Mechanical Properties and Mechanisms of a New Alkali-Activated Cementitious Material Compared to Ordinary Portland Cement–Solidified Saline Soil
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract The inherent deteriorative characteristics of saline soil limit its application as a backfill material in engineering practice. Achieving green, low-carbon disposal and resource utilization of saline soil has therefore become an urgent challenge. In this study, a sustainable alkali-activated cementitious material was developed using three typical industrial byproducts (IBP), i.e., iron tailings, fly ash, and ground granulated blast furnace slag as precursors, with lime and NaOH as composite activators, to stabilize saline soil and enhance its engineering performance. This multisource IBP system differs from previous studies that mainly relied on single or binary precursors and ordinary portland cement (OPC). The effects of curing agent (CA) content and curing time on the mechanical properties of stabilized soil were systematically investigated, and the curing mechanism was analyzed through X-ray diffraction and scanning electron microscope. The results indicate that with increasing CA content and curing time, the unconfined compressive strength, triaxial shear strength, California bearing ratio, cohesion, and internal friction angle of the stabilized saline soil were significantly improved, meeting the requirements of subgrade design specifications. Compared with untreated saline soil, the alkaline environment facilitated the breakdown of precursor bonds, releasing active {[{SiO}4]}−4 and {[{AlO}4]}−5 species, which promoted the formation of abundant C(N)─ A─ S─ H hydration products. These products encapsulated soil particles, filled pores, and enhanced interparticle bonding, thereby improving structural stability. The proposed process effectively utilizes IBP, reduces dependence on OPC, and offers substantial benefits in resource recycling and carbon reduction. This study provides theoretical and practical support for the green disposal of saline soil and sustainable infrastructure development.
Source: crossref · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Northeastern Univ.
Univ. of Melbourne
Shenyang Univ. of Technology
China Earthquake Administration
China Railway 14th Bureau Group Construction Engineering Corporation Limited
References (88)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.resenv.2021.10001610.1016/j.resenv.2021.100016 ↗
2. 10.1617/s11527-021-01702-010.1617/s11527-021-01702-0 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.13319510.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.133195 ↗
4. 10.1007/s40996-024-01379-910.1007/s40996-024-01379-9 ↗
5. 10.1038/s41598-020-77701-y10.1038/s41598-020-77701-y ↗
6. Chen, Y., A. Maimait, J. Cheng, Y. Duan, D. Yin, H. Dong, and Y. Li. 2024. “Properties of saline soil stabilized with fly ash and modified aeolian sand.” Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 21 (Dec): e03503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2024.e03503.
7. 10.3390/ma1516553110.3390/ma15165531 ↗
8. Cheng, S., Q. Wang, J. Wang, Y. Han, and H. Li. 2021. “Experimental study on undrained shear properties of saline soil under freeze-thaw cycles.” Geofluids 2021 (1): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/9987414.10.1155/2021/9987414 ↗
9. Chinese Standard. 2001. Code for investigation of geotechnical engineering. GB 50021-2001. Beijing: Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China.
10. Chinese Standard. 2010. Test methods of materials stabilized with inorganicbinders for highway engineering. JTG E51-2009. Beijing: Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China.
11. Chinese Standard. 2014. Technical code for building in saline soil regions. GB/T 50942-2014. Beijing: Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China.
12. Chinese Standard. 2019. Standard for geotechnical testing method. GB/T 50123-2019. Beijing: Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China.
13. 10.1016/j.enggeo.2008.07.00710.1016/j.enggeo.2008.07.007 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.08.08710.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.08.087 ↗
15. 10.1007/s10064-022-02866-x10.1007/s10064-022-02866-x ↗
16. 10.3390/ma1521759410.3390/ma15217594 ↗
17. 10.1515/rams-2022-030310.1515/rams-2022-0303 ↗
18. 10.1080/10298436.2020.177523010.1080/10298436.2020.1775230 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.minpro.2016.01.00110.1016/j.minpro.2016.01.001 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.jaap.2026.10760710.1016/j.jaap.2026.107607 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.fuel.2025.13706510.1016/j.fuel.2025.137065 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.cemconres.2011.05.00610.1016/j.cemconres.2011.05.006 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.envres.2025.12158010.1016/j.envres.2025.121580 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.envres.2025.12096410.1016/j.envres.2025.120964 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.psep.2025.10797010.1016/j.psep.2025.107970 ↗
26. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1993)119:5(811)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1993)119:5(811) ↗
27. 10.1016/j.rser.2023.11329110.1016/j.rser.2023.113291 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.13470610.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.134706 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.13176810.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.131768 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2025.14283510.1016/j.conbuildmat.2025.142835 ↗
31. 10.1680/geot.2003.53.4.43910.1680/geot.2003.53.4.439 ↗
32. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.12468510.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.124685 ↗
33. 10.1016/j.scp.2023.10137610.1016/j.scp.2023.101376 ↗
34. 10.1016/j.cemconres.2010.11.01210.1016/j.cemconres.2010.11.012 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.powtec.2025.12129110.1016/j.powtec.2025.121291 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.13023010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.130230 ↗
37. 10.3390/app1416724610.3390/app14167246 ↗
38. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.13090210.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.130902 ↗
39. 10.3390/buildings1514247110.3390/buildings15142471 ↗
40. Li, Z., H. Dong, X. Zhao, K. Wang, and X. Gao. 2025b. “Utilisation of Bayer red mud for high-performance geopolymer: Competitive roles of different activators.” Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 23 (Dec): e05047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2025.e05047.
41. 10.3390/su1409560410.3390/su14095604 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.wasman.2020.02.01710.1016/j.wasman.2020.02.017 ↗
43. Liao, Y., X. Wang, L. Wang, Z. Yin, B. Da, and D. Chen. 2022. “Effect of waste oyster shell powder content on properties of cement-metakaolin mortar.” Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 16 (Jun): e01088. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e01088.
44. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.13140910.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.131409 ↗
45. 10.3390/buildings1403059710.3390/buildings14030597 ↗
46. 10.3390/buildings1402031410.3390/buildings14020314 ↗
47. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.27710.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.277 ↗
48. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.13189310.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.131893 ↗
49. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.21010.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.210 ↗
50. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.02.01010.1016/j.jclepro.2011.02.010 ↗
51. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.13059610.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.130596 ↗
52. 10.1007/s00521-016-2658-010.1007/s00521-016-2658-0 ↗
53. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.14099610.1016/j.jclepro.2024.140996 ↗
54. Oyebisi, S., F. Olutoge, P. Kathirvel, I. Oyaotuderekumor, D. Lawanson, J. Nwani, A. Ede, and R. Kaze. 2022. “Sustainability assessment of geopolymer concrete synthesized by slag and corncob ash.” Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 17 (Dec): e01665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2022.e01665.
55. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.11854310.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.118543 ↗
56. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.13209310.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.132093 ↗
57. 10.3390/ma1613451710.3390/ma16134517 ↗
58. 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e1155310.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11553 ↗
59. 10.3390/su15211547410.3390/su152115474 ↗
60. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.14020110.1016/j.jclepro.2023.140201 ↗
61. 10.3390/buildings1208119310.3390/buildings12081193 ↗
62. Srikhamma, T., C. Phiangphimai, T. Phoo-ngernkham, S. Detphan, S. Hanjitsuwan, K. Changjatturas, N. Kongmuang, and P. Chindaprasirt. 2025. “Assessment of hybrid alkali-activated fly ash–limestone powder as sustainable rendering mortar.” Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 23 (Dec): e05201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2025.e05201.
63. 10.1016/j.jobe.2022.10520010.1016/j.jobe.2022.105200 ↗
64. 10.1007/s41024-022-00198-710.1007/s41024-022-00198-7 ↗
65. 10.3390/ma1606244710.3390/ma16062447 ↗
66. 10.1016/j.jobe.2023.10788210.1016/j.jobe.2023.107882 ↗
67. 10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.23210.1016/j.rser.2017.05.232 ↗
68. 10.1016/j.enggeo.2013.10.00410.1016/j.enggeo.2013.10.004 ↗
69. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.13330010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.133300 ↗
70. 10.3390/math803045610.3390/math8030456 ↗
71. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.13135310.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.131353 ↗
72. 10.1007/s11440-023-01949-710.1007/s11440-023-01949-7 ↗
73. 10.1007/s10064-020-01885-w10.1007/s10064-020-01885-w ↗
74. 10.1007/s10853-006-0820-210.1007/s10853-006-0820-2 ↗
75. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.06.16410.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.06.164 ↗
76. Yang, Z., R. Li, H. Zhu, B. Zhang, Z. Dong, X. Zhan, G. Zhang, and H. Zhang. 2024. “Synthesis of eco-sustainable seawater sea-sand geopolymer mortars from ternary solid waste: Influence of microstructure evolution on mechanical performance.” Sustainable Mater.Technol. 41 (Sep): e01056. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susmat.2024.e01056.10.1016/j.susmat.2024.e01056 ↗
77. 10.1016/j.clay.2015.03.02310.1016/j.clay.2015.03.023 ↗
78. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.12902810.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.129028 ↗
79. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.04.24010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.04.240 ↗
80. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.12508210.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.125082 ↗
81. 10.3390/buildings1203035010.3390/buildings12030350 ↗
82. 10.1016/j.psep.2025.10703310.1016/j.psep.2025.107033 ↗
83. 10.1016/j.jobe.2023.10658510.1016/j.jobe.2023.106585 ↗
84. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.255-260.336610.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.255-260.3366 ↗
85. Zhao, A. P., A. P. Tang, J. Sun, and X. M. Yu. 2014. “Tests and research on characteristics of shear strength of cement improved soil under freeze-thaw cycle.” Adv. Mater. Res. 1015 (Oct): 105–109. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.1015.105.10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.1015.105 ↗
86. 10.1016/j.ceramint.2023.05.03910.1016/j.ceramint.2023.05.039 ↗
87. 10.1631/jzus.A170051710.1631/jzus.A1700517 ↗
88. Zhu, Y., X. Yu, L. Gao, J. Chen, and M. D. Cotugno. 2019. “Unconfined compressive strength of aqueous polymer-modified saline soil.” Int. J. Polym. Sci. 2019 (1): 9137069. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/9137069.