Compressive and tensile strength of aeolian sand stabilized with porcelain polishing waste and hydrated lime

Silva, José Daniel Jales; Santos Júnior, Olavo Francisco dos; Paiva, William de

doi:10.28927/SR.2023.002322

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Article • Soil. Rocks 46 (1) • 2023 • https://doi.org/10.28927/SR.2023.002322 copy

Compressive and tensile strength of aeolian sand stabilized with porcelain polishing waste and hydrated lime

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

The improvement of sandy soils by incorporating new stabilizing agents in a physical and/or chemical process has become the subject of many studies in recent decades. In addition, the use of industrial wastes in this process can bring significant benefits to the environment and savings in natural resources. This work aims to evaluate the implications of incorporating porcelain polishing waste (PPW) and hydrated lime on the mechanical properties of an aeolian dune sand from the city of Natal/RN. Tests of unconfined compressive strength and split tensile strength were performed on compacted soil specimens with different contents of PPW (10%, 20% and 30%), hydrated lime (3%, 5% and 7%) and relative densities (25%, 50% and 75%). To evaluate the effects of each factor, the Response Surface Methodology with Central Composite Design was used. The results have shown that all three factors have a positive effect on the response variables. The highest strengths were obtained in regions combining high values of relative density and PPW content and an optimum lime content was found. An inversely proportional correlation and good fit to the experimental data was obtained between the strength values and the porosity/binder index ( $η / B_{i v}$ ). The strength gains were attributed to densification of the soil structure and cementation of the particles by the compounds formed in the reaction between lime and PPW. The results also showed an increase in the strength with curing time, indicating a pozzolanic activity of the mixtures.

Keywords
Industrial waste; Soil stabilization; Unconfined compressive strength; Split tensile strength; Central composite design

Properties	Symbol	Value
Specific gravity (-)	$G_{s}$	2.66
Mean diameter (mm)	$d_{50}$	0.265
Effective diameter (mm)	$d_{10}$	0.151
Coefficient of uniformity (-)	$C_{u}$	1.94
Coefficient of curvature (-)	$C_{c}$	0.98
Maximum void ratio (-)	$e_{m a x}$	0.84
Minimum void ratio (-)	$e_{m i n}$	0.60

Factors	Levels
Factors	-1.68	-1	0	+1	+1.68
Relative density (%)	7.96	25	50	75	92.04
Lime content (%)	1.64	3	5	7	8.36
PPW content (%)	3.18	10	20	30	36.82

Mixtures	Real value (Coded value)
Mixtures	Relative density	Lime content	PPW content
FP-1	25% (-1)	3% (-1)	10% (-1)
FP-2	25% (-1)	3% (-1)	30% (+1)
FP-3	25% (-1)	7% (+1)	10% (-1)
FP-4	25% (-1)	7% (+1)	30% (+1)
FP-5	75% (+1)	3% (-1)	10% (-1)
FP-6	75% (+1)	3% (-1)	30% (+1)
FP-7	75% (+1)	7% (+1)	10% (-1)
FP-8	75% (+1)	7% (+1)	30% (+1)
AP-1	7.96% (-1.68)	5% (0)	20% (0)
AP-2	92.04% (+1.68)	5% (0)	20% (0)
AP-3	50% (0)	1.64% (-1.68)	20% (0)
AP-4	50% (0)	8.36% (+1.68)	20% (0)
AP-5	50% (0)	5% (0)	3.18% (-1.68)
AP-6	50% (0)	5% (0)	36.82% (+1.68)
CP	50% (0)	5% (0)	20% (0)

Contents		Properties
Lime	PPW	$γ_{d_{m a x}}$ (kN/m³)	$γ_{d_{m i n}}$ (kN/m³)	$e_{m a x}$	$e_{m i n}$	$G_{s}$
3%	10%	17.0	14.4	0.84	0.55	2.64
3%	30%	17.1	12.7	1.06	0.53	2.62
7%	10%	16.6	14.0	0.88	0.58	2.62
7%	30%	16.0	12.1	1.15	0.62	2.60
1.64%	20%	16.8	13.7	0.91	0.56	2.63
8.36%	20%	16.4	12.7	1.05	0.59	2.61
5%	3.18%	16.7	14.3	0.84	0.58	2.64
5%	36.82%	15.5	11.6	1.24	0.68	2.60
50%	20%	16.6	13.2	0.99	0.58	2.62

Mixtures	$q_{u}$ (kPa)	Standard deviation (kPa)	$q_{t}$ (kPa)	Standard deviation (kPa)	$\frac{q_{t}}{q_{u}}$
FP-1	99.30	3.25	8.75	0.32	0.09
FP-2	495.15	16.89	72.65	3.70	0.15
FP-3	288.61	13.43	23.30	0.93	0.08
FP-4	719.66	62.30	74.01	5.11	0.10
FP-5	128.70	9.53	13.73	0.88	0.11
FP-6	1408.08	17.79	125.38	6.09	0.09
FP-7	284.13	8.05	24.05	1.72	0.08
FP-8	1561.43	33.07	162.48	4.96	0.10
AP-1	325.15	22.45	54.52	4.72	0.17
AP-2	1241.88	107.04	113.18	1.57	0.09
AP-3	224.77	6.25	20.83	1.85	0.09
AP-4	849.45	67.47	72.68	5.18	0.09
AP-5	57.39	1.47	7.13	0.13	0.12
AP-6	1277.55	71.74	145.19	5.91	0.11
CP	825.45	66.00	67.64	4.07	0.08

Source	SS	df	MS	p-value
$R D$	2423320	1	2423320	0.000000
$R D^{2}$	9366	1	9366	0.044625
$L$	690686	1	690686	0.000000
$L^{2}$	219029	1	219029	0.000000
$P$	6490356	1	6490356	0.000000
$P^{2}$	73773	1	73773	0.000002
$R D \times P$	1122071	1	1122071	0.000000
Lack of Fit	164859	7	23551	0.000001
Pure Error	63960	30	2132
Total	11241543	44

Source	SS	df	MS	p-value
$R D$	13246.0	1	13246.02	0.000000
$R D^{2}$	314.6	1	314.61	0.000053
$L$	4977.8	1	4977.83	0.000000
$L^{2}$	2874.4	1	2874.38	0.000000
$P$	78262.9	1	78262.94	0.000000
$R D \times L$	372.5	1	372.54	0.000016
$R D \times P$	6881.7	1	6881.74	0.000000
$L \times P$	69.4	1	69.38	0.034724
Lack of Fit	1745.6	6	290.93	0.000000
Pure Error	425.4	30	14.18
Total	110574.6	44

Mixtures	Relative density	Lime content	PPW content	$q_{u}$ (kPa)			$q_{t}$ (kPa)
Mixtures	Relative density	Lime content	PPW content	Predicted	Observed	Error	Predicted	Observed	Error
1	60%	6%	15%	704.07	677.52	-3.77%	57.59	53.88	-6.44%
2	40%	4%	25%	777.69	849.86	9.28%	75.89	79.16	4.31%

Associação Brasileira de Mecânica dos Solos Av. Queiroz Filho, 1700 - Torre A, Sala 106, Cep: 05319-000, Tel: (11) 3833-0023 - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: secretariat@soilsandrocks.com

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] #Corresponding author. E-mail address: josedanieljales@gmail.com