Foundations on Expansive soils
Citations
193 citations
97 citations
Cites methods from "Foundations on Expansive soils"
...Two additional columns are included where the soils are classified according to classic methodologies based on grain size and Atterberg limits testing (Seed et al. 1962; Chen 1988)....
[...]
87 citations
Cites background from "Foundations on Expansive soils"
...Because of this movement lightly loaded structures such as foundations, pavements, canal beds and linings and residential buildings founded on them are severely damaged (Chen, 1988)....
[...]
79 citations
78 citations
Cites background from "Foundations on Expansive soils"
...Ecoinvent the world’s most consistent and transparent life cycle inventory database, 2018; Chen, Habert, Bouzidi, Jullien, & Ventura, 2010; Flower & Sanjayan, 2007; Habert et al., 2011; PE International’s Gabi database, 2018), the global warming potential (GWP) of fly ash, cement and lime ranges between 0.00526 and 0.027 kg CO2eq/kg, 0.82–0.948 kg CO2eq/kg and about 0.416 kg CO2eq/kg, respectively. The replacement of about 40% ordinary Portland cement with fly ash is found to reduce the carbon footprint by 36–43% (Nath, Sarker, & Biswas, 2018). In another study by Chan, Thorpe, and Islam (2015), fly ashbased geopolymer cement is reported to reduce carbon footprint by 25% as compared to ordinary Portland cement....
[...]
...Ecoinvent the world’s most consistent and transparent life cycle inventory database, 2018; Chen, Habert, Bouzidi, Jullien, & Ventura, 2010; Flower & Sanjayan, 2007; Habert et al., 2011; PE International’s Gabi database, 2018), the global warming potential (GWP) of fly ash, cement and lime ranges between 0.00526 and 0.027 kg CO2eq/kg, 0.82–0.948 kg CO2eq/kg and about 0.416 kg CO2eq/kg, respectively. The replacement of about 40% ordinary Portland cement with fly ash is found to reduce the carbon footprint by 36–43% (Nath, Sarker, & Biswas, 2018). In another study by Chan, Thorpe, and Islam (2015), fly ashbased geopolymer cement is reported to reduce carbon footprint by 25% as compared to ordinary Portland cement. Although, many literatures can be found on its application to produce building materials, application of FA-based geopolymer for subgrade and sub-base stabilisation is still rare. Sargent, Hughes, and Rouainia (2016) used a GGBS geopolymer (a low carbon binder) to improve the strength weak soil through deep dry soil mixing method. Phummiphan et al. (2016) used FA-based geopolymer to stabilise marginal laterite soil. Similarly, Mohammadinia et al. (2015) investigated stabilisation of construction and demolition waste for application in subbase and base, using FA-based geopolymer....
[...]
...It heaves up during wetting and shrinks with the formation of cracks on drying, due to the presence of montmorillonite clay mineral in the soil (Chen, 1975)....
[...]
...Ecoinvent the world’s most consistent and transparent life cycle inventory database, 2018; Chen, Habert, Bouzidi, Jullien, & Ventura, 2010; Flower & Sanjayan, 2007; Habert et al., 2011; PE International’s Gabi database, 2018), the global warming potential (GWP) of fly ash, cement and lime ranges between 0.00526 and 0.027 kg CO2eq/kg, 0.82–0.948 kg CO2eq/kg and about 0.416 kg CO2eq/kg, respectively. The replacement of about 40% ordinary Portland cement with fly ash is found to reduce the carbon footprint by 36–43% (Nath, Sarker, & Biswas, 2018). In another study by Chan, Thorpe, and Islam (2015), fly ashbased geopolymer cement is reported to reduce carbon footprint by 25% as compared to ordinary Portland cement. Although, many literatures can be found on its application to produce building materials, application of FA-based geopolymer for subgrade and sub-base stabilisation is still rare. Sargent, Hughes, and Rouainia (2016) used a GGBS geopolymer (a low carbon binder) to improve the strength weak soil through deep dry soil mixing method. Phummiphan et al. (2016) used FA-based geopolymer to stabilise marginal laterite soil....
[...]
...Ecoinvent the world’s most consistent and transparent life cycle inventory database, 2018; Chen, Habert, Bouzidi, Jullien, & Ventura, 2010; Flower & Sanjayan, 2007; Habert et al., 2011; PE International’s Gabi database, 2018), the global warming potential (GWP) of fly ash, cement and lime ranges between 0.00526 and 0.027 kg CO2eq/kg, 0.82–0.948 kg CO2eq/kg and about 0.416 kg CO2eq/kg, respectively. The replacement of about 40% ordinary Portland cement with fly ash is found to reduce the carbon footprint by 36–43% (Nath, Sarker, & Biswas, 2018). In another study by Chan, Thorpe, and Islam (2015), fly ashbased geopolymer cement is reported to reduce carbon footprint by 25% as compared to ordinary Portland cement. Although, many literatures can be found on its application to produce building materials, application of FA-based geopolymer for subgrade and sub-base stabilisation is still rare. Sargent, Hughes, and Rouainia (2016) used a GGBS geopolymer (a low carbon binder) to improve the strength weak soil through deep dry soil mixing method....
[...]
References
193 citations
97 citations
87 citations
79 citations
78 citations