No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Evaluating the Use of Ponded Fly Ash in a Roadway Base Course
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 February 2011
Abstract
This paper summarizes findings of laboratory and field trial evaluations of ponded fly ash used as a component in a stabilized aggregate base course. Ponded fly ash is the fine portion of pond ash which is a by-product of a coal burning process and is disposed by sluicing to a disposal pond.
Three stabilized aggregate base mixtures containing various proportions of dense graded aggregate, ponded fly ash, and hydrated lime were evaluated in the laboratory relative to maximum dry density, optimum moisture content, unconfined compressive strength, and static chord modulus of elasticity. The mixture that was selected for field trial evaluation had the highest unconfined compressive strength and consisted of 84% dense graded aggregate, 11% ponded fly ash, and 5% hydrated lime.
A 750 foot section of a 22 foot wide roadway was constructed in May 1988. Approximately 88 tons of ponded fly ash were utilized in constructing the experimental base. Prior to construction, in-place California Bearing Ratio tests, moisture content determinations and Road Rater deflection tests were performed on the prepared subgrade. The stabilized aggregate base was placed in one 8 inch lift. During construction, relative compaction and moisture content of the base material were monitored by means of nuclear devices. Post construction evaluations included Road Rater deflection tests and coring to obtain samples for laboratory evaluation.
To date, the section containing the stabilized aggregate base is performing very well in comparison to the conventionally paved section.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Materials Research Society 1990
References
1. Kentucky Department of Highways, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, Special Note for Experimental Utilization of Waste Materials in Highway Construction, 1987.Google Scholar
2. American Society of Testing and Materials, ASTM D 1557-78 Method C, 1987 Annual Book of ASTM Standards. Soil and Rock: Building Stones: Geotextiles, 04.08, pp. 280–286.Google Scholar
3. American Society of Testing and Materials, ASTM C 593-85, 1987 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Cement; Lime; Gypsum, 04.01, pp. 365–370.Google Scholar
4. American Society of Testing and Materials, ASTM C 39-86, 1987 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Concrete and Aggregates, 04.02, pp. 25–30.Google Scholar
5.
Havens, J.H., Deen, R.C., and Southgate, H.F., Research Report UKTRP 81-17, Kentucky Transportation Research Program, University of Kentucky, 1981.Google Scholar
6.
Sharpe, G.W., Deen, R.C., Southgate, H.F., and Anderson, M.A., Research Report UKTRP 84-23, Kentucky Transportation Research Program, University of Kentucky, 1984.Google Scholar
7. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, AASHTO Interim Guide for Design of Pavement Structures, 1972 and 1981.Google Scholar
8. American Society of Testing and Materials, ASTM D 1883-73, 1987 Annual Book of ASTM Standards. Soil and Rocks Building Stones: Geotextiles, 04.08, pp. 323–329.Google Scholar
9.
Clegg, B., An Impact Soil Test as an Alternative to California Bearing Ratio, (Proc. 3rd ANZ Geomechanics Conf. Vol.1, Wellington, New Zealand, 1980) pp. 225–230.Google Scholar
10. American Society of Testing and Materials, ASTM D 2216-80, 1987 Annual Book of ASTM Standards- Soil and Rock: Building Stones: Geotextiles, 04.08, pp. 355–358.Google Scholar
11. Kentucky Department of Highways, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, KM 64-512, Kentucky Methods, 1987.Google Scholar
12.
Hunsucker, D.Q., and Sharpe, G.W., Research Report KTC 89-32, Kentucky Transportation Center, University of Kentucky, 1989.Google Scholar
13. American Society of Testing and Materials, ASTM C 469-87, 1987 Annual Book of ASTM Standards- Concrete and Aggregates, 04.02, pp. 308–312.Google Scholar