM International.
6. 10.1007/s12205-021-2154-710.1007/s12205-021-2154-7 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.cscm.2024.e0350310.1016/j.cscm.2024.e03503 ↗
8. 10.1080/1064119X.2019.160491710.1080/1064119X.2019.1604917 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2023.10518910.1016/j.cemconcomp.2023.105189 ↗
10. Cui, G., Xi, C., Cheng, Z., Liu, Z., & Ma, S. (2021). Influence of fly ash content on mechanical properties of clay⁃containing silt soil. Science Technology and Engineering, 21(34), 14688–14695.
11. 10.1016/j.jrmge.2024.05.00710.1016/j.jrmge.2024.05.007 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.ceramint.2017.06.10810.1016/j.ceramint.2017.06.108 ↗
13. GB/T 50145-2007. (2008). Standard for engineering classification of soil. China Planning Press.
14. 10.1016/j.trgeo.2021.10063910.1016/j.trgeo.2021.100639 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.12440310.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.124403 ↗
16. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.879.9110.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.879.91 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.11812610.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.118126 ↗
18. 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.000262910.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0002629 ↗
19. 10.1080/14680629.2020.177234910.1080/14680629.2020.1772349 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.enggeo.2015.08.02010.1016/j.enggeo.2015.08.020 ↗
21. 10.1080/14680629.2022.207175610.1080/14680629.2022.2071756 ↗
22. JTG 3430-2020. (2020). Test methods of soils for highway engineering. China Communications Press.
23. JTG E51-2009. (2009). Test methods of materials stabilized with inorganic binders for highway engineering. China Communications Press.
24. 10.3390/app1006212910.3390/app10062129 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.sandf.2020.01.00410.1016/j.sandf.2020.01.004 ↗
26. 10.1080/1064119X.2020.172879110.1080/1064119X.2020.1728791 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.trgeo.2021.10058510.1016/j.trgeo.2021.100585 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.11180310.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.111803 ↗
29. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.194-196.102610.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.194-196.1026 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.cscm.2024.e0320310.1016/j.cscm.2024.e03203 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.cscm.2023.e0268710.1016/j.cscm.2023.e02687 ↗
32. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.13550710.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.135507 ↗
33. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.13090210.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.130902 ↗
34. 10.1016/j.cscm.2024.e0344710.1016/j.cscm.2024.e03447 ↗
35. 10.1155/2022/488764710.1155/2022/4887647 ↗
36. 10.16552/j.cnki.issn1001-1625.2019.09.02710.16552/j.cnki.issn1001-1625.2019.09.027 ↗
37. 10.3390/ma1307178910.3390/ma13071789 ↗
38. 10.3390/ma1411288310.3390/ma14112883 ↗
39. 10.14081/j.cnki.hgdxb.2018.05.01410.14081/j.cnki.hgdxb.2018.05.014 ↗
40. 10.1016/j.jrmge.2021.12.01410.1016/j.jrmge.2021.12.014 ↗
41. 10.1016/j.clay.2020.10547410.1016/j.clay.2020.105474 ↗
42. Ma, J., Yan, N., Bai, X., Zhang, M., Liu, J., & Wang, Y. (2021). Strength characteristics of soda residue-fly ash mixture with different proportions and phases. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 43(5), 893–900.
43. 10.3390/su1214585210.3390/su12145852 ↗
44. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.695.9310.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.695.93 ↗
45. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.06.06710.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.06.067 ↗
46. 10.11113/mjfas.v13n4.92110.11113/mjfas.v13n4.921 ↗
47. 10.1016/j.clema.2022.10015110.1016/j.clema.2022.100151 ↗
48. 10.1016/j.clay.2016.04.00510.1016/j.clay.2016.04.005 ↗
49. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.12626410.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126264 ↗
50. Shao, Y., Liu, X., & Zhu, J. (2019). Experimental study on the improvement of marine soft soil by alkali residue. Water Power, 45(4), 04.
51. 10.3389/fmats.2019.0021110.3389/fmats.2019.00211 ↗
52. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.01.13910.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.01.139 ↗
53. 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2024.10543810.1016/j.cemconcomp.2024.105438 ↗
54. 10.1080/19648189.2023.219494810.1080/19648189.2023.2194948 ↗
55. 10.1007/s11356-020-09845-310.1007/s11356-020-09845-3 ↗
56. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.13135310.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.131353 ↗
57. 10.1016/j.enggeo.2023.10736310.1016/j.enggeo.2023.107363 ↗
58. Wang, Y., Sun, C., Wang, X., Chen, Y., & Gong, X. (2023). Mechanical properties of composite soda residue soil mixed with fly ash and soft clay. Journal of Building Materials, 26(2), 206–214.
59. 10.1007/s11440-022-01498-510.1007/s11440-022-01498-5 ↗
60. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.12892010.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128920 ↗
61. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.12726210.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127262 ↗
62. 10.1016/j.clay.2018.10.00510.1016/j.clay.2018.10.005 ↗
63. 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.000301010.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0003010 ↗
64. 10.1016/j.cemconres.2007.11.00110.1016/j.cemconres.2007.11.001 ↗
65. 10.1016/j.enggeo.2020.10549110.1016/j.enggeo.2020.105491 ↗
66. 10.1016/j.measurement.2018.08.05310.1016/j.measurement.2018.08.053 ↗
67. 10.1680/jenge.18.0018310.1680/jenge.18.00183 ↗
68. 10.1007/s12665-020-08990-910.1007/s12665-020-08990-9 ↗
69. Zhang, X. (2015). Research of soda residue performance in highway and microstructure characteristics. Dissertation. Hebei University of Technology.
70. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.12310710.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.123107 ↗
71. 10.1080/1064119X.2020.181720410.1080/1064119X.2020.1817204 ↗
72. 10.1080/14680629.2022.206490410.1080/14680629.2022.2064904 ↗
73. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.13332010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.133320 ↗
74. 10.1007/s40891-023-00439-w10.1007/s40891-023-00439-w ↗
75. Zhang, P., Zhao, X., Jiang, D., Xu, S., & Zong, Z. (2020). Experimental study on strength properties and water stability of soda residue soft soil. Highway, 65(2), 212–218.
76. 10.16552/j.cnki.issn1001-1625.2017.04.05210.16552/j.cnki.issn1001-1625.2017.04.052 ↗
77. 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2019.02.00910.1016/j.cemconcomp.2019.02.009 ↗
78. 10.3724/SP.J.1249.2018.0104810.3724/SP.J.1249.2018.01048 ↗
79. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.12104510.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121045 ↗
80. 10.19721/j.cnki.1001-7372.2024.01.00510.19721/j.cnki.1001-7372.2024.01.005 ↗
81. 10.3390/buildings1310240710.3390/buildings13102407 ↗
82. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.13548910.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.135489 ↗
83. 10.1007/s10706-024-02831-310.1007/s10706-024-02831-3 ↗
84. Zhou, Y. (2009). A matrix analysis of orthogonal design. Mathematics in Practice and Theory, 39(2), 202–207.
85. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.11884210.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118842 ↗
86. 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.01.06310.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.01.063 ↗