Long-Term Comparison between Waste Paper Fly Ash and Traditional Binder as Hydraulic Road Binder Exposed to Sulfate Concentrations.

Sulfate attack is one of the drawbacks of cementitious materials for stabilized soils. In the current study, a durability comparison of stabilized soil with cement (Type IV) and waste paper fly ash (WPFA) was conducted. First, the treated soil's unconfined compressive strength (UCS) was tested. Next, the treated soil was subjected to various wetting/drying cycles with various sulfate concentrations and temperatures for a year. In the meantime, samples were taken for DRX, FTIR, and TGA microstructural analyses. Additionally, samples were manufactured to track swelling over an 800 day period. The outcomes show that WPFA's UCS remained constant. Furthermore, ettringite development can be seen in the microstructural studies, however testing on linear displacement over 800 days revealed no significant changes in swelling. Finally, SEM was used to verify the ettringite formation at 360 days in order to confirm the previous findings. All the results indicated that stabilizing soil with 5% of WPFA and 3% of cement IV is possible even in presence of high sulfate concentrations, while maintaining the durability of the structure.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors declare no conflict of interest.