Sustainable Construction Case History: Fly Ash Stabilization of Recycled Asphalt Pavement Material
- 418 Downloads
A case history is described where Class C fly ash was used to stabilize recycled pavement material (RPM) during construction of a flexible pavement in Waseca, MN, USA. The project consisted of pulverizing the existing hot-mix asphalt (HMA), base, and subgrade to a depth of 300 mm to form RPM, blending the RPM with fly ash (10% by dry weight) and water, compacting the RPM, and placement of a new HMA surface. California bearing ratio (CBR), resilient modulus (Mr), and unconfined compression (qu) tests were conducted on the RPM alone and the fly ash stabilized RPM (SRPM) prepared in the field and laboratory to evaluate how addition of fly ash improved the strength and stiffness. After 7 days of curing, SRPM prepared in the laboratory had CBR ranging between 70 and 94, Mr between 78 and 119 MPa, and qu between 284 and 454 kPa, whereas the RPM alone had CBR between 3 and 17 and Mr between 46 and 50 MPa. Lower CBR, Mr, and qu were obtained for SRPM mixed in the field relative to the SRPM mixed in the laboratory (64% lower for CBR, 25% lower for Mr, and 50% lower for qu). In situ falling weight deflectometer testing conducted 1 year after construction showed no degradation in the modulus of the SRPM, even though the SRPM underwent a freeze–thaw cycle. Analysis of leachate collected in the lysimeter showed that concentrations of all trace elements were below USEPA maximum contaminant levels.
KeywordsFly ash Industrial byproducts Sustainable construction Recycled asphalt Flexible pavement Falling weight deflectometer Stiffness Leaching
Financial support for this study was provided by the Minnesota Local Road Research Board (LRRB). The study was administered by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT). John Siekmeyer of Mn/DOT was the technical liaison. Appreciation is expressed to the City of Waseca’s Department of Engineering for supporting the field investigation, providing FWD testing, and for monitoring the lysimeter. Xiaodong Wang, Jacob Sauer, Maria Rosa, and Onur Tastan assisted with the project in the field and laboratory. The conclusions and recommendations in this report are solely those of the authors and do not reflect the opinions or policies of LRRB, Mn/DOT, or the City of Waseca.
- Bin-Shafique S, Benson C, Edil T et al (2006) Leachate concentrations from water leach and column leach tests on fly-ash stabilized soils. Environ Eng 23:51–65Google Scholar
- Bin-Shafique S, Edil T, Benson C et al (2004) Incorporating a fly-ash stabilised layer into pavement design. Geotechnical Engineering, Institution of Civil Engineers, United Kingdom 157:239–249Google Scholar
- FHWA (2003) Fly ash facts for highway engineers. Federal Highway Administration, US Department of Transportation, Washington DC, FHWA-IF-03-019Google Scholar
- Mallick R, Bonner D, Bradbury R et al (2002) Evaluation of performance of full-depth reclamation mixes. Transportation Research Record-Design and Rehabilitation of Pavements 2002:199–208Google Scholar
- Trzebiatowski B, Edil T, Benson C (2004) Case study of subgrade stabilization using fly ash: State Highway 32, Port Washington, Wisconsin. In: Aydilek A, Wartman J (eds) Beneficial reuse of waste materials in geotechnical and transportation applications, GSP No. 127. ASCE, Reston, pp 123–136Google Scholar
- Turner J (1997) Evaluation of western coal fly ashes for stabilization of low-volume roads. In: Testing soil mixed with waste or recycled materials. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, STP 1275, pp 157–171Google Scholar