Ash ND Pond

Suitability of Fly Ash and Pond Ash for Stowing in
Underground Coal Mines - An Investigation
A thesis submitted to the Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur in partial

fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
IN
ENGINEERING
By
Devi Prasad Mishra
DEPARTMENT OF MINING ENGINEERING

INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
KHARAGPUR – 721 302, INDIA
March, 2008
Wxw|vtàxw
gÉ
`ç ctÜxÇàá?
f|áàxÜá tÇw UÜÉà{xÜ
Without their love and sacrifices, I could have never reached this point in my life
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the thesis entitled “Suitability of Fly Ash and Pond Ash
for Stowing in Underground Coal Mines - An Investigation”, submitted

by Mr. Devi Prasad Mishra to the Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, for
the award of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Engineering, is a bonafide
record of the research work carried out by him under my supervision and guidance.
Mr. Mishra has worked on this thesis for about three and half years, and the thesis in
my opinion, is worthy of consideration for the award of the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy in Engineering in accordance with the regulations of the institute.
The results embodied in this thesis have not been submitted to any other university for
the award of any other degree or diploma.
Date:
Dr. Samir Kumar Das

Professor
Dept. of Mining Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology
Kharagpur-721302
W.B. India
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge the following people, each of whom made a contribution
to this study and completion of the thesis.
Firstly, it is a great pleasure and privilege for me to convey my deepest gratefulness

and immense admiration to my supervisor Prof. Samir Kumar Das, who provided
immeasurable guidance, patience, and support at every phase of the doctoral
program. I am indebted to him not only for his supervision, but also for his
understanding and friendship. His effort and help have made my doctoral program
more rewarding, both academically and personally. His continuous inspiration,
suggestions, constructive criticisms and hearty blessings have made this work
completed.
I am deeply grateful to the authority of the TIFAC, New Delhi, India including Dr.
Vimal Kumar, Adviser and his colleagues for giving me an opportunity to work as a
Senior Research Fellow in the project title “Determination of Rate of Consolidation,
Flow Rate, Settlement and Load Bearing Characteristics of Fly Ash Slurry after
Stowing”. I am deeply indebted to them for offering me the advices and helps
including financial support to successfully carry out the said project. All the data of
this research work are taken from the above mentioned R&D project.
Further, I would like to thank Prof. J. Bhattacharya, HoD, Department of Mining

Engineering, IIT Kharagpur for his help, invaluable suggestions and providing
laboratory facilities throughout the research work.
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to late Prof. M. Mazumdar and Prof. D.
Roy of Civil Engineering Department, Prof. S. K. Pal and Prof. D. Deb of Department
of Mining Engineering, IIT Kharagpur for serving on my doctoral scrutiny committee
member and for their time, support, helpful comments and constant suggestions for
improving the quality of my work during my research and academic development.
I also wish to express my gratitude to Prof. B. S. Sastry, Prof. A. Bhattacherjee, Prof.
K.U.M. Rao, Prof. K. Pathak, Prof. S. K. Mukhopadhyay, Prof. D. Chakravarty and
Prof. B. Samanta of Department of Mining Engineering, IIT Kharagpur for their
advice and timely support throughout the research work.
Special thanks are due to Prof. A. Sengupta and Prof. V. R. Desai of Civil Engineering
Department, Prof. R. P. Singh and Prof. C. K. Das of Materials Science Centre, Prof. I.
Manna of Metallurgical & Materials Engineering Department for extending help and
laboratory facilities for carrying out various experiments of this research work.
I am very much grateful to all the management and support staff of Talcher Thermal
Power station (TTPS) and Talcher Super Thermal Power Station (TSTPS), Kaniha who
whole heartedly provided me the necessary facilities and assistance during the
collection of the fly ash and pond ash samples for the study.
I wish to express my beloved gratitude to my friends Bijay, Anand, Gyan Prakash,

Amrendra, Mirajul, Kaushik, Hemant, Purushotham, Radha Kanta and Kiran for
their assistance and constant encouragement throughout my dissertation work. My
special thanks to Dr. S. Chatterjee, Dr. M. Rao, Dr. A. K. Verma and Dr. S. K. Palei
for their cooperation and encouragement throughout my research work.
I express my special thanks to all other staff members of Department of Mining

Engineering, IIT Kharagpur notably Mr. S. N. Rao and Mr. B. Biswas for their constant
help both during experimental and fabrication stages of my work. Mr. T. K. Ghuku
and Mr. S. Chakraborti of Civil Engineering Department are also thankfully
acknowledged for their help in conducting experiments in the Soil Mechanics
Laboratory. I am thankful to Mr. Mohan, his colleagues and Research Scholars’ of
Materials Science Centre for their help in carrying out Rheological and other
experiments. The support and help provided by the Central Research Facility (CRF)
centre of the institute in conducting the SEM and XRD tests are noted with
appreciation.
I am greatly indebted to my parents and all other family members for their blessings,
constant support and encouragement that played a big role in my success. Not only
have they encouraged me to pursue my academic interests, but have also served as
role models and have shaped me into the person that I am today. For this, I will be
forever grateful.
Finally, I wish to place on record my sincere thanks to my wife Amrita, whose patient
love, support and encouragement, remained a source of constant inspiration
throughout the research period and enabled me to complete this work.
Devi Prasad Mishra

ABSTRACT
This dissertation work addresses the suitability of fly ash and pond ash for stowing in
underground coal mines. The sand stowing operation is becoming practically
infeasible day by day due to severe dearth of river sand which is considered as a
primary stowing material. Due to scarcity of river sand, the mining companies face a
lot of problems in stowing their underground mines. As a result, the voids created due
to excavation of coal/mineral in most of the underground mines are not properly
stowed and left unfilled which is responsible for surface subsidence. It is recognized
that fly ash/pond ash is a major alternative to river sand as a stowing material and can
solve the above mentioned problems. Therefore, the properties of fly ash/pond ash
should be studied in depth before hand for assessing their suitability for stowing.
In this investigation, the characteristics of total 16 numbers of Class F fly ash and pond
ash samples collected from two thermal power stations namely, Talcher Thermal
Power Station (TTPS) and Talcher Super Thermal Power Station (TSTPS), Kaniha are
studied for assessing their suitability for stowing in the nearby underground coal
mines. The study of physico-chemical and engineering properties revealed that the fly
ash and pond ash samples of both the power stations are suitable for stowing. It is
observed that the fly ash and pond ash particles are almost spherical in shape.
Comparatively, the pond ash samples are coarser in size and possess higher coefficient
of permeability than the fly ash samples and therefore, better for stowing. However,
the TSTPS pond ash samples are much coarser in size and highly permeable than the
TTPS pond ash samples and most suitable for stowing. It is also found that the pond
ash possesses higher water holding capacity (WHC) as compared to the fly ash, which
absorbs higher quantity of water and allows less drainage after stowing. It will
definitely help in reducing the pumping cost.
The chemical analysis results show that the ash samples mainly consist of SiO2, Al2O3
and Fe2O3 with little amount of CaO and other compounds. SiO2, which imparts
strength to the stowing materials is the most predominant and constitutes about 60%
by weight of the total composition. CaO which is present in little amounts (< 1% in
TTPS and < 2% in TSTPS ash samples) may have some effect on the self hardening of
the stowed ash. The unburned carbon content (LOI) is also very negligible (< 2% in
TTPS and < 1% in TSTPS ash sample) in the ash samples. The presence of minerals like
quartz, mullite, hematite and magnetite in the ash samples advocates that the ash
samples can be utilized for stowing. The proximate analysis revealed that the FC (<
2%), VM (< 1%) and moisture content (< 1%) of all the ash samples are very less. Also
the CPT test results show that the ash samples could not reach the furnace
temperature till heating up to a temperature of 200ºC. Therefore, the fly ash and pond
ash samples are not prone to spontaneous heating and can be safely utilized for
stowing in any underground coal mines.
From the consolidation test it is found that the pond ash samples possess higher
coefficient of consolidation (Cv) and higher void ratio as compared to fly ash samples.
It represents that the rate of settlement of pond ash under load is faster than the fly ash
and hence more suitable for stowing. The rheological analysis revealed that the fly ash
and pond ash slurries show pseudoplastic non-Newtonian flow behaviour which is a
shear-thinning behaviour of the slurries. Therefore, the slurries will experience less
flow resistance in pipeline transportation during stowing.
Problems like delayed settling of the ash particles, escape of fines through the
barricade, poor drainage of water, etc. were encountered during the past fly ash/pond
ash stowing operations conducted in India. In order to solve the above mentioned
stowing problems, carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) flocculant is applied with pond ash
slurries during stowing in the mine goaf model and encouraging results are obtained.
After addition of just 5 ppm (optimum dosage) flocculant with the ash-water slurries
during stowing, the rate of water drainage after 15 minutes of stowing has almost
doubled in case of slurries having solid constituents of 45%, 50% and 55% by weight
(Cw), whereas, in case of slurries of 60% Cw and 65% Cw, it has increased 1.46 and
1.22 times respectively of the pond ash slurries without flocculant. It is also noticed
that instead of increasing, the sequential increment of sand proportion (up to 60% by
weight) decreases the permeability of the fly ash-sand mixtures. Therefore, addition of
river sand with fly ash during stowing in the underground mines is not beneficial for
improving the water drainage.
The stowing of the mine goaf model is conducted in two phases (1st and 2nd phase).
The results of both the stowing phases revealed that stowing of pond ash slurries
containing higher solid concentrations like 60% Cw and 65% Cw, give better stowing
efficacy in terms of higher percentage of stowing and water absorption. When stowed
with these slurry concentrations, more than 90% stowing and more than 80% water
absorption of the total water used is achieved in the 1st phase stowing itself. Stowing
with 65% Cw gives best stowing results in terms of highest percentage of stowing
(96.85%) and water absorption (87.53%) in the 1st phase. This suggests that 2nd phase
stowing in the same area may not be required and therefore, the required numbers of
stowing cycles to completely fill the void are less in case of stowing with higher
concentration slurries. The lesser amount of water drainage in case of stowing with
higher slurry concentrations may help in minimizing the pumping cost. In addition to
the study of the above mentioned stowing parameters, the consolidation
characteristics of the stowed samples are also studied in order to assess their rate of
settlement and consolidation under various applied loads. A comparative study is
made between the consolidation characteristics of the stowed pond ash and pond ash-
lime mixture samples. It is found that addition of lime improves the settlement of the
stowed pond ash-lime mixture and offer higher coefficient of consolidation values.
The thesis made a wide contribution for successful implementation of fly ash/pond
ash stowing in underground coal mines by solving some of the problems encountered
during the past fly ash/pond ash stowing trials in India. This will help the mining
industry and power sectors in mitigating their problems at both the ends. Therefore,
this research work will be not only beneficial for the mining and power sectors, but
can save the environment from the pollution hazards of fly ash.
CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................................ 1

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM ............................................................................................................... 3
1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY...................................................................................................................... 4
1.4 SCOPE OF THE WORK .................................................................................................................................. 4
1.5 ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS.............................................................................................................. 5
1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY ................................................................................................................. 6
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 8
2.2 FLY ASH: ITS GENERATION AND UTILIZATION.................................................................................. 8
2.2.1 What is Fly Ash?........................................................................................................................... 8
2.2.2 Generation of Fly Ash................................................................................................................... 9
2.2.3 Types of Coal Ash ........................................................................................................................ 9
2.2.4 Production and Utilization Status of Fly Ash in India and Abroad ............................................ 10
2.3 PROPERTIES OF FLY ASH ......................................................................................................................... 12
2.3.1 Physical Properties of Fly Ash.................................................................................................... 13
2.3.1.1 Colour.................................................................................................................................. 13
2.3.1.2 Bulk density......................................................................................................................... 13
2.3.1.3 Specific gravity.................................................................................................................... 13
2.3.1.4 Particle morphology ............................................................................................................ 14
2.3.1.5 Particle size distribution ...................................................................................................... 16
2.3.1.6 Permeability......................................................................................................................... 17
2.3.1.7 Water holding capacity (WHC)........................................................................................... 18
2.3.2 Chemical Composition of Fly Ash ............................................................................................. 19
2.3.3 Mineralogical Composition of Fly Ash ...................................................................................... 22
2.4 CLASSIFICATION OF FLY ASH ................................................................................................................ 24
2.5 GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF FLY ASH .......................................................................... 25
2.5.1 Compaction Characteristics ........................................................................................................ 25
2.5.2 Consolidation Characteristics ..................................................................................................... 26
2.6 RHEOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF FLY ASH SLURRIES........................................................ 26
2.7 SUITABILITY OF FLY ASH FOR STOWING IN UNDERGROUND COAL MINES .......................... 29
2.7.1 Particle Size and Particle Morphology ....................................................................................... 29
2.7.2 Settling and Drainage Characteristics......................................................................................... 30
2.7.3 Chemical and Mineralogical Composition ................................................................................. 30
2.7.4 Spontaneous Heating Characteristics.......................................................................................... 31
2.7.5 Strength and Stability.................................................................................................................. 31
2.8 STATUS OF FLY ASH STOWING IN INDIA AND ABROAD................................................................. 32
2.8.1 Status of Fly Ash Stowing in India ............................................................................................. 32
2.8.1.1 Fly ash stowing in SCCL..................................................................................................... 33
2.8.1.2 Fly ash stowing in WCL...................................................................................................... 34
2.8.2 Status of Fly Ash Stowing in Abroad ......................................................................................... 34
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
3.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 36
3.2 MATERIALS ................................................................................................................................................... 36
3.2.1 Fly Ash and Pond Ash ................................................................................................................ 36
3.2.1.1 Details of the thermal power stations selected for sample collection.................................. 37
3.2.1.2 Sample collection ................................................................................................................ 38
3.2.1.2.1 Collection of fly ash and pond ash samples from TTPS............................................... 38
3.2.1.2.2 Collection of fly ash and pond ash samples from TSTPS............................................. 38
3.2.2 Additives..................................................................................................................................... 39
3.2.2.1 River sand............................................................................................................................ 39
3.2.2.1.1 Physical properties of river sand ................................................................................. 39
3.2.2.2 Flocculant ............................................................................................................................ 40
3.2.2.3 Slack lime ............................................................................................................................ 41
3.3 METHODS....................................................................................................................................................... 41
3.3.1 Characterization of Fly Ash and Pond Ash Samples .................................................................. 42
3.3.1.1 Physical properties .............................................................................................................. 43
3.3.1.2 Chemical and mineralogical composition ........................................................................... 43
3.3.1.3 Spontaneous heating characteristics .................................................................................... 43
3.3.2 Engineering properties................................................................................................................ 43
3.3.3 Geotechnical Properties .............................................................................................................. 44
3.3.4 Model Study................................................................................................................................ 44
3.3.4.1 Determination of amount of drainage and absorption of water........................................... 44
3.3.4.2 Determination of amount of stowing and void.................................................................... 45
3.3.4.3 Consolidation test of stowed pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture .................................... 45
CHAPTER 4: PHYSICO-CHEMICAL AND ENGINEERING PROPERTIES OF FLY

ASH AND POND ASH
4.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 46
4.2 PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF FLY ASH AND POND ASH SAMPLES................................................. 46
4.2.1 Specific Gravity .......................................................................................................................... 46
4.2.2 Bulk Density ............................................................................................................................... 47
4.2.3 Porosity ....................................................................................................................................... 48
4.2.4 Particle Size Analysis ................................................................................................................. 49
4.2.5 Particle Morphology ................................................................................................................... 52
4.2.6 Water Holding Capacity (WHC) ................................................................................................ 56
4.2.7 Permeability ................................................................................................................................ 58
4.2.7.1 Permeability of fly ash and pond ash samples..................................................................... 58
4.2.7.2 Permeability of river sand ................................................................................................... 61
4.2.7.3 Permeability of fly ash and river sand mixtures .................................................................. 61
4.2.8 pH of Fly Ash and Pond Ash Samples........................................................................................ 63
4.3 CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF FLY ASH AND POND ASH SAMPLES ........................................... 64
4.3.1 Instrumentation ........................................................................................................................... 64
4.3.2 Results and Discussion ............................................................................................................... 64
4.4 UNBURNED CARBON CONTENT OF FLY ASH AND POND ASH SAMPLES .................................. 67
4.5 CLASSIFICATION OF ASH SAMPLES ..................................................................................................... 68
4.6 MINERALOGICAL COMPOSITION OF FLY ASH AND POND ASH SAMPLES .............................. 69
4.7 SPONTANEOUS HEATING CHARACTERISTICS OF FLY ASH AND POND ASH SAMPLES....... 73
4.7.1 Proximate Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 73
ii
4.7.2 Crossing Point Temperature (CPT) Test..................................................................................... 74
4.8 SETTLING CHARACTERISTICS OF FLY ASH AND POND ASH SAMPLES.................................... 78
4.8.1.1 Jar test apparatus.................................................................................................................. 78
4.8.1.2 Turbidity meter.................................................................................................................... 79
4.8.2 Experimental Procedure.............................................................................................................. 79
4.8.2.1 Preparation of stock solution ............................................................................................... 80
4.8.2.2 Flocculation jar test procedure ............................................................................................ 80
4.8.3.1 Settling characteristics of ash samples without adding flocculant ...................................... 80
4.8.3.2 Settling characteristics of ash samples added with flocculant............................................. 81
CHAPTER 5: GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES OF FLY ASH AND POND ASH
5.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 87

5.2 COMPACTION TEST OF FLY ASH AND POND ASH SAMPLES ........................................................ 87
5.2.1 Determination of Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content............................... 87
5.3 CONSOLIDATION TEST OF COMPACTED ASH SAMPLES ............................................................... 88
5.3.2 Preparation of Sample for Consolidation Test............................................................................ 89
5.3.3 Determination of Coefficient of Consolidation .......................................................................... 89
5.3.4 Determination of Void Ratio ...................................................................................................... 91
5.4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ...................................................................................................................... 91
5.4.1 Compaction Test ......................................................................................................................... 91
5.4.2 Consolidation Test ...................................................................................................................... 93
5.4.2.1 Void ratio (e) ....................................................................................................................... 96
5.4.2.2 Rate of consolidation and settlement................................................................................... 97
CHAPTER 6: RHEOLOGY OF FLY ASH AND POND ASH SLURRIES

6.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 99
6.2 INSTRUMENTATION ................................................................................................................................... 99
6.3 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE............................................................................................................... 100
6.3.1 Preparation of Fly Ash and Pond Ash Slurries ......................................................................... 100
6.3.2 Test Procedure .......................................................................................................................... 100
6.4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .................................................................................................................... 101
6.4.1 Rheological Test Results of Fly Ash Slurries ........................................................................... 101
6.4.2 Rheological Test Results of Pond Ash Slurries ........................................................................ 104
CHAPTER 7: STOWING WITH POND ASH SLURRIES-A MODEL STUDY

7.1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 107
7.2 EXPERIMENTAL SET-UP.......................................................................................................................... 107
7.2.1 Mine Goaf Model ..................................................................................................................... 107
7.3 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE............................................................................................................... 108
7.3.1 Measurement of Drainage and Absorption of Water ................................................................ 110
7.3.2 Measurement of Stowing and Void Percentages ...................................................................... 110
7.4.1 Drainage and Absorption of Water ........................................................................................... 112
7.4.1.1 Drainage and absorption of water after 1st phase of stowing............................................. 112
7.4.1.2 Drainage and absorption of water after 2nd phase of stowing............................................ 116
7.4.1.3 Comparative study............................................................................................................. 118
iii
7.4.1.3.1 Comparison of water drainage .................................................................................. 118
7.4.1.3.2 Comparison of water absorption ............................................................................... 119
7.4.2 Percentage of Stowing and Void .............................................................................................. 121
CHAPTER 8: CONSOLIDATION CHARACTERISTICS OF STOWED POND ASH

AND POND ASH-LIME MIXTURE
8.1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 124
8.2 FABRICATION OF MINE GOAF MODEL FOR STOWING ................................................................ 125
8.3 STOWING THE MINE GOAF MODEL .................................................................................................... 126
8.4 CONSOLIDATION TEST OF THE STOWED SAMPLES...................................................................... 126
8.4.1 Collection and Preparation of Sample for Consolidation Test ................................................. 126
8.4.2 Consolidation Test Procedure ................................................................................................... 127
8.5.1 Consolidation Test of Stowed Pond Ash Samples.................................................................... 127
8.5.1.1 Void ratio (e) ..................................................................................................................... 131
8.5.1.2 Rate of consolidation and settlement................................................................................. 132
8.5.2 Consolidation Test of Stowed Pond Ash-Lime Mixture Samples ............................................ 134
8.5.2.1 Void ratio (e) ..................................................................................................................... 138
8.5.2.2 Rate of consolidation and settlement................................................................................. 139
8.5.3 Comparative Study ................................................................................................................... 141
8.5.3.1 Comparison between the void ratio of stowed pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture samples
....................................................................................................................................................... 141
8.5.3.2 Comparison between the Cv values of stowed pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture samples
....................................................................................................................................................... 143
CHAPTER 9: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

9.1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 147
9.2 SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS ................................................................................................................. 147
9.2.1 Physico-Chemical and Engineering Properties......................................................................... 147
9.2.2 Geotechnical Properties ............................................................................................................ 150
9.2.3 Rheological Properties.............................................................................................................. 151
9.2.4 Model Study.............................................................................................................................. 151
9.2.5 Consolidation Characteristics of Stowed Samples ................................................................... 152
9.3 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................................ 154
9.4 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY ............................................................................................................... 158
9.5 RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................................................................... 159
9.6 FUTURE SCOPE OF RESEARCH ............................................................................................................. 159
_Toc194295738
REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………………………………...161
APPENDIX A…………………………………………………………………………………………………….169
APPENDIX B……………………………………………………………………………………………………..175
APPENDIX C…………………………………………………………………………………………………….184
PUBLICATIONS………………………………………………………………………………………………...199
CURRICULUM VITAE…………………………………………………………………………………………201
iv
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Utilization of fly ash by NTPC, India for the year 2005-06 and 2006-07 (Source:
www.ntpc.co.in) ....................................................................................................................................... 12
Table 2.2 Average physical and chemical composition of Indian fly ash (Rao, 1999)............................ 12
Table 2.3 Microscopic observations of coal ash (Source: Trivedi and Singh, 2004)............................... 16
Table 2.4 Normal range of chemical composition (by wt. %) for fly ash produced from different coal
types (Source: www.tfhrc.gov) ................................................................................................................ 20
Table 2.5 Range of chemical composition of Indian coal ashes (Source: Pandian, 2004)....................... 21
Table 2.6 Chemical composition (wt %) of Australian bituminous coal fly ashes (Source: Lee et al.,
1999) ........................................................................................................................................................ 21
Table 2.7 Chemical requirements for fly ash classification (ASTM C-618) ........................................... 24
Table 3.1 Details of Talcher thermal power station (TTPS) and Talcher super thermal power station
(TSTPS) (Source: NTPC, India) .............................................................................................................. 37
Table 3.2 Designation of the collected fly ash and pond ash samples of TSTPS .................................... 39
Table 3.3 Physical properties of the river sand ........................................................................................ 40
Table 4.1 Specific gravity of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples .......................................................... 47
Table 4.2 Specific gravity of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples........................................................ 47
Table 4.3 Bulk density of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples ............................................................... 48
Table 4.4 Bulk density of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples............................................................. 48
Table 4.5 Porosity of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples ...................................................................... 48
Table 4.6 Porosity of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples.................................................................... 49
Table 4.7 Results of the particle size analysis of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples ........................... 50
Table 4.8 Results of the particle size analysis of TSTPS fly ash samples ............................................... 50
Table 4.9 Water holding capacity of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples .............................................. 57
Table 4.10 Water holding capacity of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples .......................................... 57
Table 4.11 Results of the permeability test of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples................................ 59
Table 4.12 Results of the permeability test of the TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples........................ 59
Table 4.13 Results of the permeability test fly ash-sand mixtures........................................................... 61
Table 4.14 Results of the pH test of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples ............................................... 64
Table 4.15 Results of the pH test of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples............................................. 64
Table 4.16 Elemental composition of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples ............................................ 65
Table 4.17 Chemical composition (element oxides) of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples.................. 65
Table 4.18 Elemental composition of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples .......................................... 66
Table 4.19 Chemical composition (element oxides) of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples ............... 66
Table 4.20 Loss on ignition of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples ....................................................... 68
Table 4.21 Loss on ignition of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples ..................................................... 68
Table 4.22 Results of the proximate analysis of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples ............................ 73
Table 4.23 Results of the proximate analysis of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples .......................... 74
Table 4.24 Results of the settling test of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples without adding flocculant
.................................................................................................................................................................. 81
Table 4.25 Results of the settling test of fly ash F1 added with various dosages of flocculant................ 82
Table 4.28 Results of the settling test of pond ash P1 added with various dosages of flocculant ............ 83
v
Table 5.1 Moisture content and dry density of TTPS fly ash (F1) and pond ash (P1) samples determined
from the proctor compaction test ............................................................................................................. 92
Table 5.2 Specimen measurements during the consolidation test of TTPS ash samples ......................... 93
Table 5.3 Computation sheet for e and Cv of fly ash F1 ........................................................................... 94
Table 5.6 Computation sheet for e and Cv of pond ash P1........................................................................ 95
Table 6.1 Viscosity values at different shear rates for various slurry concentrations of fly ash F1 ....... 101
Table 6.4 Viscosity values at different shear rates for various slurry concentrations of pond ash P1 .... 104
Table 7.1 Specifications of the mine goaf model................................................................................... 108
Table 7.2 Quantity of pond ash, water and flocculant used in different slurry concentrations for 1st phase
stowing ................................................................................................................................................... 109
Table 7.3 Drainage and absorption of water in case of stowing with pond ash slurry of 45 % Cw....... 113
Table: 7.4 Drainage and absorption of water in case of stowing with pond ash slurry of 50 % Cw ..... 113
Table 7.5 Drainage and absorption of water in case of stowing with pond ash slurry of 55% Cw........ 114
Table 7.8 Drainage and absorption of water after 2nd phase stowing with pond ash slurries of different
concentrations ........................................................................................................................................ 117
Table 7.9 Absorption of water by the pond ash after 1st phase stowing of pond ash slurries with and
without flocculant .................................................................................................................................. 120
Table 7.10 Stowing heights measured at various locations after 1st phase stowing............................... 121
Table 7.11 Stowing heights measured at various locations after 2nd phase stowing .............................. 121
Table 7.12 Stowing and void percentages after 1st and 2nd phase stowing with pond ash slurries of
various concentrations............................................................................................................................ 122
Table 8.1 Specifications of the mine goaf model for pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture stowing .... 125
Table 8.2 Specimen measurements of the stowed pond ash samples during consolidation test ............ 128
Table 8.3 Computation sheet for e and Cv of stowed pond ash sample collected after 7 days of stowing
................................................................................................................................................................ 129
................................................................................................................................................................ 129
................................................................................................................................................................ 130
................................................................................................................................................................ 130
................................................................................................................................................................ 131
Table 8.8 Void ratio (e) of stowed pond ash samples collected after different days of stowing under
various applied loads.............................................................................................................................. 131
Table 8.9 Coefficient of consolidation (Cv) of stowed pond ash samples collected after different days of
stowing under various applied loads ...................................................................................................... 133
Table 8.10 Specimen measurements of the stowed pond ash-lime mixture samples during consolidation
test .......................................................................................................................................................... 135
Table 8.11 Computation sheet for e and Cv of stowed pond ash-lime mixture sample collected after 7
days of stowing ...................................................................................................................................... 136
vi
days of stowing ...................................................................................................................................... 136
days of stowing ...................................................................................................................................... 137
days of stowing ...................................................................................................................................... 137
days of stowing ...................................................................................................................................... 138
Table 8.16 Void ratio (e) of stowed pond ash-lime mixture samples collected after different days of
stowing under various applied loads ...................................................................................................... 139
Table 8.17 Coefficient of consolidation (Cv) of stowed pond ash-lime mixture samples collected after
different days of stowing under various applied loads........................................................................... 140
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1 Scanning electron micrographs of fly ash particles ................................................................ 15

Figure 3.1 Particle size distribution curve of river sand .......................................................................... 40
Figure 3.2 Structure of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC)......................................................................... 41
Figure 3.3 Block diagram of the followed methodology ......................................................................... 42
Figure 4.1 Particle size distribution curves of TTPS ash samples ........................................................... 51
Figure 4.2 Particle size distribution curves of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples.............................. 51
Figure 4.3 Scanning electron micrographs of TTPS fly ash samples at ×500, ×1000 and ×1500
magnifications .......................................................................................................................................... 53
Figure 4.4 Scanning electron micrographs of TTPS pond ash samples at ×500, ×1000 and ×1500
magnifications .......................................................................................................................................... 54
Figure 4.5 Scanning electron micrographs of TSTPS fly ash samples at ×1000 magnification .............. 54
Figure 4.6 Scanning electron micrographs of TSTPS pond ash samples at ×1000 magnification .......... 55
Figure 4.7 Bar chart showing the coefficient of permeability of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples ... 59
Figure 4.8 Bar charts showing the coefficient of permeability of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples 60
Figure 4.9 Variation in coefficient of permeability with proportion of sand in the fly ash-sand mixtures
.................................................................................................................................................................. 62
Figure 4.10 X-ray diffraction patterns of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples ....................................... 71
Figure 4.11 X-ray diffraction patterns of TSTPS fly ash samples ........................................................... 71
Figure 4.12 X-ray diffraction patterns of TSTPS pond ash samples........................................................ 72
Figure 4.13 Crossing point temperature (CPT) curves of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples .............. 76
Figure 4.14 Crossing point temperature (CPT) curves of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples ............ 77
Figure 4.15 Jar test apparatus................................................................................................................... 79
Figure 4.16 Variation in turbidity values of ash-water suspension with flocculant dosages at different
settling times for TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples............................................................................. 85
Figure 5.1 Image of the consolidation testing machine ........................................................................... 89
Figure 5.2 Moisture-density relationships of fly ash (F1) and pond ash (P1) samples ............................. 92
Figure 5.3 Load vs. void ratio curves of compacted fly ash and pond ash samples of TTPS .................. 97
Figure 5.4 Load vs. Cv curves of compacted fly ash and pond ash samples of TTPS.............................. 98
Figure 6.1 Image of the advanced rheometer, AR-1000 ........................................................................ 100
Figure 6.2 Viscosity vs. shear rate curves of fly ash slurries prepared with different fly ash samples.. 103
Figure 6.3 Viscosity vs. shear rate curves of pond ash slurries prepared with various pond ash samples
................................................................................................................................................................ 106
Figure 7.1 Mine goaf model used for pond ash stowing ........................................................................ 108
Figure 7.2 Side view of the model stowed with pond ash slurry of 45% Cw ........................................ 111
Figure 7.3 Schematic side view of the model showing the stowing contours of different slurry
concentrations and measurement of stowing heights............................................................................. 111
Figure 7.4 Percentage of drainage versus time curves for stowing with pond ash slurries.................... 115
Figure 7.5 Percentage of drainage versus time curves for stowing with pond ash slurries added with
flocculant................................................................................................................................................ 116
Figure 7.6 Absorption of water by the stowed pond ash after 1st and 2nd phase stowing....................... 117
Figure 7.7 Comparison of water drainage from the stowing of pond ash slurries added with and without
flocculant................................................................................................................................................ 119
Figure 7.8 Trend of water absorption by the stowed pond ash after 1st phase stowing of pond ash slurries
with and without flocculant.................................................................................................................... 120
Figure 7.9 Change in stowing heights with measurement locations after 1st and 2nd phase stowing ..... 121
viii
Figure 7.10 Change in stowing and void percentages with slurry concentrations after 1st and 2nd phase
stowing ................................................................................................................................................... 122
Figure 8.1 Mine goaf model used for pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture stowing ............................ 125
Figure 8.2 Load vs. void ratio curves of stowed pond ash samples collected after different days of
stowing ................................................................................................................................................... 132
Figure 8.3 Load vs. Cv curves of stowed pond ash samples collected after different days of stowing .. 133
Figure 8.4 Variation in Cv with time of stowed pond ash samples under constant applied loads.......... 133
Figure 8.5 Load vs. void ratio curves of stowed pond ash-lime mixture samples collected after different
days of stowing ...................................................................................................................................... 139
Figure 8.6 Load vs. Cv curves of stowed pond ash-lime mixture samples collected after different days of
stowing ................................................................................................................................................... 140
Figure 8.7 Variation in Cv with time of stowed pond ash-lime mixture samples under constant applied
loads ....................................................................................................................................................... 141
Figure 8.8 Load vs. void ratio curves of stowed pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture samples collected
after different days of stowing ............................................................................................................... 142
Figure 8.9 Load vs. Cv values of stowed pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture samples collected after
different days of stowing........................................................................................................................ 144
Figure 8.10 Variation in Cv with time of stowed pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture samples at
different applied loads............................................................................................................................ 145
ix
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
Mining and power are two major sectors which boost the industrialization and play a
major role in the development of a country by improving the economy. Day by day,
the demand for electricity is increasing rapidly in India due to heavy industrialization.
As the power generation being augmented to meet the increasing energy demand, the
combustion of coal for power generation increases each year. As a result, a large
quantity of fly ash is produced, which emerged as a major source of environmental
pollution.
It is estimated that nearly 75% of India’s total installed power generation capacity is
thermal, of which coal-based generation is 90%, the remaining comprising diesel,
wind, gas, and steam. At present, near about 82 thermal power stations working in
India use bituminous and sub-bituminous coal and produce more than 100 million
tons of fly ash per year. The ash ponds used for the disposal of such huge quantity of
ash presently occupy nearly 65,000 acres of land (Das and Yudhbir, 2006; Sengupta,
2002). As per Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF), India, the generation of
fly ash has increased from 40 million tons in 1993-94 to 100 million tons during 2002-03
and it is expected to reach 175 million tons by 2012 (www.pib.nic.in). The high ash
content (30–50%) of the coal used in the power plants contributes such a large volume
of fly ash (Pandian, 2004; Singh et al., 2005).
In India, emphasis is being given on the increment of fly ash utilization. In late
eighties/early nineties, the utilization of fly ash was around 3%. In 1994 and 1998, the
utilization was roughly around 3 to 5% and 10% respectively of the total ash produced
(Kumar et al. 1999). As per the statistics supplied by the MOEF, the utilization of fly
ash stood at about 26% in the year 2002-03. Although, there is a steady progress in fly
ash utilization from 1990, still we are much behind the target of 100% fly ash
Introduction
utilization. Million tons of unused fly ash demands a huge quantity of land for its
disposal. It is now high time to search for new uses of fly ash/pond ash so that it can
be utilized up to its maximum level and the environmental problems can be
minimized. Therefore, the effective utilization of fly ash in bulk has been a focus of
research these days (Chugh et al. 2007). It has been recognized that bulk utilization of
the huge quantity of unused fly ash (pond ash) locked in the ash ponds is possible in
geotechnical engineering applications such as construction of embankments, as a
backfill material, as a sub-base material, etc. (Pandian, 2004). The use of fly ash for
reclamation of abandoned mines can solve both the disposal as well as stowing
problems in an environmentally safe manner (Singh et al., 2005). Therefore, the
characterization of fly ash is essential for its effective utilization as a stowing material
and to supplement the search for other applications (Moreno et al., 2005).
Stowing operation in underground coal mines is an important activity in which the

mined out area is tightly filled by packing with the stowing material. The main
purposes of stowing are to increase the percentage of recovery of coal and minimize
surface subsidence (Chugh et al., 2002). It is yet another effective means of coal
conservation, which is widely in use for extraction of coal pillars from underground
coal seams and coal seams lying underneath built-up areas, which otherwise would
have resulted in locking of coal in pillars. Hydraulic sand stowing is very much
popular and widely adopted in underground coal mines due to the properties of river
sand favourable for stowing and simplicity in the stowing operation. In recent years,
the source of river sand is depleting rapidly at an alarming rate due to its increasing
application in the construction works. Due to severe dearth of river sand and
increasing cost of sand stowing, the economic viability of underground mining with
sand stowing is getting bleak.
Hydraulic stowing of fly ash/pond ash (mixture of fly ash and bottom ash deposited
in ash ponds) in the underground coal mines is gaining acceptability in India. It is now
understood that a huge quantity of fly ash/pond ash can be utilized in stowing by
2
Introduction
adopting the principle of “Place it back from where it originates”. In countries

including India, initiatives have been taken and research on utilization of fly
ash/pond ash for stowing is being undertaken for its effective utilization in bulk. As a
result, hydraulic pond ash stowing in small scale has been undertaken on trial basis in
some of the Indian coal mines (Kumar et al. 2003). For the first time in India, hydraulic
fly ash stowing was done on a trail basis in the underground mine PK-I of Singareni
Collieries Company Ltd. (SCCL), Manuguru area in which approximately 10, 000 m³
of pond ash was stowed in three phases. Based on the experience and knowledge
gained at Manuguru area, the same technology was replicated at GDK 6A incline of
Ramagundam region where, about 9, 000 m3 of ash from NTPC, Ramagundam was
stowed and the stowing was found to be satisfactory with encouraging results (Rao, et
al., 2005; Kumar et al. 2003). The trial of pond ash stowing was also undertaken at
Durgapur Rayatwari No.4 mine in the Chandrapura area of Western Coalfields Ltd.
(WCL) (Rahman, 2005). Though the results of the stowing trials made earlier were
some how encouraging, more R&D is needed to solve the problems like delayed
settling of fly ash, poor drainage of water, escape of fines through the barricade and
soiling of coal in the working faces etc. which were encountered during the earlier
stowing operations (Ghosh et al. 2005).
The outcome of this research will not only help in solving some of the above
mentioned problems, but may help the mining industry to carryout full scale fly
ash/pond ash stowing in an effective manner.
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The problems faced by the mining and power sectors can be briefly summarized in
following two points:
• Mining industries are facing acute shortage of river sand for carrying out the
stowing operation in their underground mines and in need for an alternative
stowing material in abundance at a minimum cost.
3
Introduction
• The high volume of unused fly ash require large disposal area causing huge
capital loss to the power plants and simultaneously causing ecological
imbalance and related environmental problems.
It has been recognized that the unused fly ash/pond ash, the coal combustion bi-
products (CCBs) of the thermal power plants can be a major alternative to river sand
for stowing in the underground coal mines. If fly ash/pond ash can be successfully
utilized for stowing, the power sector will find a site for its safe disposal and mining
sector will get an economical filling material yielding better safety and stability in
mines. Since the underground coal mine and the power plants are usually located
close to each other, their mutual cooperation will solve the problem at both the ends.
1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The objectives of this research are outlined as follows:
a) To study the physico-chemical and engineering properties of fly ash and pond
ash to assess their suitability for stowing in the underground coal mines.
b) To study the geotechnical properties of fly ash and pond ash.
c) To study the rheological characteristics of fly ash and pond ash slurries for
assessing their flow behaviour.
d) To find out the most suitable stowing methodology using pond ash slurries of
various solid concentrations in a mine goaf model.
e) To determine the rate of consolidation, settlement and load bearing

characteristics of pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture after stowing.
1.4 SCOPE OF THE WORK
To achieve the above mentioned objectives, the scope of the work is outlined in the
following lines. First of all, an extensive literature review is conducted on the areas
related to the current research work. For experimental work, fly ash and pond ash
samples from two thermal power stations namely, Talcher Thermal Power Station
4
Introduction
(TTPS) and Talcher Super Thermal Power Station (TSTPS), Kaniha are collected.
Thereafter, the physical, chemical and mineralogical properties of ash samples are
studied in the laboratory using standard test procedures. Apart from this, the settling
characteristics and spontaneous heating characteristics of the ash samples are also
studied. The geotechnical properties like compaction test and consolidation
characteristics of the fly ash and pond ash samples are investigated. In order to access
the flow behaviour, the rheological properties of fly ash and pond ash slurries in six
different concentrations are studied. A model study is conducted to study the various
stowing parameters, using a mine goaf model fabricated in the laboratory. In this
study, parameters like rate of water drainage, absorption of water by the stowed mass,
percentage of stowing and void are determined for stowing with five different slurry
concentrations. Apart from this, the effect of addition of flocculant on the drainage of
water from the stowed mass is studied for each slurry concentration. Finally, the
consolidation test of the stowed pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture samples are
conducted to assess their load bearing characteristics.
1.5 ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS
The organization of the thesis is as follows:
Chapter 2 reviews the literature pertaining to the present investigation. It mainly

focused on the physico-chemical, engineering and geotechnical properties of fly ash
and the rheological properties of fly ash slurries. The suitability of the fly ash for
stowing and the status of fly ash stowing in Indian and abroad are also discussed in
this chapter.
Chapter 3 presents the frame work of the methodology for conducting the research
work. This chapter also incorporates the details of the materials used in the present
investigation.
5
Introduction
Chapter 4 furnishes the results of the experimental works carried out to study the
physico-chemical and engineering properties of the collected fly ash and pond ash
samples.
Chapter 5 covers the experimental procedure and results of the study on geotechnical
properties like compaction and consolidation tests of the ash samples.
Chapter 6 presents the rheological test results of the fly ash and pond ash slurries of
various solid concentrations.
Chapter 7 describes the experimental details and results of the stowing conducted in a
fabricated mine goaf model to study the various stowing parameters and to find out a
most suitable stowing methodology giving best stowing efficacy.
Chapter 8 presents the outcome of the study on consolidation test of the stowed pond
ash and pond ash-lime mixture samples collected from the mine goaf model after
different time intervals.
Chapter 9 presents summary and conclusions that are drawn based on the present
research work. This chapter also discussed about the limitations of the study,
recommendations and potential areas for future research.
1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
In relation to fly ash/pond ash stowing, the study contributed the following aspects:
a) The study of physico-chemical and engineering properties of fly ash and pond
ash samples will help in assessing their suitability for stowing in underground
coal mines.
b) The study of the geotechnical properties like the compaction and consolidation
tests of fly ash and pond ash will help in assessing their suitability from
geotechnical point of view.
6
Introduction
c) The knowledge of flow behaviour of the fly ash and pond ash slurries which is
essential for their hydraulic transportation through pipeline has been assessed
through rheological analysis.
d) The study of different parameters from the stowing with pond ash slurries of
various concentrations, using a mine goaf model, will give an idea regarding
the rate of water drainage, quantity of water absorbed by the stowed pond ash,
percentages of stowing and void etc. It will help in identifying the most
suitable pond ash slurry concentration giving best stowing efficacy.
e) The significance of application of flocculant for enhancing the settling

characteristics of fly ash/pond ash and improving drainage of water from the
pond ash after stowing are demonstrated in the study. It may help in solving
the settling and drainage problems associated with fly ash/pond ash stowing
in underground mines.
f) From the consolidation test of the stowed pond ash, the coefficient of
consolidation and rate of settlement under various applied loads can be
evaluated. It may assist in predicting the load taking ability of fly ash/pond
ash after hydraulic pond ash stowing.
7
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 INTRODUCTION
It has been recognized that the bulk utilization of the coal combustion by-products
(CCBs) e.g. fly ash and pond ash is possible if they are utilized as a stowing material in
the underground mines. For effective utilization of fly ash in stowing, their physico-
chemical, engineering and geotechnical properties etc. are to be studied in depth.
Keeping these things in mind, an extensive literature review is carried out in subject
areas related to the current research work. Emphasis has been given on topics like
generation and utilization of fly ash, physico-chemical and mineralogical composition
of fly ash, engineering and geotechnical properties of fly ash etc. Some insights are
also made in details on the literature on the rheology of fly ash slurries. In addition to
that, literature on suitability of fly ash and pond ash for stowing in the underground
coal mines are also referred in details. Some literature on stowing experiences with fly
ash and pond ash in underground coal mines of India and abroad are also reviewed
and incorporated in this chapter.
2.2 FLY ASH: ITS GENERATION AND UTILIZATION
This section covers the collection of selected literatures on generation and current
utilization of fly ash in India and abroad.
2.2.1 What is Fly Ash?
The solid inorganic residue of coal combustion, during the process of thermal power
generation which is carried away from the power station boiler plant in the flue gas is
called fly ash or Pulverized Fuel Ash (PFA). Fly ash which is also called the coal
combustion by-product (CCB) of coal-fired thermal power stations is a fine material
Literature Review
with spherical particles. It closely resembles volcanic ashes and also named as
‘pozzolan’.
2.2.2 Generation of Fly Ash
Fly ash is generated from various inorganic and organic constituents present in feed
coals and generally produced at a temperature of 1200–1700°C (Vassilev and
Vassileva, 2006). The coal which is used in the thermal power stations constitutes
carbon as the major component. It also contains hydrogen, oxygen and some minor
elements of nitrogen and sulphur and non-combustible impurities (10 to 40%) usually
present in the form of clay, shale, quartz, feldspar and limestone. When coal is
consumed to generate electricity at elevated temperatures, these non-combustible
minerals remain as ash products (Metcalfe et al., 2006).
2.2.3 Types of Coal Ash
Three categories of coal ash is available from the thermal power plants namely, fly ash,
bottom ash and pond ash (www.ntpc.co.in).
a. Dry fly ash
The finer fraction of CCBs of the thermal power stations which are carried by the flue
gas in suspension and collected from different rows of Electro-Static-Precipitators
(ESPs) and bag houses in dry form are called dry fly ash or simply fly ash. Fly ash
constitutes 75–85% of the total coal ash, and the remainder is collected as bottom ash
or boiler slag (Siddique, 2007).
b. Bottom ash
The ash particles which are heavier and coarser than fly ash fall to the bottom of the
combustion chamber and collected at the bottom of the boiler furnace are termed as
bottom ash. These are basically clinkers formed from the residue, which by the help of
clinker grinder are broken down to smaller pieces. Bottom ash, similar to sand or
9
Literature Review
gravel in texture, constitutes about 20% of the coal ash and characterized by better
geo-technical properties.
c. Pond ash
Fly ash and bottom ash are mixed together with water to form slurry and pumped to
the ash ponds for disposal. In ash ponds, the ash gets settled and excess water is
decanted. This deposited ash in ash ponds is known as pond ash.
Sometimes, these three types of coal ashes are synonymously called ‘fly ash’ by the
users.
2.2.4 Production and Utilization Status of Fly Ash in India and Abroad
About 1500 million tons of fly ash/bottom ash is already generated in India and 40,000
ha of land are covered by storage of such huge amount of pond ash (Rahman, 2005).
Fly ash utilization is a major part of fly ash management and has got versatile
application areas. Originally, before it has got its commercial applications, fly ash was
treated as waste of the thermal power plants. Due to favourable engineering
properties, fly ash has got numerous applications in several diversified areas and
hence, treated as by-products. Due to presence of pozzolanic property, it is used as a
raw material for cement manufacturing (Pati et al., 2001; Ravina, 1998). Some of the
other major areas of current fly ash utilization are addition as a cementitious material
in concrete, making of bricks, tile manufacturing, land fills and making of roads and
embankments, reclamation of low lying and waste land areas for agriculture, back
filling in open cast mines, stowing in underground mines soil amendment, structural
fills, and extraction of valuable trace elements (Pati et al., 2001; Chugh et al., 2000;
Naik et al., 1993). In agriculture, it has got wide applications in field crops, forestry,
floriculture, reclamation of waste land etc. In construction industry, the fly ash based
components are also being used in the forms of pavement block, sintered aggregate
(substitute for clinker and natural aggregates), wood substitute - doors & panels,
granite substitute, ceramic tiles and paints & enamels. Based on literature review,
10
Literature Review
Chugh et al. (2000) attempted to classify beneficial use applications based on CCBs
significant properties. These are:
• Large volume (structural fills, embankments, unstabilized road sub-base)
• Cementitous/Pozzolonic (cement/concrete, flowable fills, structural materials,

waste stabilization)
• Chemical/Neutralization properties (acid mine drainage, mine reclamation)
• Abrasive properties (blasting grit, roof shingles, snow and ice removal)
• Mineralogical properties (magnetite removal, aluminum alloys, silicon alloys,

etc.)
• Soil enhancement properties (artificial soils, soil amendments)
Singh et al. (2005) reported that in India, the use of fly ash in making of bricks, landfill
and making of road etc. is hardly 5% of the total production. However, in other
countries like U.S.A, U.K, Germany and China recorded utilizations are 31%, 40.58%
and 90% respectively. In Japan, the rate of fly ash utilization is around 50% and the
rest is mainly disposed of in the sea due to shortage of land disposal sites. In Japan,
70% of the total ash utilization is covered in the cement industry (Horiuchi et al., 2000).
The maximum fly ash utilisation area in India is cement manufacturing which
constitutes 49% of the total, whereas, only 2% of the total ash generation is utilized for
mine fills (Sengupta, 2002).
With increasing production, the utilization potential of fly ash in India is also
increasing year by year. A meagre 3% utilisation of 40 million tonnes of fly ash
generation in 1994 has risen to 38% of 112 million tonne generated in 2004-05. The
generation of fly ash is expected to increase to 170 million tonne by the end of XI five
year plan (2007-2012) and the targeted utilization is expected to be 100% (TIFAC, New
Delhi). As per National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. (NTPC), India, from 0.3
million tons in 1991-92, the level of fly ash utilization during 2004-05 stood at over
12.74 million tons. In the year 2005-06 and 2006-07, the total utilization of fly ash was
11
Literature Review
16.70 and 20.76 million tones respectively. The area wise break-up of fly ash utilization
by NTPC is given in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1 Utilization of fly ash by NTPC, India for the year 2005-06 and 2006-07
(Source: www.ntpc.co.in)
Year, 2005-06 Year, 2006-07

Area of Utilization
Quantity (in Million Tones)
Land development 6.59 7.51
Cement and concrete 5.67 7.40
Roads/Embankments 0.67 1.76
Ash dyke raising 2.65 2.69
Bricks 0.13 0.15
Mine filling 0.60 0.61
Others 0.40 0.64
Total 16.70 20.76
2.3 PROPERTIES OF FLY ASH
The physical and chemical properties of fly ash varies in a wide range with the
variation in coal-source or production-source differences, the type and uniformity of
the coal, the operating parameters of the power plant and the collection methods
employed to separate the ash from the combustion stream. The average physical and
chemical composition of Indian fly ash reported by Rao (1999) is given in Table 2.2.
Table 2.2 Average physical and chemical composition of Indian fly ash (Rao, 1999)
Physical composition Chemical composition

Constituents Value Constituents Percentage
pH 5.5-6.5 Silica 49-67
Specific gravity 2.17 Alumina 16-29
Water content 1.48% Iron Oxide 4-10
Liquid limit 25-35% Calcium Oxide 1-4
Optimum moisture content
24% Manganese Oxide 0.2-2
(OMC)
Max. dry density 13.13 N/m3 Sulphur 0.1-2
Unconfined compressive strength 34 KN/m2
Loss on ignition (LOI) 0.4-0.6
Surface area (Sq.m/N) 2300-5700
12
Literature Review
Literatures on important physical and chemical properties of the fly ash are given in
details in the following sections.
2.3.1 Physical Properties of Fly Ash
2.3.1.1 Colour
Fly ash basically looks like cement, grayish white in colour and in powder form (Liu et
al., 2004). The colour of fly ash depends on the amount of unburned carbon and iron
oxides present in the ash matrix. The presence of carbon from the incomplete
combustion of coal lends a gray to black colour to fly ash, depending on the
concentration. Carbon-free ash can range from blue-gray to brown and the colour is
generally due to the presence of iron oxides in the ash matrix. The overall colour of fly
ashes is gray. The fly ashes indicate dark gray, medium gray, light gray by the
Munsell colour chart going from the first field to the third one. Presumably, in fly
ashes produced from the same coal, the smaller the size of particles becomes, the
brighter they appear (Lee et al. 1999).
2.3.1.2 Bulk density
The bulk density of fly ash depends mainly on the degree of expansion of their surface
since the existence of micropores filled with air causes a decrease of their density
(Rokita and Tomaszewski, 1988). Liu et al. (2004) from their characterization study of
coal ashes from China found that the ash samples have bulk density of 0.6 – 0.9 g/cm3.
The characterization study conducted by Bayat (1998) on seven different Turkish fly
ash samples reveals that the bulk density of the fly ash samples ranges from 0.88 to
1.44 g/cm3. He also observed that bulk densities increases as the particle size of fly ash
decreases.
2.3.1.3 Specific gravity
Specific gravity is an important parameter for self-weight and compaction of fly ash
and mostly needed for the use of fly ashes in geotechnical and other applications (Das
13
Literature Review
and Yudhbir, 2006; Pandian, 2004). It depends upon the fineness, carbon and iron
content and mineralogy of fly ash (Pandian et al. 1998). Fly ashes having high iron
oxide contents, like hematite and magnetite may have high specific gravity (Seals et
al., 1972; Trivedi and Singh, 2004). In general, the specific gravity of coal ash lies
around 2.0 and for Indian fly ashes, the range varies from 1.46 to 2.66 (Pandian, 2004;
Pandian et al., 1998). Bayat (1998) reported that the specific gravity of Turkish fly ashes
ranged from 1.83 to 2.99. Canadian fly ashes have specific gravity ranging between
1.94 and 2.94, whereas, American ashes have specific gravity ranging between 2.14
and 2.69 (Siddique, 2007).
Fly ashes have much lower specific gravity than the natural soil. Investigations at
Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore showed that the coal ash particles are generally
cenospheres leading to low values of specific gravity (Pandian et al., 1998). According
to Trivedi and Singh (2004), the lower specific gravity of fly ash is due to the trapped
micro bubbles of air in ash particles which increases the surface area, hence volume of
the ash and tends to lower the specific gravity of the fly ash. The specific gravity of fly
ash is related to its fineness, which increases as the particle size decreases (Bayat,
1998). Lee et al. (1999) studied the relationship between specific gravity and fineness of
the fly ash, which determines the amounts of pore spaces present in fly ash. They
found that the specific gravity has got a direct relationship with Blaine specific surface
area. Trivedi and Singh (2004) observed that the breaking of ash particles into finer
fraction increases specific gravity that may be due to the release of entrapped gas.
They had related the specific gravity (Gs) of fly ash to the mean size as per the
following relationship with a satisfactory value of correlation coefficient R2 as 0.9344.
Gs = 1.6091D50 -0.0464 … (2.1)
2.3.1.4 Particle morphology
The morphology or shape and surface characteristics of the fly ash particles depend on
many factors especially, on the combustion temperature and the size of grains (Rokita
and Tomaszewski, 1988). The morphology of the fly ash particle can be revealed from
14
Literature Review
the micrographs obtained from the scanning electron microscope (SEM) and energy
dispersive x-ray analysis (EDXA) (Siddique, 2007). The scanning electron micrographs
of fly ash particles are shown in Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1 Scanning electron micrographs of fly ash particles
The electron micrographs indicate that the fly ashes are predominantly fine-grained
and mostly composed of solid or hollow spherical, oval or irregularly shaped glassy
particles of varying sizes. The thin walled hollow spherical particles are known as
‘cenospheres’ or floaters as they are very light and tend to float on water surface.
Sometimes, fly ashes may also contain many small spherical particles within a large
hollow glassy sphere, called ‘pherospheres’ (Berry, 1985; Georgakopoulos, 2003; Shao
et al., 2004; Siddique, 2007; Metcalfe et al. 2006). Berry (1985) found some reddish-
brown particles high in iron content and irregularly shaped, porous, carbon particles
in fly ash. From the micrographs, Porbaha et al. (2000) observed that the fly ash
particles are composed primarily of glass spheres, together with some crystalline
material and varying amounts of unburned carbon.
In fly ash, spheres of many different sizes and surfaces are found either loose or
embedded in a larger matrix-like structure. From the SEM micrographs, White and
Case (1990) observed a conglomeration of spherical particles, in which adhering of
smaller spheres to the larger ones and clustering of the smaller particles in a larger
particle size range were noticed. Trivedi and Singh, (2004) observed that coarse ash
contain rounded, sub-rounded, spongy, and opaque particles. The superfine particles
(mainly, size < 0.01 mm) present in all fly ash have a tendency to form agglomerates
15
Literature Review
(tendency of fines to stick together) in presence of moisture. The microscopic

observations of coal ash made by them are given in Table 2.3.
Table 2.3 Microscopic observations of coal ash (Source: Trivedi and Singh, 2004)
Colour Grain structure Species

Clear or brownish Spherules Siliceous aluminous glass
Reflected light white Sub-rounded Sponge porous grains
Reflected light white Irregular spherules Glass agglomerate
Opaque (dark gray, red) Angular grains Magnetite, Hematite
Opaque (black) Irregular porous grains Carbon
Das and Yudhbir (2006) studied the morphology of the Indian fly ashes and reported
that the spherical particles are predominantly in finer fraction whereas in coarser
fraction having grain size >75 µm are irregular in outline. The unburned carbons have
irregular shapes and may contain some spherical particles on its surface.
2.3.1.5 Particle size distribution
The particle size distribution of fly ash is one of the important physical properties and
is related to its pozzolanic activity (Siddique, 2007). It varies over a wide range and
depends on many factors, especially on the initial grinding of coal, the efficiency of the
thermal power plants and the type of ash collection equipment used (Rokita and
Tomaszewski, 1988). The fly ash particles typically range from less than 1 µm to 150
µm in size. It is generally finer than Portland cement (Siddique, 2007; Berry, 1985).
Metcalfe et al. (2006) reported that fly ash particle dimensions ranges from about 100
µm to sub-micron size. Fly ash collected by electrostatic precipitators’ ranges in
fineness from 4000 to 7000 cm2/g (Berry, 1985). The small fly ash fractions (below
0.075 mm) may account for 70-95%, however, the percentage of the finest fractions
(below 0.020 mm) is much diversified. The larger-grain fractions (0.075-0.500 mm)
constitute 5-30%, but the largest grains fractions (over 0.200 mm) is negligible (Rokita
and Tomaszewski, 1988).
The Indian coal ashes consist predominately of silt-size fraction with some clay-size
fraction. The fly ash particles are finer compared to bottom ash particles and the pond
16
Literature Review
ash particles are sized in between fly and bottom ashes (Pandian et al., 1998). Based on
the grain size distribution, Pandian, (2004) classified the coal ashes as sandy silt to silty
sand. His study concluded that the Indian coal ashes are poorly graded with
coefficient of curvature ranging between 0.61 and 3.70 and coefficient of uniformity
ranging between 1.59 and 14.0. The results of particle size analysis conducted by
Marrero et al. (2007) show that the particle size of fly ash ranges from 0.3 to 100 μm
with a maximum between 20 and 30 μm with 20% of the particles having less than 5
μm. Trivedi and Singh (2004) reported that fly ash contains particle size in the range of
coarse sand to silt. However, the maximum frequency of particles is in the range of
fine sand to silt. Pond ash contains 5% to 10% of particles in coarse and medium sand
size, 35% to 50% in fine sand size and 40% to 60% of particles in the range of silt size.
2.3.1.6 Permeability
‘Permeability’ which refers to the propensity of a material to allow fluid to move

through its pores or interstices is a measure of how easily a fluid e.g. water can flow
through a porous medium. The permeability of fly ash depends on grain size
distribution (shape and size of particles), void ratio and density or degree of
compaction and pozzolanic activity (Trivedi and Singh, 2004; Pandian, 2004). Since fly
ash consists almost entirely of spherical shaped particles, the particles are able to be
densely packed during compaction, resulting in comparatively low permeability
values. The permeability of fly ash lies in the range of those values obtained for silts
and clays. The permeability values of fly ash are also dependent on the consolidation
pressure and free lime content. There is a decrease in permeability at higher
consolidation pressure due to reduction in the micropore volume available for flow.
Also, owing to the presence of free lime which results in cementation, there is a loss of
interconnectivity of pores due to floc formation in the voids and decrease in
permeability is observed (Pandian and Balasubramonian, 1999). The results of the test
conducted by Pandian (2004) revealed that the permeability of fly ashes is in the range
of 8 × 10–6 cm/s to 1.87 × 10–4 cm/s, 5 ×10–5 cm/s to 9.62 × 10–4 cm/s for pond ashes,
17
Literature Review
and 9.9 × 10–5 cm/s to 7 × 10–4 cm/s for bottom ashes. Since, the bottom and pond
ashes are coarser than fly ashes; they possess a higher value of permeability
coefficient. Openshaw et al. (1992) reported that the permeability of fly ash is very low
and varies significantly from 1 x 10-6 to 8 x 10-4 cm/sec depending on compaction.
Kaniraj and Gayathri (2004) in their study on the pearmeability and consolidation
characteristics of compacted fly ash, from the Dadri thermal power plant observed
that the coefficient of permeability of the compacted fly ash was comparable to those
of nonplastic silts. Porbaha et al. (2000) carried out the permeability tests on two silt-
size fly ashes, with low free lime content under constant stresses of 49 and 98 kPa for
12 days to study the effect of time on permeability of fly ash. Their results showed that
the coefficient of permeability for the tested ashes is between 10–6 and 10–7 m/s. They
finally concluded that the time has got very minimal effect on the permeability of fly
ash with a lower free lime content.
Fly ash possesses the tendency to reduce the permeability when mixed with sand.
Parker and Thornton (1976) from their study on fly ash produced from Wyoming low
sulphur coal concluded that the addition of fly ash to sand is more effective in
reducing the permeability value of the fly ash-sand mixture which reduced three
orders of magnitude at 50% fly ash.
2.3.1.7 Water holding capacity (WHC)
The water holding capacity of fly ash is a measure of the capacity of fly ash to hold
water. It depends on the porosity of fly ash, size of particles and the way the particles
are arranged. Iyer and Stanmore (1999) studied the water absorption of the original
Curragh and Tarong fly ashes and the WHC was determined as 24% and 33%
respectively. They also studied the effect of addition of fraction with maximum fines
on the water holding capacity of original fly ash particles. Their study showed that the
addition of fraction with maximum fines to dense fly ash slurry decreases the water
absorption, which concludes, the water absorption is a function of particle size. Sarkar
and Rano (2007) have compared the WHC of fly ashes from different thermal power
18
Literature Review
plants in Eastern India and studied the effect of size fractionation on the water holding
capacities. From their study, it was concluded that the fly ashes collected from super
thermal power plant possess least WHC (40.7%) and comparatively, the coarser size
fractions of fly ashes in general have higher WHC than the finer ones.
2.3.2 Chemical Composition of Fly Ash
Fly ash is a complex inorganic-organic mixture with unique, polycomponent,

heterogeneous and variable composition. In fly ash, approximately 188 minerals or
mineral groups have been identified (Vassilev and Vassileva, 2006). The chemical
composition of fly ash is influenced to a great extent by the geological and
geographical factors related to coal deposit, the combustion conditions, and the
removal efficiencies of the control devices (Sarkar et al., 2006). Mainly, the nature of
mineral matter and organic constituents in coal determine the chemical composition of
the resulting ash during combustion (Berry, 1985; Gupta et al., 1998, Liu et al., 2004).
Chemically, coal is an organic material and it primarily contains carbon, hydrogen,
nitrogen, oxygen, and sulfur. The primary inorganic constituents associated with the
coal include clay minerals, silica, carbonates, and sulfides. The resulting CCBs are
primarily made of silicon, aluminium, iron, calcium, magnesium, sulfur, and several
trace elements such as arsenic, selenium, lead, mercury, boron, etc. Most of these
elements combine with oxygen to form corresponding oxides. Since combustion of
coal is never complete, CCBs also contain varying amounts of unburned carbon called
loss on ignition (LOI) (Koukouzas et al., 2007; Chugh et al. 2000; Tishmack, 1996).
So far the chemical composition is concerned; fly ash primarily consists of silicon
dioxide (SiO2), aluminium oxide (AI2O3), iron oxide (Fe2O3) and calcium oxide (CaO)
(Openshaw et al. 1992; Liu et al., 2004; Metcalfe et al., 2006; Siddique, 2007). Berry
(1985) reported that more than 85 percent of most fly ashes comprise chemical
compounds and glasses formed from SiO2, Al2O3, Fe2O3, CaO and MgO. Amongst
these, SiO2 and Al2O3 together make up about 45–80% of the total ash. The sub-
19
Literature Review
bituminous and lignite coal ashes have relatively higher proportion of CaO and MgO
and lesser proportions of SiO2, Al2O3 and Fe2O3 as compared to the bituminous coal
ashes (Siddique, 2007). The elements present in fly ash in order of decreasing
abundance are Si, Al, Fe, Ca, C, Mg, K, Na, S, Ti, P, and Mn (Openshaw et al. 1992).
Table 2.4 compares the normal range of the chemical constituents of bituminous coal
fly ash with those of lignite coal fly ash and sub bituminous coal fly ash. From the
table, it is evident that lignite and sub bituminous coal fly ashes have a higher calcium
oxide content and lower loss on ignition than fly ashes from bituminous coals.
(www.tfhrc.gov).
Table 2.4 Normal range of chemical composition (by wt. %) for fly ash produced from
different coal types (Source: www.tfhrc.gov)
Components Bituminous Sub-bituminous Lignite

SiO2 20 -60 40 – 60 15 – 45
Al2O3 5 – 35 20 – 30 10 – 25
Fe2O3 10 - 40 4 – 10 4 – 15
CaO 1 – 12 5 – 30 15 – 40
MgO 0–5 1–6 3 – 10
SO3 0–4 0–2 0 – 10
Na2O 0–4 0–2 0–6
K2O 0–3 0–4 0–4
LOI 0 – 15 0–3 0–5
Vassilev and Vassileva (2006) reported that the chemical composition of fly ash
includes major (>1%), minor (1–0.1%), and trace (<0.1%) elements. The major and
minor elements are mostly expressed as oxides and these elements (in order of
decreasing amounts) are commonly O, Si, Al, Ca, Fe, C, K, Mg, H, Na, Ti, N, P, and Ba,
and occasionally Mn, Sr, F, and Cl. The other elements detected are mostly trace
elements in fly ash. The study conducted by Pandian and Balasubramonian (2000)
revealed that the Indian fly ashes contain silica, alumina, iron oxide and calcium
oxide. The silica content in fly ashes is between 38 and 63%, 37 and 75% in pond ashes,
and 27 and 73% in bottom ashes. The alumina content ranges between 27 to 44% for fly
20
Literature Review
ashes, 11 to 53% for pond ashes and 13 to 27% for bottom ashes. The calcium oxide is
in the range of 0 to 8% for fly ashes, 0.2 to 0.6% for pond ashes and 0 to 0.8% for
bottom ashes. Trivedi and Singh (2004) found that coal ash contains maximum
percentage of silicon (57.5%) followed by aluminium (27.2%), iron (5.4%) and calcium
oxide. They found that CaO and MgO accounted for 3.5% of the total constituents. The
unburned carbon content determined by them was 4.1%. The range of chemical
composition of Indian coal ashes reported by Pandian (2004) is given in Table 2.5. Lee
et al. (1999) studied the chemical compositions of six class F fly ashes from Japan using
Australian bituminous coal and the results are given in Table 2.6.
Table 2.5 Range of chemical composition of Indian coal ashes (Source: Pandian, 2004)
Compounds Fly ash Pond ash Bottom ash

SiO2 38 – 63 37.7 – 75.1 23 – 73
Al2O3 27 – 44 11.7 – 53.3 13 – 26.7
TiO2 0.4 – 1.8 0.2 – 1.4 0.2 – 1.8
Fe2O3 3.3 – 6.4 3.5 – 34.6 4 – 10.9
MnO 0 – 0.5 bd* – 0.6 bd – 0.3
MgO 0.01 – 0.5 0.1 – 0.8 0.1 – 0.7
CaO 0.2 – 8 0.2 – 0.6 0.1 – 0.8
K2O 0.04 – 0.9 0.1 – 0.7 bd – 0.56
Na2O 0.07 – 0.43 0.05 – 0.31 bd – 0.3
LOI 0.2 – 3.4 0.01 – 20.9 0.61 – 51.6
*below detectable limit
Table 2.6 Chemical composition (wt %) of Australian bituminous coal fly ashes
(Source: Lee et al., 1999)
Fly ash SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 CaO MgO TiO2 Na2O K2O SO3 C
A-1 63.8 24.8 4.6 2.3 0.9 1.0 1.2 0.7 0.3 0.7
A-2 62.0 25.5 4.3 2.2 1.2 1.1 1.3 0.8 0.4 0.8
A-3 59.5 26.4 4.8 2.3 1.2 1.1 1.3 0.8 1.0 0.3
A’-1 62.5 26.4 4.2 2.0 1.1 1.1 1.2 0.8 0.5 1.5
A’-2 60.9 25.4 4.2 2.3 0.9 1.1 1.2 0.8 0.6 1.3
A’-3 59.6 26.4 4.3 2.3 1.1 1.1 1.4 0.8 1.0 0.4
21
Literature Review
2.3.3 Mineralogical Composition of Fly Ash
Mineralogical characterization is important in identifying the crystalline phases that

constitute the major part of fly ash. The bulk mineralogical characteristics of fly ash
depend mainly on the rank of coal burned, the calcium content of the coal, and the
combustion process. Generally, fly ashes have 15–45% crystalline matter and the high
calcium ashes (Class C) contain larger amounts of crystalline matter ranging between
25 and 45% (McCarthy, 1988; McCarthy et al., 1993). Many researchers have identified
the mineralogical compositions of fly ashes by using powder X-ray diffraction
analysis. From the X-ray diffraction patterns, they found that the major crystalline
phases present in fly ash are quartz (SiO2) and mullite (Al6Si2O13) and minor phases
are iron oxides like magnetite (Fe3O4) and hematite (Fe203) (Metcalfe et al. 2006; Lee et
al., 1999; Khanra et al., 1998; White and Case, 1990; Berry, 1985; Monte and Sabbioni,
1984). Tishmack (1996) reported that the predominant minerals in ash resulting from
combustion of eastern and midwestern coals are quartz, mullite, hematite and
magnetite. This ash is referred to as class F fly ash. According to Vassilev and
Vassileva (2006), the minerals and phases in fly ashes have forming (>10%), major (1–
10%), minor (0.1–1%) or accessory (<0.1%) occurrences. The forming, major and minor
species (in the order of decreasing amounts) commonly include glass, mullite, quartz,
char, hematite-magnetite, anhydritre-gypsum, feldspars, lime-portlandite, clay and
mica minerals, cristobalite-tridymite, calcite-ankerite, corundum, jarosite, and some Ca
and Ca–Mg silicates.
Quartz (SiO2) in the fly ash originates from silt and clay present in the coal. It
crystallizes directly from the molten ash or by devitrification of the glass after cooling.
Its formation requires temperatures of above 1000ºC. Mullite is twice as abundant in
low-calcium ashes as in high calcium. Ferrite spinel ((Mg,Fe)(Fe.A1)204), magnetite
(Fe304), and hematite (Fe2O3) are the principal iron containing phases in fly ash
(Tishmack, 1996). Evaluating the XRD patterns, Koukouzas et al. (2007) conformed
that the major mineral phase of fly ash is quartz, while other mineral phases are
22
Literature Review
maghemite, hematite, periclase, rutile, gehlenite and anhydrite. They also observed
that almost all ash samples contain quartz, which can be considered as a primary
mineral, especially in cases where ash samples originate from fuels such as bituminous
coal and lignite, which contain high amounts of silicon dioxide. Except quartz, the
majority of the samples contain hematite, especially in cases where bituminous coal is
used. Formation of iron oxides is partially due to the decomposition of pyrite. They
reported that the fly ashes from high sulphur coals have higher amounts of iron-
bearing minerals compared to the fly ash from low sulphur coals.
Mullite does not occur naturally in coal. It is assumed to form during combustion by
the thermal decomposition of naturally occurring aluminosilicates, such as kaolinite at
1200-1500ºC. Its composition varies between (Al2O3)3(SiO2)2 and (Al2O3)2(SiO2)
depending on the exact temperature of formation (Metcalfe et al., 2006; White and
Case, 1990). Trivedi and Singh (2004) identified that the peak near 2θ = 26.40º in the X-
ray diffractograms is characteristic of aluminosilicate minerals. Presence of heavy
minerals like magnetite and hematite was indicated by their respective peaks near
35.4º and 33.2º. Along with aluminosilicate mineral, the concurrence of strong peak
close to 2θ = 26.5º was indicated as quartz to be one of the major constituents.
Shao et al. (2004) studied the major phases present in the fly ash samples of a power
station in Beijing of China. They found that the raw fly ash sample comprises some
quantity of glassy phase and the mineral phases e.g. quartz (SiO2), mullite (Al6Si2O13),
enstatite ((Mg,Fe)SiO3), anorthite (CaAl2Si2O8) and hematite (Fe2O3). Bayat (1998)
compared the mineralogical properties of seven different fly ashes from eastern,
central and western lignite and bituminous coal fields in Turkey. He found that the
low-calcium fly ashes have the typical, relatively simple, crystalline phases: quartz,
mullite, hematite and ferrite spinel. The high-calcium fly ashes have the most complex
assemblage of crystalline phases.
23
Literature Review
2.4 CLASSIFICATION OF FLY ASH
Based on the chemical composition, fly ash has been broadly classified worldwide into
two major classes and designated as Class F and Class C as per ASTM C 618. The
standard takes its major elements like Si, Al, Fe and Ca into account for classifying the
fly ash (Koukouzas et al., 2007). The chief difference between Class F and Class C fly
ash is in the amount of calcium and the silica, alumina, and iron content in the ash.
When the combined amount of silica (SiO2), alumina (Al2O3), and iron oxides (Fe2O3)
in fly ash is 70% or above (by mass), it is described as a Class F ash and when this
amount is between 50 and 70%, the ash is called a Class C fly ash. According to ASTM
C 618, the chemical requirements to classify any fly ash are given in Table 2.7.
Table 2.7 Chemical requirements for fly ash classification (ASTM C-618)
Properties Class F fly ash Class C fly ash

SiO2 + Al2O3 + Fe2O3, min. % 70.0 50
Sulfur trioxide (SO3), max. % 5.0 5.0
Moisture Content, max. % 3.0 3.0
Loss on ignition (LOI), max. % 6.0 6.0
Class F fly ashes usually contain less than 5% CaO, whereas, fly ashes belonging to
Class C contain a large proportion of CaO (10–35%) (Koukouzas et al., 2007). Since,
Class C fly ash has higher lime content than Class F, possesses higher cementitious
properties than Class F fly ash. The low-calcium Class F fly ashes are commonly
produced from the burning of higher-rank bituminous coals and anthracites and these
fly ashes are pozzolanic in nature (hardening when reacted with Ca(OH)2 and water).
On the other hand, the high-calcium Class C fly ashes are normally produced from the
burning of low-rank lignites and sub-bituminous coals and possess both cementitious
(self-hardening when reacted with water) and pozzolanic properties (Vassilev and
Vassileva, 2006; Indraratna, 1996).
24
Literature Review
2.5 GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF FLY ASH
Study of geotechnical characteristics of fly ash is necessary for its fruitful utilization as
a fill material where its mechanical behaviour is important (Trivedi and Singh, 2004).
This section deals with the selected literatures on the geotechnical properties like
compaction and consolidation characteristics of the fly ash.
2.5.1 Compaction Characteristics
Compaction of fly ash is required to improve its engineering properties. The

compacted unit weight of the material depends on the amount and method of energy
application, grain size distribution, plasticity characteristics and moisture content at
compaction (Pandian, 2004). In case of fly ash, the extent of compaction depends on
the moisture content and applied load. Trivedi and Singh (2004) reported that the
optimum moisture content reduces and maximum dry unit weight (γd) increases with
increasing in fineness of fly ash. They opined that the presence of porous particle (un-
burnt coal, pelerosphere and cenosphere) is responsible for increasing the optimum
moisture content and this may be one of the reasons for high optimum moisture
content and low maximum dry unit weight of pond ash in compaction. The maximum
dry unit weight (kNm-3) obtained is related to the mean size (mm) of fly ash by the
following expression (Trivedi and Singh, 2004):
γd (Proctor) = 7.5486 D50 -0.1072 … (2.2)
The variation in dry density with moisture content for fly ashes is less compared to
that of a well-graded soil, both having the same median grain size (Moulton, 1978).
Trivedi and Singh, (2004) reported that the maximum dry unit weight achievable in
case of coal ash is less than natural soils due to low specific gravity and high air void
content. From the compaction test, they found that the optimum moisture content of
fly ash at maximum dry unit weight varies from 30 to 40%. From the study of the
compaction behaviour of the MPEB, Sarani fly ash, Prabakar et al. (2004) found that
25
Literature Review
the optimum moisture content and maximum dry density of the used fly ash are
44.24% and 0.94 gm/cc respectively.
2.5.2 Consolidation Characteristics
Study of consolidation characteristics of fly ash is required to estimate the rate of

settlement and it depends on the initial density, degree of saturation, self-hardening
characteristics and pozzolanic activity of fly ash. From the consolidation test, Pandian
(2004) found that the compressibility of fly ash is less than that of pond ash which is
less than that of bottom ash and the Cv values varies from 0.694 × 103 to 7.641 × 10–3
cm2/min for fly ashes, 1.76 × 10–5 to 4.90 × 10–4 cm2/min for pond ashes and 0.46 × 10–4
to 2.01 × 10–3 cm2/min for bottom ashes. From the laboratory consolidation tests on
undisturbed samples from reclamation fills, Capco (1990) found the Cv values of the
order 0.57–1.14 cm2/min. Since, primary consolidation of fly ash completed in about
one minute and it is difficult to take the time-compression readings manually, Web
and Hughes (1987) used an automatic recording system for taking the consolidation
readings at very small time intervals. They found that the Cv values of fly ash is of the
order of 1.9–19 cm2/min and reported that this high rate of consolidation of fly ash is
favorable particularly for its use in embankments and reclamation fills. The results of
the permeability and consolidation tests conducted by Kaniraj and Gayathri (2004)
showed that the coefficients of permeability and consolidation of the compacted fly
ash are comparable to those of nonplastic silts. Trivedi and Singh, (2004) stated that
with increasing coarseness, the compression of coal ash closely resembles that of
sandy soils.
2.6 RHEOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF FLY ASH SLURRIES
Rheology is defined as the science of deformation and flow of matter (Boger, et al.,
2007). In practice, rheology stands for viscosity measurements, characterization of flow
behavior and determination of material structure. The hydraulic transportation of
mine tailings and backfill materials has emerged as an effective means of conveyance
26
Literature Review
in mining and mineral industries. The flow behaviour of these materials is dependent
on the properties of the particles and the carrier fluid (Streat, 1986). In case of fly ash
slurries, the determination of the rheological behaviour is essential for proper
evaluation of displacement pressure and flow rates for optimum fly ash placement
(Shah and Jeong, 2003). The major factors which affect the rheological properties of fly
ash slurry are the physico-chemical properties of the fly ash, solids concentration in
the slurry, temperature and shear rate (Sobota and Plewa, 2000; Streat, 1986). Rokita
and Tomaszewski, (1988) stated that the mixtures of fly ashes and water exhibit
different rheological properties depending on the volume concentration of fly ashes
(Φ). In small concentrations range (Φ < 0.15) the mixtures are Newtonian fluids and the
flow curves of mixtures satisfy Newton’s equation
du
τ=µ … (2.3)
dy
where,
τ = shearing stress,
µ = dynamic viscosity,
du/dy = velocity gradient,
They also observed that the dynamic viscosity of the slurry increases with an
increment in volumetric concentration of fly ashes. Over the higher concentrations
range (Φ > 0.15-0.20), the mixtures appear the characteristics of non-Newtonian fluids
and the flow curves satisfy well Bingham’s equation
du
τ = τ0 + µpl … (2.4)
dy
where,
τ0 = initial stress
µpl = coefficient of plasticity of the mixture.
27
Literature Review
Verkerk (1982) worked on the transportation of high concentration fly ash

slurries/pastes and found that these pastes exhibit distinct non-Newtonian properties
as the solids concentration increased above 70% by weight. Usui et al. (2001) from the
study on rheology and pipeline transportation of dense fly ash-water slurry containing
70 wt% of fly ash observed that the slurry show a shear-thinning behaviour which is
the behaviour of non-Newtonian fluid. Iyer and Stanmore (2000) stated that most
correlations of slurry rheology involve the volumetric packing fraction Φ as a
correlating parameter. According to them, the differences in rheological behaviour and
variation in maximum packing fraction is due to the surface chemistry of fine fly ash
particles. Olhero and Ferreira (2004) studied the effect of particle size distribution and
particle packing of silica suspensions on the rheological behaviour. Their results show
that the flow properties of the suspensions are strongly influenced by the particle size
distribution. They also found that the viscosity of suspensions increases with the
addition of fine particles. On the other hand, increasing the size ratio enhanced the
shear thinning character of the suspensions, while decreasing the size ratio led to an
accentuation of the shear thickening behaviour.
Shah and Jeong (2003) studied the effect of temperature on rheology of fly ash slurries.
They found that the rheology of fly ash slurries influenced by temperature and noticed
that the shear stress as well as viscosity values of fly ash slurry decreases at higher
temperature. Also, they opined that the rheological behaviour of fly ash slurries can be
described by a pseudo-plastic non-Newtonian power law fluid model. The rheological
properties of the fly ash slurry also depend on the fineness of the ash particles in the
slurry. Iyer and Stanmore (1999) from their study on the effect of water absorption and
role of fines on the yield stress of dense fly ash slurries concluded that the yield stress
of the dense fly ash slurries increases with the addition of maximum fines to the
original fly ash particles.
28
Literature Review
2.7 SUITABILITY OF FLY ASH FOR STOWING IN UNDERGROUND COAL MINES
The suitability of a particular material for stowing in the underground coal mines
depends on its availability, cost and the stowing system being employed (Karfakis et
al., 1996). The other parameters which are equally important are, particle size
distribution, permeability, abrasiveness, presence of carbonaceous materials, strength
and deformation characteristics, consolidation and shrinkage, compressibility, stability
and load bearing characteristics of overlying strata etc. Quality of fly ash/pond ash
plays a significant role for its effective utilization as a suitable stowing material.
Therefore, due care should be taken in maintaining the quality of the ash which
include, particle size, moisture content and vegetation, grass & roots. Proper collection
of ash samples plays an important role in maintaining the above mentioned qualities
(Ramanujam, 2005). Many researchers from their study found that the physical and
chemical characteristics of fly ash are suitable for stowing in underground mines,
backfilling, making of highway embankments and other geotechnical applications
(Bhattacharya and Banerjee, 1997; Gray and Lin, 1972; Toth et al., 1988). Some of the
properties which affect the suitability of fly ash for stowing in the underground coal
mines are discussed in this section.
2.7.1 Particle Size and Particle Morphology
It is desirable that the maximum particle size of the stowing material should be less
than 1/5th of the pipe diameter in order to limit the critical velocity of flow in pipeline
during its hydraulic transportation and prevent pipe blockage (Pandey and
Kumbhakar, 2007). It is already mentioned that fly ash is mainly composed of silt-
sized material having a diameter from 0.01-100 µm (Chang et al., 1977). According to
Ghosh et al. (2006) fly ash is 25% lighter than river sand and favourable for hydraulic
transportation through pipelines during stowing due to less head loss, less energy cost
and transportation cost. In other words, the energy consumption associated with fly
ash transportation will be less compared to sand transportation for the same volume
29
Literature Review
to be stowed below ground. Apart from this, they also reported that no elaborate
screening arrangement is required at the stowing plant. The fine particle sizing and
spherical particle shape of fly ash enhances mix flowability i.e. allowing them to flow
and blend freely in mixtures.
2.7.2 Settling and Drainage Characteristics
In hydraulic stowing, settling of stowed material and drainage of water through the
stowing material plays an important role. Ideally, the hydraulic fill should be free
draining and the water should readily drain out from the stowed area as quickly as
possible after stowing (Rankine and Sivakugan, 2005). Pandey and Kumbhakar (2007)
reported that the stowing material should settle within 30 minutes of stowing. It is
observed that fly ash, due to fineness in nature remains in suspension for a longer time
and settles very slowly after stowing which affects the drainage rate of water. From
the study it was observed that application of additives with the ash-water suspension
enhanced the settling of fly ash particle and facilitated quicker drainage of water after
stowing (Kumar et al., 2006; Ghosh et al., 2006; Prashant et al., 2006). Flocculants have
been applied in the gold mine industry to aid the dewatering of fill composed of
hydraulically stowed tailings slurry of 0.4-0.6 kg per litre solids concentration. It was
observed that the addition of flocculants effectively aid in dewatering (Moody, 1990).
From drainage point of view, pond ash readily allows water to percolate at a faster
rate as compared to fly ash due to coarser in particle size and as such it can be a better
alternative for stowing.
2.7.3 Chemical and Mineralogical Composition
It is already stated that fly ash primarily consists of SiO2, Al2O3 and Fe2O3. In addition
to that, fly ash also contains some amount of CaO or free lime. The presence of SiO2 in
abundance helps in improving the strength and consolidation characteristics of the fly
ash, whereas, the presence of free lime renders its pozzolanic characteristics. Since,
30
Literature Review
the principal mineralogical phases of fly ash are quartz, mullite, biotite, hematite,
magnetite, rutile etc., fly ash can be utilized in large scale in stowing of the coal mines
after extraction of coal, instead of a conventional filler like sand (Khanra et al., 1998).
2.7.4 Spontaneous Heating Characteristics
It is required that the material to be used for stowing in the underground coal mines
should be free from carbonaceous matter and should not prone to spontaneous
heating. The presence of carbonaceous matter causes auto oxidation and responsible
for generation of heat. The Directorate General of Mines Safety (DGMS) has
categorized the susceptibility of the stowing material to spontaneous heating with
respect to their crossing point temperature and moisture content. As per DGMS
circular (1994), the stowing material should have crossing point temperature more
than 160ºC and moisture content less than 2%. The proximate analysis of the pond ash
of thermal power station of Heavy Water Plant, Manuguru, Andhra Pradesh
conducted for stowing in underground coal mines revealed that the moisture, ash,
volatile matter and fixed carbon content are 0.2905%, 97.4655%, 1.6898% and 0.5542%
respectively. Therefore, the pond ash contains very negligible percentage of fixed
carbon as well as moisture content (< 2%) and safe to be used for stowing (Kumar et
al., 2003). From the crossing point temperature (CPT) and ignition point temperature
(IPT) analysis, it was also found that the ash samples did not reach the bath
temperature till 200ºC. This shows that fly ash and pond ash are not susceptible to
spontaneous heating and can be safely used as a stowing material in the underground
coal mines (Singh et al., 2005; Kumar et al., 2003).
2.7.5 Strength and Stability
Fly ash, due to pozzolanic in nature, forms cementitious compounds when reacts with
calcium hydroxide and alkali and increases the strength. Class C fly ash has higher
lime content than Class F ash and possesses higher cementitious properties and
31
Literature Review
therefore, it offers greater stability and load bearing characteristics after stowing.
Horiuchi et al. (2000) from their study on effective use of fly ash as fill material
concluded that coal fly ash reclaimed by slurry placement shows lower
compressibility, higher ground density and higher strength as compared to other
methods. Higher strength increases stability against liquifaction during earth quake.
According to them the higher stability of the fly ash ground formed by slurry
placement is caused by higher density and its self-hardening property. Pandey and
Kumbhakar (2007) reported that the compressibility of ash (15-20%) has been found to
be more than the allowable compaction for any stowing material (2.4-9.6%). Moreover,
the ash pack develops strength upon curing, within a short period of time and behaves
like a consolidated fill, unlike sand packs, which are unconsolidated and incapable of
attaining any strength. Such consolidated ash packs would, therefore, help strengthen
the in-situ coal pillar/stook and compensate for the high compressibility value. Finally
they opined that, from strata control point of view, ash pack would be better than sand
packs.
2.8 STATUS OF FLY ASH STOWING IN INDIA AND ABROAD
Selected literatures on fly ash stowing status in India and abroad are presented in the
following sections.
2.8.1 Status of Fly Ash Stowing in India
Fly ash stowing in India is totally a new concept for underground coal mining sectors.
Though, most of these fly ashes are land filled in the mine sites or disposed in specific
mounds it has not been widely used for stowing. The idea of using fly ash for mine
stowing in India came in the year 1994 (Rahman, 2005). The hydraulic fly ash (pond
ash) stowing has been done on a trail basis in two mines of Singareni Collieries
Company Ltd. (SCCL) and Western Coalfields Ltd. (WCL). It is also being practiced in
Swang Colliery of Central Coalfields Ltd. (CCL) (Pandey and Kumbhakar, 2007). As
reported by NTPC, Korba, they are in the process of utilizing fly ash for stowing in the
32
Literature Review
Balgi underground mine of South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. (SECL) at Korba area. In this
stowing activity, it is expected that about 3,000,000 tons of fly ash will be consumed.
The details of the fly ash stowing operation in the SCCL and WCL are outlined as
follows:
2.8.1.1 Fly ash stowing in SCCL
Fly ash (pond ash) stowing was done for the first time in India in the underground
mine PK-I of SCCL, Manuguru area on a trail basis, in which approximately 10, 000 m³
of pond ash was stowed in three phases. The pond ash from the nearby captive
thermal power station of Heavy Water Plant at Manuguru, Andhra Pradesh was used
for stowing. In the 1st phase around 280 m3 of pond ash was stowed at 43D/42LS out
bye of SP-1 panel of P. K. No.1 incline in the month of May, 2002. The pond ash-water
slurry was prepared at ratio of 1:1 and stowed at an average stowing rate of 105
m3/hr. In the 2nd phase, around 2,100 m3 of pond ash was stowed in 37D/43L
development gallery of the said mine in the same year. The stowing results in both the
phases were encouraging. After the 2nd phase stowing demonstration, the Phase-III
demonstration was undertaken in a working depillaring district with a quantity of
about 8,000 m3 to10, 000 m3 of pond ash instead of sand stowing during the year 2003
(Kumar et al. 2003). Based on the experience and knowledge gained at Manuguru area,
the same technology was replicated at GDK 6A incline of Ramagundam region. About
9, 000 m3 of ash from NTPC, Ramagundam was stowed and the stowing was found to
be satisfactory with encouraging results (Rao et al., 2005).
After the successful trials, the regular stowing of pond ash was undertaken in SQ.1
stowing district of P.K. No.1 incline (SCCL) during 2004-05 and about 12,685 m3 of ash
was stowed successfully. During stowing, the problems like escape of fines (less than
53-micron size) through the barricade, transportation of ash with vegetation from the
ash pond, pollution of sump water and soiling of coal in the working faces, etc. were
encountered and after that the stowing operation was discontinued (Rao et al., 2005).
33
Literature Review
2.8.1.2 Fly ash stowing in WCL
The trial of pond ash stowing at Durgapur Rayatwari Colliery (DRC) No.4 mine in the
Chandrapura area of WCL, was done in a successive phased manner. In this stowing
operation, about 5,000 m3 of pond ash from Chandrapura super thermal power station
of the Maharashtra State Electricity Board was stowed (Sanyal, 2002). The Phase 1
stowing started in the month of November, 2000 and about 2000 m3 of pond ash was
stowed in panel 16 and 30. In phase 2 trail, about 2500 m3 of pond ash was stowed in
panel 16A. In both the trials problems like escape of high percentage (8 to 10%) of fines
through the barricades with discharged water from the stowed area, improper mixing
of ash with water and delay in settling of fines were encountered. In order to solve the
problems faced in both the trails, about 3000 m3 of selected graineous pond ash was
stowed in phase 3 on March, 2002 and good results were found. From this trial it was
concluded that coarse-grained pond ash (plus 50 micron size) is best suited for mine
stowing and no additive is required for this kind of pond ash for quicker settling
(Rahman, 2005).
2.8.2 Status of Fly Ash Stowing in Abroad
Fly ash stowing in underground mines was first tried in April 1963 at Springfield
Colliery. In Poland, about 1 million cubic meter of fly ash is used every year in over 40
coal mines compared to 25.1 million cubic meters of sand consumption (Singh et al.,
2005). In Poland, the highest ash quantities are currently used in hard coal mining for
backfill and for filling mine voids. The ashes are directly transported to mine voids
hydraulically through pipelines (Sobota and Plewa, 2000). Bradecki (2001) described
the experience of filling goaf with fly ash in a Polish longwall mines. The method of
hydraulic insulation of goaf which was used is based on the forcing of fly ash slurry
into the decoaled area. The technology of feeding gobs with ash water slurry is based
on so called ‘system of dragged pipes’ in which the slurry is directly pumped into the
gobs from the collector, mounted at rear of a longwall support. In Hungary, the
34
Literature Review
hydraulic fly ash stowing was conducted in coal mines for decades on routine manner
where, the hydraulic transport pipelines starting from power plant to different coal
mines were used for supplying fly ash (Rai, 2001).
Chugh et al. (2002) had conducted a backfilling operation of mined-out areas from the
surface with gob, coal combustion by-products and fine coal processing waste based
paste backfill containing 65% - 70% solids to minimize short-term and long-term
surface deformation risk. A room-and-pillar panel of Crown III mine of Freeman
United Coal Company, Illinois, USA was chosen for the purpose. Two injection holes
were drilled over the demonstration panel to inject the paste backfill. Backfilling was
started on August 11, 1999 through the first borehole. About 9,293 tons of paste
backfill were injected through this borehole with a maximum distance of transport of
91 m underground. On September 27, 2000, backfilling operation was resumed
through the second borehole with a mixture of class F ash and FBC (fluidized bed
combustion) ash. About 6,000 tons of paste backfill were injected underground
through this hole. They successfully demonstrated that the extraction ratio can be
increased from the current value of approximately 56% to about 64%. They also
reported that mine openings do not have to be completely backfilled to enhance their
stability and a backfill height of about 50% of the seam height is adequate to minimize
surface deformations.
Fly ash slurry is also being treated as an excellent material for backfilling trenches and
filling underground facilities. Ramme et al. (1994) utilized flowable fly ash slurry for
filling underground facility construction and abandonment. They had used fly ash of
Port Washington Power Plant for making three mixtures added with some aggregates
like sand, 19 mm coarse aggregates and water. From the compressive strength test of
the prepared specimens they found that the compressive strength (0.27-0.43 MPa after
28 days) of the mixtures is quite comparable with many undisturbed or recompacted
soils and hence, suitable for backfilling.
35
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
3.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter highlights the methodology adopted and materials used during the
course of investigation. The main materials used in this study are fly ash and pond ash
samples collected from two thermal power stations of Orissa, India. The details of the
thermal power stations selected for sample collection are incorporated in this chapter.
Apart from fly ash and pond ash samples, some additives are also used, which are
added with the ash samples in some of the tests.
3.2 MATERIALS
The details about the materials used in the entire investigation are outlined in the
following sections.
3.2.1 Fly Ash and Pond Ash
Fly ash and pond ash samples are collected from two thermal power stations of the
eastern part of India namely, Talcher Thermal Power Station (TTPS) and Talcher Super
Thermal Power Station (TSTPS), Kaniha. The reasons for choosing these two power
stations for sample collection are enumerated as follows:
1. Both these power stations are situated near the underground coal mines of
Talcher area.
2. In recent years, these underground coal mines are facing acute scarcity of river
sand for stowing and in want of an alternative stowing material nearby at a
minimum cost.
3. The selected thermal power stations produce huge quantities of fly ash and
bottom ash which are sluiced together with water and sent to the ash ponds for
disposal.
Methodology
4. The ash ponds have already occupied a huge area of land which is a headache
for the power station authority.
5. The ash samples if found suitable for stowing, may help in solving the disposal
problem of the thermal power stations and the stowing problem of the nearby
coal mines.
3.2.1.1 Details of the thermal power stations selected for sample collection
Both the thermal power stations, TTPS and TSTPS, selected for ash collection are
subsidiaries of National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. (NTPC), India. These two
major power units of NTPC are situated in the Angul district of Orissa. Talcher
thermal and Kaniha are situated at distances of about 15 km and 60 km respectively
from Angul town. TSTPS, Kaniha is the largest power station of the country run by
NTPC. The details of the thermal power stations are given in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1 Details of Talcher thermal power station (TTPS) and Talcher super thermal
power station (TSTPS) (Source: NTPC, India)
Talcher Thermal Power Talcher Super Thermal Power Station

Details
Station (TTPS) (TSTPS), Kaniha
P.O. Talcher Thermal, P.O. Deepshikha (Kaniha),
Location
Dist. Angul, Orissa Dist. Angul, Orissa
Approved
460 MW 3000 MW
Capacity
Stage I : 1000 MW
Installed
460 MW Stage II : 2000 MW (Under
Capacity
construction)
4×60 MW
Unit Sizes 6×500 MW
2×110 MW
Jagannath Mines of MCL, Talcher Lingaraj Area of MCL,
Coal Source
Coal Field Talcher Coal Field
37
Methodology
3.2.1.2 Sample collection
3.2.1.2.1 Collection of fly ash and pond ash samples from TTPS
Total 6 numbers of ash samples are collected from TTPS, out of which 3 numbers are
fly ash, collected from the discharge point of 3 units of silos and 3 numbers of pond
ash collected from three nearby ash ponds. Grab sampling method is used for
collecting pond ash samples from the ash ponds. Each fly ash and pond ash sample
collected approximately in 50 kg by weight in plastic bags. The fly ash samples are
designated as Fly ash 1 (F1), Fly ash 2 (F2), Fly ash 3 (F3), similarly, the pond ash
samples are designated as Pond ash 1 (P1), Pond ash 2 (P2) and Pond ash 3 (P3). One
full truck of pond ash (P2) is transported from TTPS for conducting stowing operation
in the mine goaf model.
3.2.1.2.2 Collection of fly ash and pond ash samples from TSTPS
The fly ash and pond ash samples collected from TSTPS, Kaniha constitute total 10 in
numbers, out of which, 4 numbers are of fly ash samples and 6 numbers are of pond
ash samples. The fly ash samples are collected from two units, namely, Unit II and
Unit III. From each unit, 2 numbers of fly ash samples are collected, i.e. one from
hopper no. 2 and another from hopper no. 3. Pond ash samples are collected from two
ash ponds namely, Stage I and Stage II. Unit I and Unit II discharge ash into Stage I
ash pond, whereas, Unit III, Unit IV and Unit V discharge ash into Stage II ash pond.
From each ash pond, three pond ash samples are collected from three different
locations by grab sampling method. The detailed designation of the collected ash
samples are given in Table 3.2.
38
Methodology
Table 3.2 Designation of the collected fly ash and pond ash samples of TSTPS
Fly ash samples Pond ash samples

Sample collection points Sample ID Sample collection points Sample ID
Stage I
Unit II
Point 1 NP1
Hopper No. 2 NF1
Point 2 NP2
Hopper No. 3 NF2
Point 3 NP3
Stage II
Unit III
Point 1 NP4
Hopper No. 2 NF3
Point 2 NP5
Hopper No. 3 NF4
Point 3 NP6
The physico-chemical properties of the collected ash samples of both the thermal
power stations are presented in Chapter 4.
3.2.2 Additives
The details of the additives used with the fly ash and pond ash samples during the
investigation are given as follows:
3.2.2.1 River sand
To study the effect of sand addition on the permeability of fly ash-sand mixtures,
locally available river sand is used for the purpose of mixing with fly ash in different
proportions.
3.2.2.1.1 Physical properties of river sand
The physical properties of river sand such as bulk density, specific gravity, porosity,
particle size analysis and permeability are determined. The particle size analysis is
done by using standard mechanical sieves as per ASTM D422. The coefficient of
permeability is determined as per ASTM D2434 by using a constant-head
permeameter. The results of the physical properties of river sand are given in Table 3.3
and the particle size distribution curve is shown in Figure 3.1. From the particle size
distribution curve, the D60, D30 and D10 values are determined and the coefficient of
uniformity (CU) and coefficient of curvature (CC) are calculated as per the following
39
Methodology
formula and given in Table 3.3. Since, CU<6 and 1>CC, it is poorly graded sand (SP) as
per classification and gradation of soils by ASTM D 2487.
CU = D60 / D10 … (3.1)
and CC = (D30 × D30) / (D60 × D10) … (3.2)
Table 3.3 Physical properties of the river sand
Parameters Values
Specific gravity 2.58
Bulk density, g/cm3 1.70
Porosity, % 34.11
Coefficient of permeability, k (cm/sec) 0.484×10-1
Particle size distribution
D10 0.19 mm
D30 0.33 mm
D60 0.58 mm
Coefficient of Uniformity, CU 3.053
Coefficient of Curvature, CC 0.99
Sieve analysis of river sand

100
80
Percent finer
60
40
20
0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Particle size, mm
Figure 3.1 Particle size distribution curve of river sand
3.2.2.2 Flocculant
In this study carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) an anionic natural flocculant is used to

enhance the settling of the fly ash and pond ash particles and improve the drainage
rate of water from the stowed pond ash by adding to the pond ash slurries during
40
Methodology
stowing. CMC is an important industrial polymer with a wide range of applications in

flocculation and drag reduction. It is a derivative of cellulose and formed by its
reaction with sodium hydroxide and chloroacetic acid. It has a number of sodium
carboxymethyl groups (CH2COONa), introduced into the cellulose molecule, which
promote water solubility. The structure of CMC is shown in Figure 3.2. The most
important properties of CMC are viscosity building and flocculation. Among all the
polysaccharides, CMC is easily available and it is also very cheap (Biswal and Singh,
2004). Unlike many flocculants derived from natural products, it is relatively resistant
both to biological and hydrolytic degradation (Tripathy & De 2006).
Figure 3.2 Structure of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC)
3.2.2.3 Slack lime
Slack lime is used for mixing with pond ash before stowing, to observe the effect of
addition of lime on the consolidation properties of the stowed pond ash-lime mixture
samples.
3.3 METHODS
A number of experiments starting from the characterization study of the ash samples
to mine model study are conducted in order to assess the suitability of the fly ash and
pond ash for stowing in underground coal mines. The detailed experimental programs
41
Methodology
of the present investigation are systematically shown in the block diagram (Figure 3.3)
and outlined in the following sections.
Methodology
Sample collection
Study of suitability of fly ash and
pond ash for stowing
Characterization of fly ash and pond ash samples Study of engineering properties of ash samples
Physical Properties Chemical Characteristics Spontaneous Heating Settling characteristics

Characteristics of ash samples
Bulk density Chemical composition
by SEM Proximate analysis
Specific gravity Rheology of fly ash and
Crossing point pond ash slurries
Particle size analysis and Mineralogical composition
temperature (CPT)
particle morphology by XRD technique
analysis
Water holding capacity Loss on ignition (LOI)
pH of ash samples
Permeability test of ash Study of geotechnical properties of ash samples
samples
Compaction test
Permeability test of fly
Consolidation test of compacted ash samples
ash‐river sand mixtures
Model study: Pond ash stowing in mine goaf model
Stowing without flocculant Phase‐I/II stowing Stowing with flocculant
Observations
Percentage of drainage of water from the stowed mass
Percentage of absorption of water by the stowed mass
Percentage of stowing and percentage of void between
the stowed mass and roof
Consolidation test of stowed pond ash and
pond ash‐lime mixture
Results and discussion
Conclusions and recommendations
Figure 3.3 Block diagram of the followed methodology
3.3.1 Characterization of Fly Ash and Pond Ash Samples
The various characteristics of the collected ash samples of TTPS and TSTPS studied are
given as follows:
42
Methodology
3.3.1.1 Physical properties
The physical properties studied include determination of bulk density, specific gravity
(as per IS: 2386 (Part III)), porosity, particle size analysis (using Malvern 3601 particle
size analyzer and IS: 2720, Part-4), particle morphology (from SEM micrographs),
permeability (as per ASTM D-2434), water holding capacity (by Keen’s box method),
pH (as per ASTM D 5239) etc.
3.3.1.2 Chemical and mineralogical composition
After studying the physical properties, the chemical and mineralogical composition of
the ash samples are studied. The chemical composition (elements and element oxides)
of the collected ash samples are determined by scanning electron microscope (SEM),
whereas, the mineral phases present in the ash samples are identified by using the X-
ray diffraction (XRD) technique. The unburned carbon content of the ash samples are
determined by the loss on ignition (LOI) test as per ASTM C 311.
3.3.1.3 Spontaneous heating characteristics
The spontaneous heating characteristics of fly ash and pond ash samples of both the
power stations are studied by proximate analysis (as per IS: 1350, Part I) and crossing
point temperature (CPT) method. From the proximate analysis, various parameters
which are responsible for self heating like moisture content, volatile matter (VM)
content and fixed carbon content (FC) are determined.
The test procedures, instrumentation etc. of the above mentioned experiments are
described in brief in Chapter 4.
3.3.2 Engineering properties
Some of the engineering properties of fly ash and pond ash samples of TTPS like the
settling characteristic and the rheological behaviour are studied in depth. The settling
characteristic is studied by using jar test apparatus and CMC flocculant with the ash-
water suspensions and the detailed test procedure is given in Chapter 4. In rheological
43
Methodology
analysis, the apparent viscosity and flow behaviour of the fly ash and pond ash
slurries of six different concentrations are studied by Advanced Rheometer (Model:
AR 1000). The details of the rheological test procedure and the rheometer used are
covered in a separate Chapter 6.
3.3.3 Geotechnical Properties
The geotechnical properties like compaction and consolidation tests of the ash samples
of TTPS are studied. The compaction test is conducted as per IS: 2720 (Part 7), from
which, the maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of fly ash and pond
ash samples are determined. The consolidation test of compacted fly ash and pond ash
samples is carried out as per IS: 2720 (Part 15). The quantity of water equivalent to the
optimum moisture content (OMC) as determined from the compaction test is added to
the ash samples during compaction. The rate of settlement and consolidation of the
compacted ash samples are evaluated from the consolidation test. The detailed test
procedures are given in Chapter 5.
3.3.4 Model Study
The model study is conducted using a mine goaf model fabricated in the laboratory for
determining different stowing parameters. The objectives of this study are to find out
a suitable pond ash slurry concentration giving best stowing efficacy. Stowing with
pond ash slurries of five different concentrations are conducted in the model in two
phases. The parameters which are studied from the model study are outlined as
follows:
3.3.4.1 Determination of amount of drainage and absorption of water
In this study, the percentage of water drainage from the stowing and percentage of
water absorbed by the stowed pond ash are determined from stowing with each pond
ash slurry concentration. The effect of CMC flocculant on the drainage of water from
44
Methodology
stowing is also studied, by adding optimum flocculant dosages with pond ash slurries
during stowing.
3.3.4.2 Determination of amount of stowing and void
The volume percentage of stowing and void are determined after complete drainage
of water from the stowing with each pond ash slurry concentration.
The experimental procedures followed in the model study are given in details in
Chapter 7.
3.3.4.3 Consolidation test of stowed pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture
Finally, the consolidation test of the stowed pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture
samples is conducted to study their rate of consolidation and settlement under various
applied loads. Slack lime of 7% by weight of the total solid is added with the pond ash
to observe its effect on the consolidation characteristics of the pond ash-lime mixture.
A comparative study is made between the consolidation characteristics of the stowed
pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture samples. The detailed test procedure is
separately presented in Chapter 8.
45
CHAPTER 4
PHYSICO-CHEMICAL AND ENGINEERING PROPERTIES OF
FLY ASH AND POND ASH
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Characterization of fly ash and pond ash is of paramount importance in order to

classify them for engineering purposes (Pandian, 2004; Koukouzas et al., 2007).
Because of high variability in properties, the physico-chemical and engineering
properties of the ash samples must be evaluated for each project (Chugh et al., 2000).
This chapter presents the outcome of the study on physico-chemical, mineralogical
and engineering properties of the collected fly ash and pond ash samples of TTPS and
TSTPS to evaluate their suitability for stowing in the underground coal mines.
4.2 PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF FLY ASH AND POND ASH SAMPLES
4.2.1 Specific Gravity
The specific gravity of the fly ash and pond ash samples of both the power stations are
determined by using Water Pycnometer as per IS: 2386 (Part III), conforming ASTM
D854. With this method the specific gravity is calculated by the following formula:
D
Specific Gravity =
A − (B − C) … (4.1)
Where,
A = Wt. in gm. of saturated surface dry sample
B = Wt. in gm. of Pycnometer + sample + water
C = Wt. in gm. of Pycnometer + water
D = Wt. in gm. of oven dry sample

Physico-Chemical and Engineering Properties of Fly Ash and Pond Ash
The results of the specific gravity of the TTPS and TSTPS ash samples determined by
the above method are given in Table 4.1 and Table 4.2 respectively. The specific
gravity of fly ash and pond ash samples of TTPS varies from 2.14 – 2.17 and 2.00 – 2.15
respectively, whereas, for fly ash and pond ash samples of TSTPS it varies from 2.06 –
2.20 and 1.72 – 1.92 respectively. Comparatively, the average specific gravity of fly
ashes is more than the pond ash samples of both the power stations. The average
values of specific gravity of the fly ash samples of both the power stations are coming
equal. However, the specific gravity of TSTPS pond ash samples are lesser than that of
TTPS pond ash samples due to coarser in particle size.
Table 4.1 Specific gravity of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
Fly ash Pond ash

Ash samples
F1 F2 F3 P1 P2 P3
Specific gravity 2.17 2.14 2.15 2.15 2.00 2.14
Average specific gravity 2.15 2.10
Table 4.2 Specific gravity of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
Fly ash Pond ash

Ash samples
NF1 NF2 NF3 NF4 NP1 NP2 NP3 NP4 NP5 NP6
Specific gravity 2.20 2.06 2.16 2.18 1.77 1.80 1.72 1.76 1.92 1.80
Average specific gravity 2.15 1.80
4.2.2 Bulk Density
The bulk density of ash samples of TTPS and TSTPS are determined as per the
following formula and the results are given in Table 4.3 and Table 4.4 respectively. For
each sample four experiments are conducted and their average value is taken as the
bulk density.
Bulk Density (g/cm3) = Md / V … (4.2)
Where,
Md = Mass of dry ash sample (grams)
V = sample volume (cm3)
47
Table 4.3 Bulk density of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
Fly ash Pond ash

Ash samples
F1 F2 F3 P1 P2 P3
Bulk density, g/cm3 1.06 1.00 1.02 1.05 0.95 0.98
Average bulk density, g/cm3 1.03 0.99
Table 4.4 Bulk density of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
Fly ash Pond ash

Ash samples
Bulk density, g/cm3 1.24 1.23 1.16 1.20 1.03 1.02 1.01 1.04 1.14 1.06
Average bulk density,
1.21 1.05
g/cm3
From the results it is found that the bulk density of the fly ash samples of TTPS and
TSTPS ranges between 1.00 – 1.06 gm/cm3 and 1.16 – 1.24 gm/cm3 respectively,
whereas, in case of pond ash samples of TTPS and TSTPS it ranges between 0.95 – 1.05
gm/cm3 and 1.01 – 1.06 gm/cm3 respectively. Comparatively, the average bulk
density of fly ashes is found to be more than the pond ash samples of both the power
stations.
4.2.3 Porosity
The porosity of the ash samples of TTPS and TSTPS are calculated by using the
following formula and the results are given in Table 4.5 and Table 4.6 respectively.
Porosity (%) = (1 – Bulk density / Specific gravity) × 100 … (4.3)
Table 4.5 Porosity of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
Fly ash Pond ash

Ash samples
F1 F2 F3 P1 P2 P3
Porosity, % 51.15 53.27 52.56 51.16 52.50 54.21
Average Porosity, % 52.33 52.62
48
Table 4.6 Porosity of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
Fly ash Pond ash

Ash samples
Porosity, % 43.64 40.29 46.30 44.95 41.81 43.33 41.28 40.91 40.63 41.11
Average
43.79 41.51
porosity, %
The porosity of fly ash of TTPS and TSTPS varies between 51.15 – 53.27% and 40.29 –
46.30% respectively, whereas, in case of pond ash, it varies in the range of 51.16 –
54.21% and 40.63 – 43.33% respectively. The porosity of the TTPS fly ash and pond ash
samples are comparatively higher than the TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples.
4.2.4 Particle Size Analysis
The particle size analysis of the fly ash and pond ash samples of TTPS and only the fly
ash samples of TSTPS are performed by Malvern 3601 particle size analyzer, using the
wet dispersion method in water. This apparatus (Malvern 3601) is a laser diffraction
particle sizer which works on the principle of laser diffraction and utilizes photo-
sedimentation method. It measures the change of concentration by passing a beam of
light through the suspension. The particle analysis results are obtained in the form of a
histogram and cumulative percentage of size distribution. In addition, the other
parameters obtained include the following:
D (v, 0.5) : the size below which 50% particles lie, μm
Sp. Surf. Area : Specific surface area, m2/cc
Other parameters available from the particle size analysis are the surface/volume
mean diameter, D (3, 2) and the volume mean diameter, D (4, 3).
Since, the pond ash samples of TSTPS are much coarser in size and unable to disperse
in the water medium, their particle size analysis is carried out by sieve analysis as per
49
IS: 2720 Part-4 conforming ASTM D422. The results of the particle size analysis of
TTPS and TSTPS ash samples are given in Appendix A. The summarized results of the
particle size analysis of the TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples and TSTPS fly ash
samples are given in Table 4.7 and Table 4.8 respectively. The particle size distribution
curves of TTPS and TSTPS ash samples are shown in Figure 4.1 and Figure 4.2
respectively. From the results it is found that, the specific surface area of the fly ash
samples of TTPS and TSTPS varies in the range 0.5747-0.5845 m2/cc and 0.2714-0.5171
m2/cc respectively, whereas, in case of the TTPS pond ash samples it varies in the
range of 0.2435-0.3732 m2/cc.
Table 4.7 Results of the particle size analysis of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
Fly ash Pond ash

Parameters
F1 F2 F3 P1 P2 P3
D(v, 0.9) or D90, μm 30.77 30.08 28.70 64.06 74.26 83.94
D(v,0.5) or D50, μm 14.41 14.46 14.20 23.44 28.10 33.44
D(v,0.1) or D10, μm 4.57 4.69 4.64 6.93 8.74 10.28
D(4, 3), μm 16.47 16.32 15.85 28.18 35.17 41.83
D(3,2), μm 10.27 10.44 10.30 16.08 20.48 24.64
Specific Surface Area, m /cc. 0.5845
2 0.5747 0.5826 0.3732 0.2930 0.2435
D30 8.87 8.99 8.87 14.59 19.61 22.75
D60 18.35 18.58 18.57 26.35 34.04 45.17
Coefficient of Uniformity, CU 4.02 3.96 4.00 3.80 3.89 4.39
Coefficient of Curvature, CC 0.94 0.93 0.91 1.16 1.29 1.11
Table 4.8 Results of the particle size analysis of TSTPS fly ash samples
Fly ash
Parameters
NF1 NF2 NF3 NF4
D(v, 0.9) or D90, μm 66.71 35.82 105.27 66.20
D(v,0.5) or D50, μm 20.90 14.20 34.31 22.93
D(v,0.1) or D10, μm 5.99 5.70 8.50 7.15
D(4, 3), μm 27.82 17.30 45.23 29.32
D(3,2), μm 14.30 11.60 22.11 16.67
Specific Surface Area, m /cc. 0.4196 0.5171 0.2714 0.3600
2
D30 11.68 9.60 19.70 14.10

D60 27.24 17.12 46.04 28.75
Coefficient of Uniformity, CU 4.55 3.00 5.42 4.02
Coefficient of Curvature, CC 0.84 0.94 0.99 0.97
50
Particle size analysis of TTPS ash samples
Fly ash F1 Fly ash F2 Fly ash F3 Pond ash P1 Pond ash P2 Pond ash P3
100
90
80
70
Percent finer
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 10 100 1000
Particle size, μm
Figure 4.1 Particle size distribution curves of TTPS ash samples
Particle size analysis of TSTPS fly ash samples Sieve analysis of TSTPS pond ash samples
Fly ash, NF1 Fly ash, NF2 Fly ash, NF3 Fly ash, NF4
NP1 NP2 NP3 NP4 NP5 NP6
100
100
90
90
80
80
70 70
Percent finer
Percent finer
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0
0
1 10 100 1000 0.01 0.1 1 10
Particle size, μm Particle size, mm
(a) Fly ash samples (b) Pond ash samples

Figure 4.2 Particle size distribution curves of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
The particle size distribution curves of fly ash samples of TTPS show more or less
similar distribution patterns marked by the overlapping of the curves. Among the
TTPS fly ash samples, fly ash F2 is the coarsest of all having minimum specific surface
area and maximum mean particle diameter (D50 = 14.46 μm), whereas, pond ash P3 is
the coarsest and the pond ash P1 is the finest among the pond ash samples with mean
particle diameters (D50) of 33.44 μm and 23.44 μm respectively. The results of TSTPS
ash samples show that among the fly ash samples, fly ash NF3 is the coarsest and the
fly ash NF2 is the finest of all. Among the pond ash samples, pond ash NP1 is the
coarsest and NP3 is the finest. However, except pond ash NP1, all other pond ash
51
samples of TSTPS showed a similar particle size distribution pattern with no

significant variations.
The values of the D30 and D60 for each sample are determined from the particle size
distribution curves and the Coefficient of Uniformity (CU) and Coefficient of
Curvature (CC) are calculated by using the following formulae and the results are
given in the respective tables.
CU = D60 / D10 … (4.4)
and CC = (D30 × D30) / (D60 × D10) … (4.5)
In case of fly ash samples of both the power stations, since, CU<6 and 1>CC, it may be
concluded that the fly ash samples are poorly graded as per the classification and
gradation of soils by ASTM D 2487.
4.2.5 Particle Morphology
The particle morphology of the fly ash and pond ash samples of both the power
stations are analyzed from the micrographs obtained by JEOL JSM-5800 Scanning
Electron Microscope (SEM). The particle shape is quantified by using image analysis
and documented with micrographs. The micrographs in three magnifications e.g.
×500, ×1000 and ×1500 are acquired for each sample. The micrographs of TTPS fly ash
and pond ash samples in all three magnifications are shown in Figure 4.3 and Figure
4.4 respectively, whereas, the micrographs of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples in
one magnification (×1000) are shown in Figure 4.5 and Figure 4.6 respectively.
(a) Fly ash F1
52
(b) Fly ash F2
(c) Fly ash F3

Figure 4.3 Scanning electron micrographs of TTPS fly ash samples at ×500, ×1000 and
×1500 magnifications
(a) Pond ash P1
(b) Pond ash P2
53
(c) Pond ash P3

Figure 4.4 Scanning electron micrographs of TTPS pond ash samples at ×500, ×1000
and ×1500 magnifications
(a) Fly ash NF1 (b) Fly ash NF2
(c) Fly ash NF3 (d) Fly ash NF4

Figure 4.5 Scanning electron micrographs of TSTPS fly ash samples at ×1000
magnification
54
(a) Pond ash NP1 (b) Pond ash NP2
(c) Pond ash NP3 (d) Pond ash NP4
(e) Pond ash NP5 (f) Pond ash NP6

Figure 4.6 Scanning electron micrographs of TSTPS pond ash samples at ×1000
magnification
55
These micrographs reveal that the fly ash and pond ash particles of both the power
stations are almost spherical in shape and porous in nature with varying sizes. The
spherical ash particles with much brighter surface are identified as ‘cenospheres’
(Berry, 1985; Georgakopoulos, 2003). Comparatively, the pond ash particles of both the
power stations are coarser in size than the fly ash particles and having some
irregularly shaped particles. Agglomeration of fine particles and sticking of finer
particles to the coarser ones are noticed particularly in micrographs of the pond ash
samples. The pond ash particles of TSTPS are much coarser, highly irregular in shape
and porous in nature as compared to the TTPS pond ash particles.
4.2.6 Water Holding Capacity (WHC)
The WHC of the ash samples of TTPS and TSTPS are determined following Keen’s box
method. The Keen box is made of brass and approximately 5.0 cm in diameter and 1.6
cm in height. The weight of the keen box fitted with a filter paper is taken on a
physical balance. Thereafter, the box is packed with small quantities of air dried ash
sample and after each addition the box is tapped to ensure even packing till it is
completely filled up. The surplus sample is stroked off with a sharp blade or spatula to
bring the ash sample in the box in level with the top of the keen box. The box with the
air dried ash sample is weighed and placed in a tray containing distilled water to a
depth of 6 mm for overnight. After equilibrium is reached, the box is removed from
the tray and the excess water is drained out after placing the box on a table. The
outside of the box is wiped out with a dry towel and weighed forthwith. Thereafter,
the expanded portion of the sample above the box is chopped off with a sharp knife
into a previously weighed watch glass and the total weight with the surplus saturated
sample is taken. The weight of the keen box with the saturated residual ash sample is
taken. After that both the box and watch glass containing saturated ash sample is
dried in an oven at 105ºC to a constant weight. The maximum WHC is calculated by
using the following formula.
56
(W5 − W6 ) + (W4 − W7 )
Maximum water holding capacity =
(W6 − W1 ) + (W7 − W3 ) … (4.6)
Where,
W1 = Wt. of Keen box + filer paper
W2 = Wt. of Keen box + filter paper + ash sample
W3 = Wt. of moisture box
W4 = Wt. of moisture box + saturated scrap sample
W5 = Wt. of Keen box + filter paper + remaining sample
W6 = Wt. of Keen box + filter paper + oven dry sample
W7 = Wt. of moisture box + oven dry scraped sample
The results of the WHC of TTPS and TSTPS ash samples are given in Table 4.9 and
Table 4.10 respectively.
Table 4.9 Water holding capacity of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
Fly ash Pond ash

Ash samples
F1 F2 F3 P1 P2 P3
Water holding capacity, % 50.70 55.11 54.74 62.77 63.56 66.79
Mean water holding capacity, % 53.52 64.37
Table 4.10 Water holding capacity of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
Fly ash Pond ash

Ash samples
Water holding
35.05 34.97 36.13 35.89 59.83 60.67 54.87 53.84 50.10 54.07
capacity, %
Mean water
holding 35.51 55.56
capacity, %
The WHC of fly ash samples of TTPS and TSTPS varies from 50.70 - 55.11% and 34.97-
36.13% respectively, whereas, in case of pond ash samples it varies from 62.77–66.79%
57
and 50.10–60.67% respectively. Comparatively, both the fly ash and pond ash samples
of TTPS possess higher WHC than that of TSTPS. From the results it is clear that the
pond ash samples of both the power stations which are comparatively coarser in
particle size than the fly ash samples possess higher WHC. Thus, from the test it is
clear that water absorption is a function of particle size and the samples containing
higher amount of fine particles possess lesser water absorption (Iyer and Stanmore,
1999). Since pond ash possesses higher WHC as compared to fly ash, it will absorb
much quantity of water and allow less to drain out for pumping and assist in reducing
the pumping cost.
4.2.7 Permeability
4.2.7.1 Permeability of fly ash and pond ash samples
The permeability test of the ash samples is conducted as per ASTM D2434 by using a
constant-head permeameter. The coefficient of permeability (k) is calculated by
Darcy’s Law
Q× L
k= … (4.7)
t × hL × A
Where, k = Coefficient of permeability, cm/sec
Q = Discharge of water in time t
L = Length of flow, cm
t = Time of flow, sec
A = Cross-sectional area of specimen, cm2
hL = Constant head causing the flow, cm
The results of the permeability test of the ash samples of TTPS and TSTPS are
presented in Table 4.11 and Table 4.12 respectively. Figure 4.7 and Figure 4.8 show the
58
bar charts of the coefficient of permeability of TTPS and TSTPS ash samples
respectively.
Table 4.11 Results of the permeability test of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
Fly ash Pond ash

Ash samples
F1 F2 F3 P1 P2 P3
Coefficient of permeability,
1.3730 1.4964 1.4184 3.3507 5.5472 7.2272
k (cm/s) × 10-4
Average k (cm/s) × 10-4 1.4293 5.375
Table 4.12 Results of the permeability test of the TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
Ash Samples Coefficient of permeability, k (cm/sec) Average k (cm/s)

NF1 0.3810 × 10-4
NF2 0.2158 × 10-4
Fly ash 0.4268 × 10-4
NF3 0.6946 × 10-4
NF4 0.4157 × 10-4
NP1 0.1455 × 10-1
NP2 0.2610 × 10-1
NP3 0.0913 × 10-1
Pond ash 0.11 × 10-1
NP4 0.0569 × 10-1
NP5 0.0453 × 10-1
NP6 0.0600 × 10-1
F1 F2 F3 P1 P2 P3
8
7.2272
7
6 5.5472
k x 10‐4 (cm/s)
5
4 3.3507
3
2 1.373 1.4964 1.4184
1
0
F1 F2 F3 P1 P2 P3
Ash samples
Figure 4.7 Bar chart showing the coefficient of permeability of TTPS fly ash and pond
ash samples
59
0.8
0.6946 0.3
0.7
0.261
0.6 0.25
k x 10‐1 (cm/s)
k x 10‐4 (cm/s)
0.5 0.2
0.4157
0.381 0.1455
0.4 0.15
0.3 0.1 0.0913

0.2158
0.0569 0.06
0.2 0.0453
0.05
0.1
0
0 NP1 NP2 NP3 NP4 NP5 NP6
NF1 NF2 NF3 NF4
Pond ash samples
Fly ash samples

Figure 4.8 Bar charts showing the coefficient of permeability of TSTPS fly ash and
pond ash samples
The results of the permeability test of TTPS ash samples show that the coefficient of
permeability values of both fly ash and pond ash samples are of 10-4 cm/s range which
is very low and equivalent to the permeability of silts. However, the permeability of
the pond ash is higher as compared to fly ash samples due to coarser particle size. In
case of TTPS ash samples, fly ash (F1) and pond ash (P1) showed minimum
permeability values of 1.373×10-4 cm/s and 3.3507×10-4 cm/s respectively, whereas, fly
ash (F2) and pond ash (P3) showed maximum coefficient of permeability of 1.4964×10-4
cm/s and 7.2272×10-4 cm/s respectively. Among the fly ash samples of TSTPS, sample
NF2 possess the lowest (k = 0.2158 × 10-4 cm/s) and sample NF3 possess the highest (k
= 0.6946 × 10-4 cm/s) coefficient permeability. Like wise, sample NP5 and NP2 possess
the lowest and highest permeability of 0.0453 × 10-1 cm/s and 0.2610 × 10-1 cm/s
respectively among the pond ash samples. Comparatively, the permeability of TSTPS
pond ash samples is much higher than TTPS pond ash samples and equivalent to the
permeability of silty sand.
60
4.2.7.2 Permeability of river sand
The permeability of the river sand to be added with the fly ash in different proportions
is also determined by the constant head permeameter. From the permeability test, the
coefficient of permeability of river sand is found to be 0.484 × 10-1 cm/s.
4.2.7.3 Permeability of fly ash and river sand mixtures
It is already observed that the permeability of fly ash samples is very less and coming
under the range of silts. Therefore, experiments are also done to study the effect of
addition of sand on the permeability of the fly ash-sand mixtures and to determine a
suitable proportion of sand which gives highest permeability of the said mixture.
Since, the fly ash F1 is least permeable to water as studied from the permeability test
earlier, the same fly ash sample is chosen to be used in the ash-sand mixture. River
sand is added with fly ash F1 in different proportions, starting from 10% to 90% by
weight in a sequential increment of 10% and the coefficient of permeability of the fly
ash-sand mixtures is determined as per ASTM D2434 by using a constant-head
permeameter.
Table 4.13 Results of the permeability test fly ash-sand mixtures
Sand : Fly ash proportions

Coefficient of permeability, k (cm/s)
(% by weight)
0 : 100 1.3730 × 10-4
10 : 90 1.2623 × 10-4
20 : 80 1.2358 × 10-4
30 : 70 1.0961 × 10-4
40 : 60 0.8989 × 10-4
50 : 50 0.8419 × 10-4
60 : 40 0.7815 × 10-4
70 : 30 1.6437 × 10-4
80 : 20 2.9439 × 10-4
90 : 10 12.6477 × 10-4
100 : 0 0.484 × 10-1
61
Permeability of fly ash‐sand mixtures
14
Coefficient of permeability, k × 10‐4
12
10
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Proportion of sand in the fly ash‐sand mixtures (by wt. %)
Figure 4.9 Variation in coefficient of permeability with proportion of sand in the fly
ash-sand mixtures
The results of the permeability test of fly ash-sand mixtures are given in Table 4.13 and
the variation in the coefficient of permeability of fly ash-sand mixtures with
proportion of sand is shown in Figure 4.9. From the results it can be observed that the
coefficient of permeability of the fly ash-sand mixtures is gradually decreasing rather
than increasing by sequential addition of sand up to 60% by weight. Even, the values
are less than that of the permeability value of the fly ash sample itself in use.
Thereafter, the permeability of the mixtures increased exponentially with the
increment of sand proportion, and reached a highest value of 12.6477 × 10-4 cm/sec at
a sand proportion of 90% by weight. A similar kind of trend is observed in case of
sand and clay composites (Mahasneh and Shawabkeh, 2005). The possible reasons of
decrease in permeability of fly ash-sand mixtures after addition of sand are outlined as
follows:
a. A sand particle is impervious in nature by itself. But river sand, due to the
presence of sufficient number of inter particle voids, is highly permeable in
nature.
b. Fly ash is very fine in nature, contains some free lime (CaO) and thus possesses
cementitious properties. It fills the inter particle voids of the sand particles and
acts as a cementing material.
62
c. As the fly ash fills the pore spaces present in the sand, it closes the avenue for
the passage of water and decreases the permeability of the fly ash-sand
mixtures. The mixtures with varying sand proportions of up to 60% by weight
are fly ash dominated which contain sufficient amount of fly ash to fill the inter
particle voids in sand and causes decrease in permeability. Beyond that, the
mixtures become sand dominated with insufficient amount of fly ash to fill the
pore spaces and subsequently an increase in permeability is noticed.
4.2.8 pH of Fly Ash and Pond Ash Samples
The pH of the fly ash and pond ash samples of TTPS and TSTPS are determined as per
standard ASTM D5239 (Standard Practice for Characterizing Fly Ash for Use in Soil
Stabilization). In this test, 20 g of fly ash is added with 80 ml of distilled water to
maintain ash-water ratio of 1:4. The mixtures are stirred up with a stirrer to disperse
the fly ash and covered with a lid. The covered beakers are left undisturbed for 2 h
and then the pH is determined in accordance with Test Method ASTM D1293 by
keeping the samples in a pH meter for 10 minutes. For each sample 3 trials are carried
out and the average is taken as the pH value of the ash sample.
The results of the pH test of TTPS and TSTPS ash samples are given in Table 4.14 and
Table 4.15 respectively. The pH of fly ash samples of TTPS and TSTPS varies in the
range of 5.71-6.17 and 7.16-8.57 respectively, whereas, it ranges from 6.76-6.99 and
7.16-8.56 respectively in case of TTPS and TSTPS pond ash samples. From the results it
is observed that the pH values of TTPS ash samples are less than 7.00 which indicate
that the ash samples are slightly acidic in nature. However, the TSTPS ash samples are
alkaline in nature with pH values above 7.00. The reason of higher pH values shown by
the TSTPS ash samples may be due to the presence of higher free lime and alkaline
oxides in the ash samples (Pandian, 2004).
63
Table 4.14 Results of the pH test of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
Fly ash Pond ash

Ash samples
F1 F2 F3 P1 P2 P3
pH values 5.71 6.17 5.74 6.99 6.78 6.76
Average pH 5.87 6.84
Table 4.15 Results of the pH test of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
Fly ash Pond ash

Ash samples
pH values 7.16 7.79 7.58 8.57 7.62 7.16 7.56 7.52 8.56 7.94
Average pH 7.78 7.73
4.3 CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF FLY ASH AND POND ASH SAMPLES
4.3.1 Instrumentation
The chemical composition (major elements and their oxides) of the ash samples of
TTPS and TSTPS are determined from the quantitative analysis with the help of a
JEOL JSM-5800 Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM). The SEM with energy dispersive
X-ray microanalyser and an auto sputter coater operates on energy-dispersive X-ray
spectroscopy (EDXS) mode. Since the ash samples are non-conducting in nature, they
are coated with gold to make them conducting by BIO-RAD E-5200 coating unit.
4.3.2 Results and Discussion
The elemental composition of the TTPS and TSTPS ash samples determined from SEM
are presented in Table 4.16 and Table 4.18 respectively and the chemical compositions
(element oxides) of TTPS and TSTPS ash samples are given in Table 4.17 and Table
4.19 respectively. The unburned carbon content of the ash samples which could not be
determined by SEM is determined as loss on ignition (LOI) and incorporated in the
next section. The results show that all the fly ash and pond ash samples of both the
power stations show a relatively similar chemical composition. They are abundant in
Si and Al, and have minor concentrations of Fe, Ca, Mg, Mn, K, Ti and P. In the ash
samples, the elements present in decreasing order of their abundance are O, Si, Al, Fe,
64
Ti, K, Ca, P and Mg. Elements in little amounts like Mn, Cr, Ni and Cu are also
identified in some of the ash samples.
Table 4.16 Elemental composition of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
Element % (By mass)

Elements Fly ash Pond ash
F1 F2 F3 P1 P2 P3
Si 28.16 28.80 27.91 28.02 28.91 27.99
Al 16.49 16.45 17.16 16.77 16.13 16.56
Fe 3.00 1.89 2.49 2.11 2.26 2.48
Ti 1.45 1.24 1.33 1.59 1.31 1.54
Ca 0.55 0.44 0.68 0.65 0.51 0.61
Mg 0.06 0.13 0.11 0.21 - -
K 0.79 0.88 0.61 0.69 0.75 0.63
P 0.04 0.28 0.09 0.27 0.28 0.24
Mn - - - - - 0.41
O 49.47 49.89 49.61 49.69 49.85 49.53
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100
Table 4.17 Chemical composition (element oxides) of TTPS fly ash and pond ash
samples
Compound % (By mass)

Compounds Fly ash Pond ash
F1 F2 F3 P1 P2 P3
SiO2 60.23 61.61 59.71 59.94 61.85 59.89
Al2O3 31.15 31.08 32.42 31.69 30.48 31.30
Fe2O3 4.29 2.70 3.56 3.01 3.23 3.54
SiO2 + Al2O3 + Fe2O3 95.67 95.39 95.69 94.64 95.56 94.73
TiO2 2.42 2.07 2.21 2.66 2.19 2.57
CaO 0.76 0.61 0.95 0.91 0.72 0.85
MgO 0.10 0.22 0.18 0.35 - -
K2O 0.96 1.06 0.74 0.84 0.90 0.76
P2O5 0.09 0.64 0.22 0.61 0.64 0.56
MnO - - - - - 0.53
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100
65
Table 4.18 Elemental composition of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
Element % (By mass)

Elements Fly ash Pond ash
Si 29.12 28.11 29.54 27.86 28.84 28.49 27.13 27.37 28.89 29.08
Al 14.56 14.36 13.44 14.69 13.28 15.39 13.45 13.00 15.31 14.43
Fe 3.61 5.10 4.06 3.91 3.43 3.62 7.54 8.79 3.59 4.08
Ti 0.58 1.03 0.83 1.20 1.16 1.42 1.61 1.06 0.87 0.76
Ca 0.79 0.78 0.54 1.26 1.03 1.04 1.06 1.02 1.15 0.68
Mg 0.06 0.27 0.64 0.84 0.56 0.05 - - 0.40 -
K 1.73 1.38 1.38 1.55 1.67 - 1.06 0.92 - 2.07
Mn - - - - 0.24 0.70 0.25 - 0.31 -
Cr 0.05 0.36 0.52 - 0.10 - - - - -
Ni 0.55 - - - - - - - - -
Cu - - - - 1.23 - - - - -
O 48.95 48.61 49.06 48.67 48.46 49.30 47.90 47.83 49.47 48.91
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
Table 4.19 Chemical composition (element oxides) of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash
samples
Compound %
Compounds Fly ash Pond ash
SiO2 62.30 60.13 63.20 59.61 61.69 60.94 58.03 58.55 61.80 62.20
Al2O3 27.51 27.13 25.39 27.76 25.09 29.07 25.41 24.56 28.93 27.26
Fe2O3 5.16 7.29 5.80 5.59 4.91 5.18 10.78 12.57 5.14 5.83
SiO2 + Al2O3 +
94.97 94.55 94.39 92.96 91.69 95.19 94.22 95.68 95.87 95.29
Fe2O3
TiO2 0.96 1.71 1.38 2.01 1.94 2.36 2.69 1.77 1.46 1.26
CaO 1.10 1.09 0.75 1.76 1.44 1.45 1.49 1.43 1.61 0.95
MgO 0.10 0.45 1.06 1.40 0.94 0.09 - - 0.66 -
K2O 2.08 1.67 1.67 1.87 2.02 - 1.28 1.11 - 2.50
MnO - - - - 0.31 0.90 0.32 - 0.40 -
Cr2O3 0.08 0.53 0.76 - 0.15 - - - - -
NiO 0.70 - - - - - - - -
CuO - - - - 1.53 - - - - -
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
The results of the chemical composition (element oxides) show that the ash samples of
both the power stations are enriched predominantly with silica (SiO2) and alumina
66
(Al2O3). They mainly contain higher amounts of silica (SiO2), alumina (Al2O3) and
lower amounts of iron oxide (Fe2O3), TiO2, K2O, CaO and MgO. The rest compounds
are present in minor concentrations in most of the ash samples. In the fly ash samples
of TTPS and TSTPS, SiO2 ranges from 59.71-61.61% and 59.61-63.20%, Al2O3 ranges
from 31.08-32.42% and 25.39-27.76%, Fe2O3 ranges from 2.70-4.29% and 5.16-7.29%,
and CaO ranges from 0.61-0.95% and 0.75-1.76% respectively. In case of pond ash
samples of TTPS and TSTPS, SiO2 ranges from 59.89-61.85% and 58.03-62.20%, Al2O3
ranges from 30.48-31.69% and 24.56-29.07%, Fe2O3 ranges from 3.01-3.54% and 4.91-
12.57%, and CaO ranges from 0.72-0.91% and 0.95-1.61% respectively. In all fly ash and
pond ash samples of both the power stations, the sum total of SiO2, Al2O3 and Fe2O3
accounts for more than 90% of the total composition. In case of TTPS and TSTPS fly
ash samples, it varies from 95.39-95.69% and 92.96-94.97% respectively, whereas, in
case of TTPS and TSTPS pond ash samples it varies from 94.64-95.56% and 91.69-
95.87% respectively.
The presence of SiO2 in abundance (around 60% of the total composition) in all the ash
samples, may help in increasing the strength of the stowing material and offer more
load bearing capacity to take the load of the overlying strata after stowing. Due to the
presence of little amount of free lime (CaO) content (< 1% in TTPS and < 2% in TSTPS
ash samples); the ash samples possess very negligible pozzolanic or cementing
properties. Comparatively, the pond ash samples of TSTPS contain higher amount of
CaO than TTPS pond ash samples, and hence they are more pozzolanic in nature.
Presence of higher amount of CaO in ash samples helps in improving the strength of
the stowed pond ash and from that point of view, TSTPS pond ash is better as
compared to TTPS pond ash for stowing.
4.4 UNBURNED CARBON CONTENT OF FLY ASH AND POND ASH SAMPLES
The loss on ignition (LOI) which is a measure of unburned carbon content present in
the fly ash and pond ash samples is determined as per the ASTM C 311 (standardized
67
for fly ash and natural pozzolans). The loss on ignition of the TTPS and TSTPS ash
samples are given in Table 4.20 and Table 4.21 respectively.
Table 4.20 Loss on ignition of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
Fly ash Pond ash

Ash samples
F1 F2 F3 P1 P2 P3
Loss on ignition, % 0.52 0.56 0.47 0.61 1.27 1.47
Average LOI, % 0.52 1.12
Table 4.21 Loss on ignition of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
Fly ash Pond ash

Ash samples
Loss on ignition, % 0.32 0.60 0.37 0.38 0.32 0.51 0.52 0.72 0.58 0.61
Average LOI, % 0.42 0.54
The LOI values of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples vary from 0.47% to 0.56% and
0.61% to 1.47% respectively. In case of TSTPS ash samples, the LOI values vary in the
range of 0.32% to 0.60% and 0.32% to 0.72% for fly ash and pond ash samples
respectively. Among the fly ashes, fly ash F2 of TTPS and fly ash NF2 of TSTPS possess
highest amount of unburned carbon content. Like wise, pond ash samples P3 and NP4
of TTPS and TSTPS respectively possess highest amount of unburned carbon.
Comparatively, the ash samples of TTPS which showed higher values of LOI than
TSTPS contain higher amounts of unburned carbon. This indicates that the combustion
process of the pulverized coal of TSTPS is much efficient than that of TTPS. The pond
ash samples of both the power stations possess higher amount of unburned carbon as
compared to the fly ash samples.
4.5 CLASSIFICATION OF ASH SAMPLES
Based on the chemical composition, the ash samples of both the thermal power
stations are classified in accordance with the ASTM C-618 specifications. Since the sum
total of SiO2, Al2O3 and Fe2O3 is greater than 70% and the LOI is less than 6% in all fly
ash and pond ash samples, according to the standard ASTM C-618, the ash samples of
TTPS and TSTPS are classified as Class F.
68
4.6 MINERALOGICAL COMPOSITION OF FLY ASH AND POND ASH SAMPLES
The mineral phases present in the collected fly ash and pond ash samples of both the
thermal power plants are identify by X-Ray Diffraction (XRD) technique. The various
phases and minerals associated with the ash samples are found out from their
diffractograms obtained from the diffractometer.
The X-ray diffraction patterns of the ash samples are collected by a Philips X'Pert
diffractometer (Model: PW 1710), operated at 40 kV and 30 mA and utilizing Cu Kα
radiation (λ = 1.542 Å). The detector is scanned over a scattering angle (2θ) range from
10° to 70°, at a scanning speed of 0.05° step size and a dwell time of 2 s per step. From
the resulting powder diffraction patterns the crystalline phases are identified by
comparing the peak positions and intensities with those in the JCPDS (Joint
Committee on Powder Diffraction Standards) data files.
The XRD patterns of both the fly ash and pond ash samples of TTPS are shown in
Figure 4.10, whereas, the XRD patterns of the fly ash and pond ash samples of TSTPS
are shown in Figure 4.11 and Figure 4.12 respectively. It is clear from the
diffractograms that all the fly ash and pond ash samples of both the power stations
revealed almost similar diffraction patterns. The peaks associated with characteristic
minerals are matched by the JCPDS file and the mineral phases identified are labeled
above the respective peaks. The XRD patterns of the fly ash and pond ash samples
displayed peaks basically due to quartz (SiO2), mullite (Al6Si2O13) and some heavy
minerals of iron oxides like magnetite (Fe3O4) and hematite (Fe2O3) which occur in
crystalline form. The most common phases and minerals found in these ashes include
quartz and mullite.
69
Quartz, that can be considered as primary mineral is present in all ash samples and
indicated by sharp peaks in the diffraction patterns. In all the ash samples, the most
intense peak near 2θ = 26.66° is identified as the main peak due to quartz (101). It is
also found that mullite or the aluminosilicate mineral is present in all the ash samples
and the peak near 2θ = 26.40° is identified as mullite. The peaks near 2θ = 16.4° are also
identified as mullite and according to Sarkar et al. (2006) these peaks are due to
refractory mullite. Along with the aluminosilicate mineral, the concurrence of strong
peaks close to 2θ = 26.50° indicates quartz. Presence of heavy minerals like magnetite
and hematite is indicated by their respective peaks near 35.4° and 33.2°.
3000 Fly ash F1 3500 Fly ash F2

Q Q
3000
2500
Intensity (a.u.) 2500

2000
Intensity (a.u.)
2000
1500
1500
M
Q
1000
H M
M HH 1000 Q H
M
M Ma Q Q M HH M
500
M
M M Q M M Ma Q Q Q
M Q M M M M
500 M Q
0 0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
2θ (degrees) 2θ (degrees)
(a) Fly ash F1 (b) Fly ash F2

4000 4000
Fly ash F3 Pond ash P1
3500 3500
26.6
Q
3000 3000
Q
Intensity (a.u.)
2500
Intensity (a.u.)
2500
2000
2000
1500
1500
M
20.85
Q M
1000 Q H
16.4
1000 M H M H
H H H
35.25
40.8
Ma QM Q
33.2
Ma QM Q
60.65
42.45
MM
50.05
Q
30.9
MM M M M
45.75
68.1
54.05
M M Q M 500 M Q
64.4
57.5
500 M Q
0
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
(c) Fly ash F3 (d) Pond ash P1
70
4000 4000
Pond ash P2 Pond ash P3
3500
3500
26.55
3000 Q
3000
Q
2500
Intensity (a.u.)
2500
Intensity (a.u.)
2000
2000
1500
1500
M M
20.8
1000 Q H Q
HH 1000
16.4
M M M H
40.8
M Ma Q Q HH
35.2
33.2
50.1
MQ
42.45
M M M Q M M Ma Q
60.6
30.9
68.05
500 Q
57.45
M M M M Q M
64.5
54.8
500
M Q
0
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
2θ (degrees)
2θ (degrees)
(e) Pond ash P2 (f) Pond ash P3
Figure 4.10 X-ray diffraction patterns of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
3000
2200 Fly ash NF2
Fly ash NF1 Q
Q
2000
2500
1800
1600
2000
Intensity (a.u.)
Intensity (a.u.)
1400
1500 1200 M
M
1000 Q
Q H
M H
1000 H
M HH 800 H Ma M
M Ma M M Q Q
Q Q 600 M M M M
M Q M Q M Q
M M
500 M Q
400
200
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
3000
Fly ash NF3 Fly ash NF4
Q 3000 Q
2500
2500
2000
Intensity (a.u.)
2000
Intensity (a.u.)
1500
M 1500
M
Q Q
1000 H
M H
H 1000 M HH H
Ma MQ
M
M Q M M Ma QMQ
M M Q
500 M Q M M M Q M
500 M Q
0
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
(c) Fly ash NF3 (d) Fly ash NF4
Figure 4.11 X-ray diffraction patterns of TSTPS fly ash samples
71
2500 2500
Pond ash NP1 Pond ash NP2
Q
Q
2000 2000
Intensity (a.u.)
Intensity (a.u.)
1500 1500
M M
1000 Q 1000
Q
M H HH H
HH M M
MM
Ma Q M M M Ma Q Q Q M Q
M Q Q M Q 500
M M
M
500 M M
0 0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
(a) Pond ash NP1 (b) Pond ash NP2

3000
Pond ash NP3 Pond ash NP4
2500 Q
Q
2500
2000
2000
Intensity (a.u.)
Intensity (a.u.)
1500 1500
M
M
Q
Q 1000
1000 HH H
H M
M HH M Ma QMQ
Ma Q MQ Q M Q M
MM M M M M Q
M M Q
500 M
500
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
(c) Pond ash NP3 (d) Pond ash NP4

Pond ash NP5 Q Pond ash NP6
3000 Q 2500
2500
2000
2000
Intensity (a.u.)
Intensity (a.u.)
1500 M
1500
M
Q 1000 Q
H
1000 M HH Q
Ma M
M HH H
MM Q Q
M Ma QMQ Q M M M M
M
Q
M M
M M Q 500
500
0 0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Figure 4.12 X-ray diffraction patterns of TSTPS pond ash samples
72
4.7 SPONTANEOUS HEATING CHARACTERISTICS OF FLY ASH AND POND ASH

SAMPLES
It is essential to study the spontaneous heating characteristics of fly ash and pond ash
for their utilization as a stowing material in the underground coal mines. Here, the
spontaneous heating characteristics of the ash samples of TTPS and TSTPS are
assessed by conducting proximate analysis and crossing point temperature (CPT) test.
4.7.1 Proximate Analysis
The proximate analysis is carried out as per the Indian standard specification IS: 1350
(Part I) to determine the moisture, volatile matter (VM), ash and fixed carbon content
of the fly ash and pond ash samples. The test standard is in accordance with the
testing standards of coal in which approximately 1 g of -70 mesh size of fly ash/pond
ash sample is taken for each analysis. Moisture content is determined by heating the
air dried ash sample in an oven at 108 ± 2°C for one hour. The VM content is
determined by heating the sample at 900 ± 10°C for seven minutes. Moisture content is
subtracted to get the volatile matter content of the ash samples. Ash content is
determined by heating the sample at 815 ± 10°C for one hour or till it attained constant
weight. The fixed carbon (FC) is estimated by deducting the sum total of moisture %,
VM %, and ash % from 100. Three repetitions are made for studying each parameter
and their average is taken as the final value. The results of the proximate analysis of
TTPS and TSTPS ash samples are given in Table 4.22 and Table 4.23 respectively.
Table 4.22 Results of the proximate analysis of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
Proximate Fly Ash Pond Ash

Analysis F1 F2 F3 P1 P2 P3
Moisture % 0.22 0.24 0.35 0.40 0.43 0.79
VM % 0.69 0.41 0.45 0.44 0.73 0.94
Ash % 97.51 98.07 98.80 99.01 97.32 97.77
Fixed Carbon % 1.58 1.28 0.40 0.15 1.52 0.50
73
Table 4.23 Results of the proximate analysis of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
Proximate Fly Ash Pond Ash

Analysis NF1 NF2 NF3 NF4 NP1 NP2 NP3 NP4 NP5 NP6
Moisture % 0.24 0.19 0.26 0.32 0.23 0.22 0.25 0.17 0.20 0.21
VM % 0.41 0.72 0.05 0.34 0.40 0.22 0.90 0.36 0.32 0.32
Ash % 99.20 99.05 98.92 99.11 99.29 99.24 98.00 98.61 99.05 98.99
Fixed Carbon
0.15 0.04 0.77 0.23 0.08 0.32 0.85 0.86 0.43 0.48
%
The results show that the ash samples of both the power stations are predominantly
enriched with ash content (> 90%), with very less amount of moisture, volatile matter
(VM) and fixed carbon content, which are the major parameters responsible for self
heating. The moisture content in case of TTPS and TSTPS fly ash samples varies from
0.22–0.35% and 0.19–0.32% respectively, whereas, in case of pond ash samples it varies
from 0.4–0.79 and 0.17–0.25% respectively. The VM content of fly ash samples of TTPS
and TSTPS varies in the range of 0.41–0.69% and 0.05–0.72% respectively, whereas, in
case of pond ash samples it varies in the range of 0.44–0.94% and 0.22–0.90%
respectively. Similarly, the fixed carbon content of fly ash samples of TTPS and TSTPS
varies in the range of 0.4–1.58% and 0.04–0.77% respectively and in case of pond ash
samples it varies from 0.15–1.52% and 0.08–0.86% respectively. Like LOI,
comparatively, most of the ash samples of TTPS contain higher percentage of fixed
carbon than TSTPS ash samples. Since, the carbon content of the ash samples of both
the power stations is very negligible and their moisture content is less than 2%, as per
the Directorate General of Mines Safety (DGMS), India they are not liable to
spontaneous heating and can be safely used as a stowing material in underground coal
mines (DGMS Circular).
4.7.2 Crossing Point Temperature (CPT) Test
CPT is the lowest temperature at which the sample temperature coincides with that of
the furnace. The apparatus proposed by Ramlu (1985) is used and the test procedure
74
outlined by him is followed for determining the CPT of the ash samples. For the test
ash sample (-100 +200 mesh) of 4 g in weight is placed in the reaction tube.
Air/Oxygen is supplied to the reaction tube at a flow rate of 80 ml/min by keeping a
liquid column difference of 5.4 cm in the manometer. Thereafter, the furnace heating
device is switched on and a heating rate of 1ºC/min is maintained by using a variac.
The temperature reading of the furnace and the ash sample is taken at an interval of 5
minutes till their temperatures coincide with two or three extra readings. Finally, the
CPT curve is drawn by plotting the furnace and sample temperatures against time.
The results of the CPT test of TTPS and TSTPS ash samples are given in Appendix A.
The CPT curves of TTPS fly ash (F1 and F2) and pond ash samples (P1 and P2) are
shown in Figure 4.13. Similarly, the CPT curves of fly ash (NF1, NF2 and NF3) and
pond ash (NP1, NP2 and NP3) samples of TSTPS are shown in Figure 4.14. From the
results it is observed that no ash sample could reach the furnace temperature till
heating up to a temperature of 200ºC. At no time neither the furnace temperature nor
the ash temperature matched or crossed each other. During the test, a minimum
difference of 1ºC and maximum difference of 4ºC is noticed between the furnace and
ash temperatures. From the CPT curves it can be seen that both the furnace and ash
temperature lines run parallel and no where they cross each other within the
maximum testing temperature of 200ºC. This suggests that the samples are not prone
to spontaneous heating and can be safely utilized as a stowing material in the
underground coal mines.
75
CPT curve of fly ash F1 CPT curve of fly ash F2
Furnace temp. Ash temp. Furnace temp. Ash temp.
220 220
200 200
180 180
160 160
Temperature, 0C
Temperature, 0C
140 140
120 120
100 100
80 80
60 60
40 40
20 20
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Time (min) Time (min)
(a) Fly ash F1 (b) Fly ash F2

CPT curve of pond ash P1 CPT curve of pond ash P2
220 220
200 200
180 180
160 160
Temperature, 0C
Temperature, 0C
140 140
120 120
100 100
80 80
60 60
40 40
20 20
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
(c) Pond ash P1 (d) Pond ash P2

Figure 4.13 Crossing point temperature (CPT) curves of TTPS fly ash and pond ash
samples
76
CPT curve of fly ash NF1 CPT curve of fly ash NF2
220 220
200 200
180 180
160 160
Temperature, 0C
Temperature, 0C
140 140
120 120
100 100
80 80
60 60
40 40
20 20
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

CPT curve of fly ash NF3 CPT curve of pond ash NP1
220 220
200 200
180 180
160 160
Temperature, 0C
140 Temperature, 0C 140

120 120
100 100
80 80
60 60
40 40
20 20
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
(c) Fly ash NF3 (d) Pond ash NP1

CPT curve of pond ash NP2 CPT curve of pond ash NP3
220 220
200 200
180 180
160 160
Temperature, 0C
Temperature, 0C
140 140
120 120
100 100
80 80
60 60
40 40
20 20
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

Figure 4.14 Crossing point temperature (CPT) curves of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash
samples
77
4.8 SETTLING CHARACTERISTICS OF FLY ASH AND POND ASH SAMPLES
In hydraulic stowing, particularly in fly ash/pond ash stowing, the settling

characteristic of the stowing material plays an important role. Quicker settling of the
stowing material facilitates in quicker solid-liquid separation and faster water
drainage from the stowed mass and prevents build up of hydrostatic pressure behind
the barricade. On the other hand, poor settling prolongs the stowing cycles, helps in
escape of fines and produces mucks in the coal face and the stowed mass remains in
slurry position for a longer duration. It is observed that fly ash particles due to its
fineness in nature remain a longer time in suspension and settle very slowly after
stowing. The settling characteristics of the fly ash and pond ash samples of TTPS are
studied by using carboxymethyl Cellulose (CMC) flocculant with the ash-water
suspension. This test is intended to simulate the flocculation process in the hydraulic
pond ash stowing in mines.
The details of the apparatus used for the study of the settling characteristics of the fly
ash and pond ash samples are given as follows:
4.8.1.1 Jar test apparatus
The settling of the pond ash is studied by using a standard flocculation jar test
apparatus (Figure 4.15) equipped with speed control arrangement. The apparatus
consists of six stirrer blades connected to a variable-speed motor through gear system.
The requirement of the variable rotation speed of the stirrers on the jar test apparatus
is that, a fast speed is used during flocculant addition and slow speeds for the
flocculation phase (Bratby, 2006). It is mounted on the top of a floc illuminator base
consisting of fluorescent tube mounted below translucent plastic plate. The illuminator
provides the diffused cold light needed for a clear visual inspection of the flocs
produced during the jar test.
78
Figure 4.15 Jar test apparatus
4.8.1.2 Turbidity meter
The turbidity of the supernatant solution is measured by Orion AQUAfast II Turbidity

Meter (Model AQ2010) manufactured by Thermo Scientific, USA. The Orion
AQUAfast II Turbidity system operates on the nephelometric principle of
measurement. The photodetector is set at 90° to light scattered by the sample and the
light source is an 875 nm LED. It gives results directly in NTU (Nephelometric
Turbidity Units) and can measure the turbidity from 0.1 to 2000 NTU.
4.8.2 Experimental Procedure
The experimental work is carried out in two steps. First, the settling characteristic of
the ash samples is studied without adding flocculant with the ash-water suspension.
In the next step the same test is repeated with adding different dosages of CMC
flocculant with the ash-water suspension of all ash samples. The purposes of adding
flocculant are to enhance the settling of the suspended pond ash particles in a water
medium and to determine the optimum dosage of flocculant giving minimum
supernatant turbidity value of the suspension.
79
4.8.2.1 Preparation of stock solution
First the stock solution of Carboxymethyl Cellulose (CMC) flocculant is prepared in a

500 ml conical flask by adding 0.1 g of CMC with 200 ml distilled water and stirring by
means of a magnetic stirrer till all the flocculant became soluble in water. Then the
volume of the flocculant solution is adjusted to 1000 ml by adding the required
quantity of water to prepare a stock solution of 10-4 g/ml concentration. The polymer
dosages in terms of ‘ppm’ (parts per million) are then calculated with respect to the
suspension volume used. In the present study, the polymer dosages in range of 0.5 to
15 ppm are used.
4.8.2.2 Flocculation jar test procedure
In jar test, 40 grams of pond ash sample is taken in six identical jars of 600 ml capacity
and added with 400 ml of distilled water to prepare an ash-water suspension of 10%
by weight. The suspensions are stirred using a glass rod to make them uniform and
allowed for conditioning for one hour before performing the jar test. Thereafter, the
jars containing the ash-water suspensions are placed on the flocculator bench dipping
the stirrer blades in the suspensions and charged simultaneously with six different
doses of the flocculant of 10-4 g/ml concentration under slow stirring condition.
Thereafter, the suspensions treated with flocculant are stirred at a high speed of 75
rpm for 2 minutes to form a homogeneous ash-water suspension followed by a slow
stirring at 25 rpm for 5 minutes (Karmakar, 1998). The flocs developed during slow
stirring are allowed to settle down for 5 minutes. At the end of the settling period, test
samples are drawn from a depth of 1 cm from the jars and the turbidity of the
supernatant liquid is measured at 5 minutes intervals up to 30 minutes.
4.8.3.1 Settling characteristics of ash samples without adding flocculant
The results of the settling test of the TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples without
adding flocculant are given in Table 4.24.
80
Table 4.24 Results of the settling test of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples without
adding flocculant
Settling Time
Ash samples 5 min 10 min 15 min 20 min 25 min 30 min
Turbidity in NTU
F1 467 420 359 256 236 216
F2 627 527 390 325 300 248
F3 242 196 172 123 110 80
P1 1716 1612 1487 1452 1237 1012
P2 1410 1362 1306 1093 1070 980
P3 997 933 917 885 835 823
The results show that the ash-water suspension containing fly ash F2 and F3 showed a
highest and lowest turbidity values respectively, whereas, among the pond ash
samples, the suspension of pond ash P1 and P3 respectively showed highest and lowest
turbidity values at all settling times. The reason behind the variation in turbidity
values may be due to variation in particle sizes and pH values of ash samples. The
suspension containing pond ash P1 which possess finest particle size and highest pH
values showed highest turbidity. Similarly the suspension of pond ash P3 with coarsest
particle size and lowest pH values showed lowest turbidity values. Since, there is no
much variation in the particle sizes of the fly ash samples, the variation in the results
may be due to the differences in their pH values.
4.8.3.2 Settling characteristics of ash samples added with flocculant
The results of the settling test of fly ash and pond ash samples added with various
dosages of CMC flocculant are given in Table 4.25 to Table 4.30 and the variation in
turbidity of the ash-water suspension with flocculant dosages are shown in Figure
4.16.
81
Table 4.25 Results of the settling test of fly ash F1 added with various dosages of
flocculant
Flocculant Settling Time

Dosages 5 min 10 min 15 min 20 min 25 min 30 min
(ppm) Turbidity in NTU
0 467 420 359 256 236 216
0.5 94 66 58 40 30 24
1 35 20 19.3 15.2 14.7 10.4
2 17.1 11.1 9.5 8.9 8.3 7.3
3 10.6 9.8 9.2 8.5 6.0 5.2
4 7.9 6.0 4.6 4.0 3.8 3.0
5 5.9 5.2 4.4 3.6 3.3 2.9
6 6.5 6.1 5.5 4.7 4.5 4.0
8 7.3 6.8 5.9 5.3 4.7 4.1
10 7.8 7.0 6.3 5.8 5.4 4.7
12 8.7 8.3 7.4 6.4 5.9 5.6
15 9.6 9.1 8.5 7.6 7.1 5.8
flocculant

0 627 527 390 325 300 248
0.5 176 165 146 119 99 87
1 121 110 91 79 69 58
2 37 26 21 19 17.7 14.6
3 31 24 19.6 18.5 17.4 13.9
4 23 21 18.1 17.7 16.1 13.1
5 18.6 16.5 12.8 11.7 9.1 7.8
6 16.4 10.8 9.5 7.8 5.9 5.3
8 12.9 10.0 8.4 6.2 4.4 4.1
10 5.8 4.9 4.7 3.5 3.3 2.8
12 9.9 7.3 5.2 4.4 4.1 4.0
15 10.6 7.9 5.6 4.7 4.5 4.1
82
flocculant

0 242 196 172 123 110 80
0.5 117 76 63 58 44 31
1 83 57 42 35 33 20
2 56 34 26 24 18 13.8
3 33 25 21 18.2 17.8 11.9
4 26 18.7 17.6 15.3 13.1 9.1
5 19.1 16.5 15.6 14.3 12.2 8.6
6 11.9 8.7 7.0 6.2 5.0 4.3
8 11.6 6.1 5.3 5.1 4.8 3.3
10 11.8 8.2 6.5 5.8 4.9 4.1
12 12.9 9.1 7.4 6.3 5.5 4.7
Table 4.28 Results of the settling test of pond ash P1 added with various dosages of
flocculant

0 1716 1612 1487 1452 1237 1012
0.5 263 242 229 218 214 210
1 149 126 122 116 106 101
2 97 51 48 46 44 41
3 27 24 22 21 20 19
4 32 31 30 28 24 21
5 34 33 30 29 28 26
6 35 33 32 30 28 27
8 36 34 33 31 29 27
10 40 37 36 34 33 28
12 59 52 48 46 45 41
15 110 106 99 98 96 93
83
flocculant

0 1410 1362 1306 1093 1070 980
0.5 260 204 198 190 182 171
1 183 174 139 134 125 115
2 40 33 27 25 22 21
3 32 27 22 21 20 20
4 27 22 20 19 18 18
5 19.9 19.3 18.7 18.3 17.9 17.7
6 30 26 22 21 19 18
8 34 29 26 22 21 20
10 35 30 28 26 25 24
12 41 34 31 29 27 26
flocculant

0 997 933 917 885 835 823
0.5 147 109 82 71 59 50
1 37 29 19.6 19.0 17.9 16.0
2 11.9 10.3 9.2 6.8 6.2 5.2
3 10.8 9.7 7.1 6.5 6.1 4.9
4 6.8 5.9 5.5 4.8 4.5 4.1
5 5.7 5.1 4.8 4.4 4.2 3.6
6 16.3 13.6 12.5 11.6 10.8 10.3
8 17.7 13.7 12.8 12.3 11.3 10.9
10 21.0 19.8 19.5 18.7 18.4 18.2
12 23 21 20 19.6 19.2 18.9
15 29 27 25 24 24 23
84
Settling characteristics of fly ash F1 Settling characteristics of fly ash F2
1000 1000
5 minute 5 minute
10 minute 10 minute
15 minute 15 minute
20 minute 20 minute
Turbidity, NTU
100
Turbidity, NTU
100
25 minute 25 minute
30 minute 30 minute
10 10
1 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Flocculant dosage, ppm Flocculant dosage, ppm
Settling characteristics of fly ash F3 Settling characteristics of pond ash P1
1000
5 minute 5 minute
1000 10 minute
10 minute
15 minute
15 minute 20 minute
20 minute 25 minute
Turbidity, NTU
100
Turbidity, NTU
25 minute 30 minute
100
30 minute
10
10
1
1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Settling characteristics of pond ash P2 Settling characteristics of pond ash P3
1000
5 minute 5 minute
1000
10 minute 10 minute
15 minute 15 minute
20 minute 20 minute
Turbidity, NTU
100
Turbidity, NTU
25 minute 25 minute
100
30 minute 30 minute
10 10
1
1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Figure 4.16 Variation in turbidity values of ash-water suspension with flocculant

dosages at different settling times for TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
From the results it can be observed that the settling characteristics of the fly ash and
pond ash samples drastically enhanced by the addition of flocculant. The flocculant
dosages which gives lowest turbidity values of the ash-water suspensions are
considered as the ‘optimum flocculant dosages’ and shown in bold. In case of fly ash
samples, F1, F2 and F3 the optimum flocculant dosages are 5 ppm, 10 ppm and 8 ppm
85
respectively, whereas, in case of pond ash samples P1, P2 and P3, the optimum dosages
are 3 ppm, 5 ppm and 5 ppm respectively. At optimum dosages, the turbidity values
of the suspensions containing fly ashes F1, F2 and F3 reduced to 5.9 NTU, 5.8 NTU and
11.6 NTU from their original values (without flocculant) of 467 NTU, 627 NTU and 242
NTU respectively after a settling time of 5 minutes. Similarly, at optimum dosages, the
turbidity values of the suspensions containing pond ashes P1, P2 and P3 reduced to 27
NTU, 19.9 NTU and 5.7 NTU from their original values (without flocculant) of 1716
NTU, 1410 NTU and 997 NTU respectively after a settling time of 5 minutes. It is also
observed that the turbidity of the ash-water suspensions at all flocculant dosages
decreases with settling time. In most of the cases, at optimum flocculant dosages,
almost all ash particles settle down after a settling time of 30 minutes, which could be
marked from the very minimal turbidity values and the extent of clarity of the
suspensions. Therefore, the CMC flocculant has a tremendous effect on the
enhancement of the settling of the fly ash and pond ash particles in water medium.
86
CHAPTER 5
GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES OF FLY ASH AND
POND ASH
5.1 INTRODUCTION
The material used for stowing should compact and consolidate enough to offer
resistance to the load arising due to convergence/caving of the over lying roof strata.
Therefore, the compaction and consolidation characteristics of the stowing material
should be studied in details beforehand to ensure its reliability in bearing the load of
the superincumbent strata. Proper compaction of fly ash increases its load-bearing
capacity, reduces settling, swelling and contraction and improves the stability. The
extent of compaction depends on the moisture content of the fly ash and the applied
load. The study of consolidation characteristics is extremely useful for forecasting the
magnitude and time rate of settlement of the stowed ash under various applied loads.
In this chapter, the geotechnical properties like the compaction and consolidation
behavior of fly ash and pond ash samples of TTPS are studied in details.
5.2 COMPACTION TEST OF FLY ASH AND POND ASH SAMPLES
5.2.1 Determination of Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content
A light weight compaction test of fly ash (F1) and pond ash (P1) samples of Talcher
Thermal Power Station (TTPS) is carried out as per Indian Standard IS: 2720 (Part 7)
confirming ASTM D698 by using a standard Proctor mold of 10 cm in diameter, 12.7
cm in height and 1000 cm3 in volume. A standard compaction load is applied to the
moist fly ash and pond ash samples with varied moisture contents. The moisture
content of the samples is varied from 20% to 40% with 5% increment so that the
moisture at which the highest dry density is achieved will be considered as the
optimum moisture content. The wet density in gm/cm3 of the compacted ash sample
is computed by dividing the wet mass by the volume of the mold used (1000 cm3).
Geotechnical Properties of Fly Ash and Pond Ash
Thereafter, using the values of wet density and the water content, the dry density is
calculated from the following formula:
ρd =
ρ
1+ w … (5.1)
where,
w = moisture content in percent divided by 100, and
ρ = wet density in grams per cm3.
A dry density versus moisture content plot is drawn by taking the dry density values
on the y-axis and the moisture contents on the x-axis. From the plot, the moisture
content corresponding to the maximum dray density is referred as the optimum
moisture content (OMC).
5.3 CONSOLIDATION TEST OF COMPACTED ASH SAMPLES
One-dimensional consolidation test of the compacted fly ash and pond ash samples of
TTPS is conducted as per Indian standard procedure IS: 2720 (Part 15) conforming
ASTM D2435 (test method for one-dimensional consolidation properties of soils) by
using a fixed ring consolidometer to determine their time rate of settlement with
increment of load. For compaction, the fly ash and pond ash samples are added with
water equivalent to their optimum moisture content as determined from the standard
compaction test.
The arrangement for consolidation test is shown in Figure 5.1, in which three fixed-
ring consolidometers in a row are attached with LVDT (in some cases dial gauges are
also used) to measure the vertical displacement of sample for the applied load.
88
Figure 5.1 Image of the consolidation testing machine
5.3.2 Preparation of Sample for Consolidation Test
a) The fly ash and pond ash samples are mixed thoroughly in a tray with water
equivalent to their respective optimum moisture content (OMC) as determined
from the compaction test.
b) Thereafter, the moist ash samples are compacted in the proctor mold in three
layers as per IS: 2720 (Part 7).
c) After compaction, the undisturbed compacted sample is drawn into the

consolidation ring by pressing the ring into the compacted ash with the help of
a jack.
d) Then the compacted core of ash sample along with the consolidation ring is
removed from the mold by a sample extruder, trimmed properly by a straight
edge to make the both faces smooth and the ring is cleaned from outside for
weighing.
5.3.3 Determination of Coefficient of Consolidation
Consolidation test of the compacted fly ash and pond ash samples are carried out
under step-increasing load, and each step is maintained for 24 h. After proper
89
assembly of the consolidometer with ash sample and proper positioning of the
LVDT/dial gauge to measure the vertical compression of the specimen, an initial
seating load of 0.5 kg/cm2 is applied for 24 h and the final dial reading is noted.
Thereafter, the first load of intensity 0.1 kg/cm2 is applied and the dial gauge readings
at various time intervals (in minutes) are recorded in the following sequence.
0, 0.25, 1, 2.25, 4, 6.25, 9, 12.25, 16, 20.25, 25, 36, 49, 64, 81, 100 and 1440 (24 h)
The next load is applied after 24 h of the previous load, maintaining a load increment
ratio of 1.0 until the maximum load of 3.2 kg/cm2 is reached. In each load increment,
the specimen deformations are recorded maintaining the same time sequence as
before. After applying the last load of 3.2 kg/cm2, the specimen is oven dried and its
dry weight is noted down. The coefficient of consolidation (Cv) is calculated by the
square root of time fitting method (Taylor’s method) in which the t vs. compression
data for each load are plotted to determine the value of t90. The value of t90 which
represents the time for 90% consolidation is taken for calculating Cv as per the
following formula:
( Hav )
2
0.848
Cv = 2
t90 … (5.2)
Where,
t90 = Time corresponding to 90% consolidation, min
Hav = Average height of specimen (cm) and it may be calculated by the following
equation:
(ΔH i + ΔH i −1 )
Hav = Hi -
2 … (5.3)
Where,
Hi = Initial height of the specimen (2.00 cm)
90
ΔH i = Change in sample height at end of the load
ΔH i −1 = Change in sample height at end of the preceding load
5.3.4 Determination of Void Ratio
The void ratio of the compacted ash samples for each load increment is calculated by
using the following formula:
H
e= -1
Hs … (5.4)
Where,
H = Specimen height, cm
Hs = Computed/equivalent height of solids (cm) and calculated as follows:
Ws
Hs =
Gs γ w A … (5.5)
Where,
Ws = Oven dry wt. of the specimen, gm
Gs = Sp. Gravity of the specimen
γ w = density of water (taken as 1.00)
A = cross-sectional area of the ring, cm2
5.4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
5.4.1 Compaction Test
The moisture content and dry density of TTPS fly ash (F1) and pond ash (P1) samples
determined from the proctor compaction test are given in Table 5.1. The moisture-
91
density curves for fly ash and pond ash samples are plotted from these values and
shown in Figure 5.2.
Table 5.1 Moisture content and dry density of TTPS fly ash (F1) and pond ash (P1)
samples determined from the proctor compaction test
Fly ash F1 Pond ash P1

Sample
Moisture content, Dry density, Moisture content, Dry density,
No.
% g/cm3 % g/cm3
1 20.61 1.07 20.44 0.97
2 24.79 1.10 25.64 0.99
3 30.09 1.12 29.49 1.01
4 34.25 1.15 34.97 1.09
5 40.12 1.09 40.07 1.04
Moisture‐density relationship for fly ash F1 Moisture‐density relationship for pond ash P1
1.16 1.1
1.08
Dry density, g/cm3
Dry density, g/cm3
1.14
1.06
1.12 1.04
1.1 1.02
1
1.08
0.98
1.06 0.96
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Moisture content, % Water content, %
Figure 5.2 Moisture-density relationships of fly ash (F1) and pond ash (P1) samples
From these curves it is found that the maximum dry density of fly ash is 1.15 g/cm3
and the corresponding moisture (optimum moisture) content is 34.25 %. Whereas, in
case of pond ash, the maximum dry density found out is 1.09 g/cm3 and the optimum
moisture content is 34.97 %. Therefore, a very less difference in the optimum moisture
content and dry density values of fly ash and pond ash samples are noticed.
Comparatively, fly ash sample showed lower optimum moisture content and higher
dry density than the pond ash sample due to finer in particle size.
92
5.4.2 Consolidation Test
The results of the specimen measurements of the compacted ash samples made during
the consolidation test are presented in Table 5.2. The time-compression data obtained
from the consolidation test and the dial gauge reading vs. t graphs for each load
increment of compacted fly ash and pond ash samples are given in Appendix B. The
graphs are used to determine the value of t90 which represents the time for 90%
consolidation for a particular applied load. The value of t90 is used to calculate the Cv
values as per the formula given in equation 5.2. The computation sheets for e and Cv of
the fly ash and pond ash samples are given in Table 5.3 to Table 5.8.
Table 5.2 Specimen measurements during the consolidation test of TTPS ash samples
Fly Ash Pond Ash

Specimen measurements
F1 F2 F3 P1 P2 P3
Diameter, D (cm) 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00
π D2
Area, A = , cm2 28.274 28.274 28.274 28.274 28.274 28.274
4
Thickness (Initial height), Hi, cm 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
Sp. Gravity of specimen, Gs 2.15 2.17 2.14 2.15 2.00 2.14
Wt. of consolidation ring (W1), g 154.72 143.66 160.35 154.72 143.66 160.35
Wt. of ring + specimen at beginning
247.82 224.28 247.96 246.03 217.22 237.65
of test (W2), g
Wt. of specimen, (W3) = W2 – W1, g 93.10 80.62 87.61 91.31 73.56 77.30
Oven dry wt. of specimen + ring
227.10 206.21 228.08 225.22 200.53 220.23
(W4), g
Oven dry wt. of specimen (Ws) = W4
72.38 62.55 67.73 70.50 56.87 59.88
– W1 , g
Computed/equivalent height of
1.19 1.02 1.12 1.16 1.01 0.99
solids (Hs), cm
Initial height of voids (Hv), cm 0.81 0.98 0.88 0.84 0.99 1.01
Initial void ratio, ei 0.681 0.961 0.786 0.724 0.98 1.02
93
Table 5.3 Computation sheet for e and Cv of fly ash F1
Change
Applied
Initial Final in Specimen
load, Void
dial dial sample height, Hav t90 Cv
p ratio,
reading reading height, H (cm) (min) (cm /min)
2
(kg/cm2) e
(mm) (mm) ∆H (cm)
(cm)
0 0 0 0 2.00 0.681 - - -
0.1 5.830 5.746 0.0084 1.9916 0.674 1.9958 127.69 0.0132
0.2 5.746 5.626 0.0204 1.9796 0.664 1.9856 108.16 0.0155
0.4 5.626 5.467 0.0363 1.9637 0.650 1.9717 77.44 0.0213
0.8 5.467 5.275 0.0555 1.9445 0.634 1.9541 67.24 0.0241
1.6 5.275 5.064 0.0766 1.9234 0.616 1.9340 28.09 0.0565
3.2 5.064 4.838 0.0992 1.9008 0.597 1.9121 25.0 0.062
Change
Applied
load, Void
p ratio,
reading reading height, H (cm) (min) (cm2/min)
(kg/cm2) e
(mm) (mm) ∆H (cm)
(cm)
0 0 0 0 2.00 0.961 - - -
0.1 5.526 5.474 0.0052 1.9948 0.956 1.9974 16.81 0.1006
0.2 5.474 5.400 0.0126 1.9874 0.948 1.9911 32.49 0.0517
0.4 5.400 5.261 0.0265 1.9735 0.935 1.9805 88.36 0.0188
0.8 5.261 5.062 0.0464 1.9536 0.915 1.9636 82.81 0.0197
1.6 5.062 4.857 0.0669 1.9331 0.895 1.9434 60.84 0.0263
3.2 4.857 4.631 0.0895 1.9105 0.873 1.9218 26.01 0.0602
94
Change
Applied
load, Void
p ratio,
2
(kg/cm2) e
(mm) (mm) ∆H (cm)
(cm)
0 0 0 0 2.00 0.786 - - -
0.1 5.645 5.570 0.0075 1.9925 0.779 1.9963 31.36 0.0539
0.2 5.570 5.446 0.0199 1.9801 0.768 1.9863 25.0 0.0669
0.4 5.446 5.305 0.0340 1.9660 0.755 1.9731 21.16 0.078
0.8 5.305 5.186 0.0459 1.9541 0.745 1.9601 20.25 0.0804
1.6 5.186 5.012 0.0633 1.9367 0.729 1.9454 14.44 0.1111
3.2 5.012 4.823 0.0822 1.9178 0.712 1.9273 10.56 0.1491
Table 5.6 Computation sheet for e and Cv of pond ash P1
Change
Applied Initial Final in Specimen
Void
load, dial dial sample height, Hav t90 Cv
ratio,
p reading reading height, H (cm) (min) (cm /min)
2
e
(kg/cm ) (mm)
2 (mm) ∆H (cm)
(cm)
0 0 0 0 2.00 0.724 - - -
0.1 5.110 5.025 0.0085 1.9915 0.717 1.9958 26.01 0.0649
0.2 5.025 4.917 0.0193 1.9807 0.708 1.9861 27.56 0.0607
0.4 4.917 4.762 0.0348 1.9652 0.694 1.9730 54.76 0.0301
0.8 4.762 4.604 0.0506 1.9494 0.681 1.9573 60.06 0.027
1.6 4.604 4.392 0.0718 1.9282 0.662 1.9388 24.01 0.0664
3.2 4.392 4.130 0.098 1.902 0.640 1.9151 24.01 0.0648
95
Change
Applied
load, Void
p ratio,
2
(kg/cm2) e
(mm) (mm) ∆H (cm)
(cm)
0 0 0 0 2.00 0.980 - - -
0.1 6.000 5.967 0.0033 1.9967 0.977 1.9984 22.09 0.0767
0.2 5.967 5.856 0.0144 1.9856 0.966 1.9912 23.04 0.073
0.4 5.856 5.694 0.0306 1.9694 0.950 1.9775 34.81 0.0476
0.8 5.694 5.524 0.0476 1.9524 0.933 1.9609 56.25 0.029
1.6 5.524 5.298 0.0702 1.9298 0.911 1.9411 26.01 0.0614
3.2 5.298 5.002 0.0998 1.9002 0.881 1.915 20.25 0.0768
Change
Applied
load, Void
p ratio,
2
(kg/cm2) e
(mm) (mm) ∆H (cm)
(cm)
0 0 0 0 2.00 1.02 - - -
0.1 4.955 4.861 0.0094 1.9906 1.011 1.9953 23.04 0.0733
0.2 4.861 4.778 0.0177 1.9823 1.002 1.9865 36.0 0.0465
0.4 4.778 4.688 0.0267 1.9733 0.993 1.9778 38.44 0.0431
0.8 4.688 4.575 0.038 1.9620 0.982 1.9677 14.44 0.1137
1.6 4.575 4.383 0.0572 1.9428 0.962 1.9524 10.24 0.1578
3.2 4.383 4.109 0.0846 1.9154 0.935 1.9291 17.64 0.0894
5.4.2.1 Void ratio (e)
The load vs. void ratio curves (commonly referred as compression curves) of the fly
ash and pond ash samples are show in Figure 5.3.
96
Fly ash, F1 Fly ash, F2 Fly ash, F3 Pond ash, P1 Pond ash, P2 Pond ash, P3

1.2 1.2
1 1
0.8 0.8
Void ratio, e
Void ratio, e
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4
Load (kg/cm2) Load (kg/cm2)

Figure 5.3 Load vs. void ratio curves of compacted fly ash and pond ash samples of
TTPS
From the compression curves it is found that the void ratio of the fly ash and pond ash
samples decreases with increment of load. Comparatively, pond ash has got higher
void ratio than fly ash samples which may be due to coarser particle size of pond ash.
This represents that the compressibility of fly ash is less as compared to pond ash
(Pandian, 2004). Due to higher void ratio, pond ash will allow water to drain out at a
faster rate after hydraulic pond ash stowing. It is definitely a positive sign of pond ash
to be used as a stowing material. It is also noticed that the ash samples (F2 and P3)
having coarser particle size possess higher void ratio as compared to those having
finer particle size. The void ratio values in case of the rest ash samples showed a
similar relationship with their particle sizes.
5.4.2.2 Rate of consolidation and settlement
The load vs. Cv curves for fly ash and pond ash samples are shown in Figure 5.4. The
consolidation test results of the compacted fly ash samples show that the Cv values are
increasing with increment of load in case fly ash F1 and F3. In case of fly ash F2, the Cv
values are decreasing at the first instance up to a load increment of 0.4 kg/cm2 and
thereafter, it is increasing with increment of loads. This may be due to the initial
squeezing or closing of the pores and thereafter attaining the load bearing capacity of
97
the saturated fly ash (devoid of pores) with the increment of load. The increase in Cv
values with load increments indicates a faster rate of settlement of the ash samples at
higher applied loads which can be marked by lower t90 values.
Load vs. CV curves of fly ash samples Load vs. CV curves of pond ash samples
Fly ash, F1 Fly ash, F2 Fly ash, F3 Pond ash, P1 Pond ash, P2 Pond ash, P3
0.16 0.18
Coefficient of consolidation, CV
0.14 0.16
0.12 0.14
0.12
0.1
(cm2/min)
(cm2/min)
0.1
0.08
0.08
0.06
0.06
0.04 0.04
0.02 0.02
0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4

Figure 5.4 Load vs. Cv curves of compacted fly ash and pond ash samples of TTPS
A similar decreasing trend in Cv values at the first instance are noticed in case of
consolidation test of compacted pond ash samples. An initial decrease in Cv values up
to a load of 0.4 kg/cm2 is found in case of pond ash P3, whereas, in case of pond ash P1
and P2 a decreasing trend is noticed up to a load increment of 0.8 kg/cm2. Thereafter,
the Cv values increased with increment of load in case of pond ash P2, whereas, in case
of P1 and P3, the Cv values again decreased at the highest applied load of 3.2 kg/cm2.
Therefore, the time rate of settlement is comparatively slower at lower applied loads
like 0.2, 0.4 and 0.8 kg/cm2 as noticed in most of the cases. Comparatively, the
compacted pond ash samples showed a higher Cv values than fly ash samples which
indicates the rate of settlement of pond ash is faster. This represents that the pond ash
samples possess a better load bearing characteristics as compared to fly ash and
therefore, they are more suitable for stowing.
98
CHAPTER 6
RHEOLOGY OF FLY ASH AND POND ASH SLURRIES
6.1 INTRODUCTION
The study of rheological behaviour of fly ash and pond ash slurry is very much
important for determining their flow behaviour. In addition to the nature of the flow
(Newtonian or non-Newtonian), it gives an idea about the change in stresses and
viscosity with change in applied normal force. The fly ash and pond ash slurries
exhibit different rheological properties depending on the volumetric concentration of
ash in the slurries, particle size distribution, solid surface characteristics and solid-
liquid interaction (Usui et al., 2001). This chapter covers the laboratory investigation
on the rheological behaviour of fly ash and pond ash slurries using rheometer.
6.2 INSTRUMENTATION
The rheological behaviour of fly ash and pond ash slurries of TTPS are studied in
controlled stress Advanced Rheometer, AR-1000 (TA Instruments, New Castle, DE)
equipped with a cone and plate geometry (40 mm diameter, 3°59'' angle, 0.116-mm
truncation). The photograph of the rheometer is shown in Figure 6.1. The rotating
parallel plate geometry of 40 mm in diameter is used in the present study. The
rheometer applies a shearing force in the material by controlled movement. The torque
required to produce a given angular velocity is related with the viscosity of the slurry.
The quantities of interest e.g. viscosity and shear rate etc. are obtained from the
rheometry experiments.
Rheology of Fly Ash and Pond Ash Slurries
Figure 6.1 Image of the advanced rheometer, AR-1000
6.3 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
6.3.1 Preparation of Fly Ash and Pond Ash Slurries
Slurries of fly ash and pond ash samples of TTPS are prepared in six different weight
concentrations (Cw), e.g. 30%, 40%, 50%, 55%, 60% and 65% Cw for the rheological
study. Beyond an ash concentration of 65%, slurry can not be prepared since; it
becomes a paste. The calculated quantity of ash samples and water are mixed together
to make a slurry of desired concentration. While preparing the slurry, adequate care is
taken for proper mixing of the ash with water to make the slurry homogeneous. The
weight concentration of fly ash/pond ash in the slurry is referred as ‘slurry
concentration’ and shortly noted as ‘Cw’ throughout the thesis.
6.3.2 Test Procedure
The fly ash and pond ash slurries are stirred properly to make them homogeneous just
before the commencement of test. The required amount of slurry is put on the lower
fixed plate of the rheometer. Thereafter, the rotating upper plate is lowered down
slowly to just touch the upper surface of the slurry kept on the lower plate. A
clearance of 500 μm is maintained between the fixed lower plate and the rotation
100
upper plate in case of all fly ash slurries. In case of pond ash slurries, a clearance of 600
μm is maintained between the parallel plates, due to coarser particle size of the pond
ash. The temperature of the system is maintained at 30°C throughout the experiment
for all slurry concentrations. All the tests are carried out in a steady state flow step
condition in which the shear stress is applied for varying the shear rate from 10 to 100
1/s at an increment of 10 1/s. At each shear rate, the apparent viscosity of the slurry is
measured by the instrument.
The summarized results of the rheological test of fly ash and pond ash slurries under
different shear rates are given in the following sections.
6.4.1 Rheological Test Results of Fly Ash Slurries
The viscosity values of different fly ash slurries under various shear rates are given in
Table 6.1 to Table 6.3 and the shear rate vs. viscosity curves of the fly ash slurries are
Table 6.1 Viscosity values at different shear rates for various slurry concentrations of
fly ash F1
Slurry concentrations
Shear rate, 1/s 30% Cw 40% Cw 50% Cw 55% Cw 60% Cw 65% Cw
Viscosity, Pa.s
10 3.87E-03 6.67E-03 8.49E-03 0.01408 0.06015 0.4474
20 2.72E-03 4.70E-03 5.68E-03 0.01201 0.04677 0.3367
30 2.44E-03 4.28E-03 4.78E-03 0.0113 0.05495 0.4204
40 2.34E-03 4.06E-03 4.50E-03 0.0109 0.07768 0.4386
50 2.30E-03 3.99E-03 4.18E-03 0.01123 0.09207 0.4116
60 2.27E-03 4.00E-03 4.01E-03 0.01269 0.09641 0.3857
70 2.26E-03 4.05E-03 4.02E-03 0.01957 0.09788 0.3678
80 2.29E-03 4.13E-03 4.21E-03 0.02853 0.09717 0.3557
90 2.34E-03 4.35E-03 4.62E-03 0.03985 0.09601 0.3507
100 2.37E-03 4.86E-03 5.22E-03 0.04308 0.09453 0.3468
101
fly ash F2
Viscosity, Pa.s
10 2.51E-03 5.74E-03 8.65E-03 9.36E-03 0.08046 0.4252
20 1.33E-03 3.59E-03 5.34E-03 6.18E-03 0.0586 0.332
30 1.21E-03 2.93E-03 4.71E-03 5.07E-03 0.0652 0.489
40 1.16E-03 2.63E-03 4.34E-03 4.49E-03 0.07683 0.43
50 1.07E-03 2.37E-03 4.18E-03 4.65E-03 0.1075 0.3543
60 1.02E-03 2.20E-03 4.27E-03 5.24E-03 0.1066 0.3165
70 9.92E-04 2.12E-03 4.42E-03 5.94E-03 0.1025 0.2962
80 9.60E-04 2.09E-03 4.82E-03 6.96E-03 0.0972 0.2831
90 9.43E-04 2.07E-03 5.81E-03 7.94E-03 0.09382 0.2746
100 9.15E-04 2.11E-03 6.27E-03 8.74E-03 0.09216 0.2702
fly ash F3
Viscosity, Pa.s
10 2.55E-03 0.03477 0.2383 0.07609 0.1683 0.4582
20 2.84E-03 0.01562 0.05432 0.04081 0.1121 0.3397
30 2.49E-03 0.01159 0.02772 0.03541 0.1051 0.3441
40 2.32E-03 8.85E-03 0.02007 0.03852 0.1161 0.4526
50 2.19E-03 7.82E-03 0.01771 0.0476 0.1433 0.396
60 2.18E-03 7.62E-03 0.01593 0.06371 0.1752 0.3516
70 2.19E-03 6.46E-03 0.0152 0.08606 0.164 0.3298
80 2.24E-03 6.37E-03 0.01611 0.09731 0.1608 0.3211
90 2.30E-03 6.79E-03 0.01807 0.09675 0.1587 0.3134
100 2.44E-03 8.38E-03 0.01866 0.09707 0.1571 0.3061
102
Rheology of fly ash F1 Rheology of fly ash F2
30% Cw 40% Cw 50% Cw 55% Cw 60% Cw 65% Cw 30% Cw 40% Cw 50% Cw 55% Cw 60% Cw 65% Cw
1.00E+00 1.00E+00
1.00E‐01
Viscosity, Pa.s
Viscosity, Pa.s
1.00E‐01
1.00E‐02
1.00E‐02
1.00E‐03
1.00E‐03 1.00E‐04
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Shear rate, 1/s Shear rate, 1/s
Rheology of fly ash F3
30% Cw 40% Cw 50% Cw 55% Cw 60% Cw 65% Cw
1.00E+00
Viscosity, Pa.s
1.00E‐01
1.00E‐02
1.00E‐03
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Shear rate, 1/s
Figure 6.2 Viscosity vs. shear rate curves of fly ash slurries prepared with different fly
ash samples
From the results, an increase in viscosity with increment in slurry concentrations is

noticed for all fly ash samples. Most of the fly ash slurries irrespective of their
concentrations show a decreasing viscosity with increasing shear rate, i.e. the slurries
show shear-thinning behaviour. The shear-thinning nature of the fly ash slurries is
attributed to the alignment of the ash particles in the flow field. The instantaneous
alignment of particles in the direction of shear with an increase in the shear rate from
rest provides a lower resistance to flow (Boger et al., 2007). In case of some of the
slurries with higher fly ash concentrations like 60% and 65% Cw, a shear-thickening
behaviour is noticed within certain ranges of shear rates. In these slurries, a sharp
increase in viscosity is noticed after a certain shear rate values and again followed by
103
decay in viscosity at higher shear rates producing ‘hump’ in the rheogram. The onset
of this increase in viscosity is often referred to as a discontinuity. Such type of cases
arises in case of slurries containing settling solids and particle-wall interaction which
are responsible for increase in viscosity of the slurries. Shear-thickening also does
occur, however, when the solids’ concentration approaches the maximum packing
concentration for the suspension (Chryss and Pullum, 2007).
Since, most of the fly ash slurries show a decrease in viscosity with increment of shear
rates, it may be stated that the fly ash slurries show non-Newtonian pseudoplastic
behaviour. Among the fly ash slurries, the slurries containing fly ash F2 showed lowest
and slurries containing fly ash F1 showed highest viscosity values at all shear rates.
The variation in viscosity values of a particular slurry concentration prepared with
different fly ash samples may be due to the difference in their particle sizes. Since, fly
ash F1 is the finest of all, the slurries prepared with this fly ash posses the highest
viscosity values as compared to the others.
6.4.2 Rheological Test Results of Pond Ash Slurries
pond ash P1
Viscosity, Pa.s
10 9.36E-03 0.3764 0.05891 0.1063 0.09939 0.802
20 5.34E-03 0.174 0.1222 0.08586 0.08127 0.8216
30 4.71E-03 0.1045 0.126 0.09361 0.1059 0.699
40 4.49E-03 0.06406 0.08995 0.1072 0.151 0.5829
50 4.65E-03 0.03301 0.06411 0.1665 0.2331 0.5264
60 5.24E-03 0.02595 0.0623 0.1598 0.2312 0.4874
70 5.94E-03 0.02242 0.06234 0.1551 0.2234 0.4622
80 6.96E-03 0.02027 0.06309 0.1521 0.2167 0.4454
90 7.94E-03 0.01922 0.06796 0.1513 0.2123 0.4359
100 8.74E-03 0.01938 0.07435 0.1508 0.2092 0.4241
104
pond ash P2
Viscosity, Pa.s
10 0.1177 0.4588 0.4527 0.3967 4.365 3.356
20 0.0487 0.2426 0.3434 0.6483 1.478 1.477
30 0.02687 0.09593 0.2018 0.2616 1.049 1.104
40 0.03156 0.6127 0.08516 0.1732 0.969 1.094
50 0.02961 0.1424 0.1119 0.1485 0.7493 1.084
60 0.02289 0.03907 0.0626 0.1374 0.5079 0.9693
70 0.01737 0.1149 0.05426 0.126 0.4769 0.8838
80 0.01911 0.06968 0.06304 0.1171 0.4474 0.8533
90 0.01468 0.02332 0.04179 0.1156 0.4054 0.8586
100 0.01157 0.06266 0.05174 0.1057 0.3827 0.8656
pond ash P3
Viscosity, Pa.s
10 0.06137 0.5317 0.3354 0.1602 0.2025 10.07
20 0.06463 0.09947 0.1172 0.1241 0.3729 7.538
30 0.05297 0.1135 0.07019 0.1787 0.2818 7.096
40 0.02909 0.0205 0.04823 0.2068 0.2653 7.186
50 0.01376 0.01468 0.05689 0.1839 0.2984 7.88
60 9.16E-03 0.09582 0.06988 0.1659 0.3319 8.131
70 7.68E-03 0.01083 0.07126 0.1545 0.3511 8.119
80 6.49E-03 0.01306 0.0725 0.1471 0.3484 8.046
90 5.63E-03 0.01367 0.07179 0.1411 0.36 7.484
100 5.70E-03 0.01314 0.07135 0.1368 0.3802 7.051
105
Rheology of pond ash P1 Rheology of pond ash P2
30% Cw 40% Cw 50% Cw 55% Cw 60% Cw 65% Cw 30% Cw 40% Cw 50% Cw 55% Cw 60% Cw 65% Cw
1.00E+00 10
Viscosity, Pa.s
1
Viscosity, Pa.s
1.00E‐01
1.00E‐02 0.1
1.00E‐03 0.01
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Shear rate, 1/s Shear rate, 1/s
Rheology of pond ash P3
30% Cw 40% Cw 50% Cw 55% Cw 60% Cw 65% Cw
100
10
Viscosity, Pa.s
0.1
0.01
0.001
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Shear rate, 1/s
Figure 6.3 Viscosity vs. shear rate curves of pond ash slurries prepared with various
pond ash samples
The summarized results of the rheological test of pond ash slurries are presented in
Table 6.4 to Table 6.6. The variation in viscosity values with shear rates for different
pond ash slurries are shown in Figure 6.3. Like fly ash slurries, all most all pond ash
slurry concentrations showed a non-Newtonian or shear-thinning behaviour i.e.
decreasing in viscosity values with increasing shear rates. From the results no
relationship between the slurry viscosity and particle size of the pond ash samples
could be established like fly ash. This may be due to very irregular shape and size of
the pond ash particles. However, an increase in viscosity with slurry concentrations is
noticed for all pond ash samples.
106
CHAPTER 7
STOWING WITH POND ASH SLURRIES - A MODEL STUDY
7.1 INTRODUCTION
Selection of an appropriate concentration of the stowing material in the slurry is

important for efficient hydraulic stowing. Stowing parameters like quantity of water
requirement, rate of drainage of water, total percentage of drainage and absorption of
water, total stowing and void percentages and the number of stowing cycles are
dependent on the chosen slurry concentration. The objectives of the present study are
to evaluate the suitability of stowing with pond ash slurries in underground mines
using a mine goaf model and to identify the most suitable pond ash slurry
concentration giving best stowing efficacy. This chapter deals with the experimental
study carried out to determine the above mentioned parameters from the stowing of
various pond ash slurry concentrations in a mine goaf model fabricated in the
laboratory. The pond ash (P2) of Talcher Thermal Power Station (TTPS) is used for
stowing in the mine model. It is also tried to improve the rate of water drainage by
adding flocculant with the pond ash slurries during stowing and the results are
incorporated in this chapter.
7.2 EXPERIMENTAL SET-UP
7.2.1 Mine Goaf Model
A mine goaf model fabricated in the laboratory for conducting stowing is shown in
Figure 7.1. The model is made of transparent Perspex sheet with a rectangular funnel
attached at the top to feed the pond ash slurry. The front side of the model is open and
attached with a removable barricade fitted with a cotton cloth and supported by wires
to allow the water to drain out after stowing. To collect the drained out water a right
angled flume is attached to the bottom of the model. The top of the model is
removable for measurement of the stowing height after each experiment and made
Stowing with Pond Ash Slurries-A Model Study
water tight to the flanges of the bottom section by nuts. The draining out water from
the stowed pond ash is collected and measured by a measuring cylinder. The detailed
specifications of the mine goaf model are given in Table 7.1.
(a) Mine goaf model (b) Model stowed with pond ash
Figure 7.1 Mine goaf model used for pond ash stowing
Table 7.1 Specifications of the mine goaf model
Model dimension 30 cm × 30 cm × 12.7 cm

Volume of the model 11430 cm3
Material Transparent Perspex sheet
Base area 30 cm × 30 cm
Height of the model 12.7 cm
No. of pillar in the goaf 01
Size of the pillar 10 cm × 10 cm × 12.7 cm
Barricade Made of cotton cloth and supported by wires
Gradient maintained 1 in 12.5
7.3 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
The model stowing is conducted using five different pond ash slurry concentrations
(Cw) e. g. 45%, 50%, 55%, 60% and 65% Cw. For complete filling of the model in the 1st
phase stowing, the quantity of pond ash and water used in the pond ash slurries of
108
different concentrations are given in Table 7.2. After preparing the slurry of a
particular concentration, the mine goaf model is completely stowed by feeding the
slurry through the funnel attached at the top of the model.
Table 7.2 Quantity of pond ash, water and flocculant used in different slurry
concentrations for 1st phase stowing
Pond ash slurry Quantity of pond Quantity of Quantity of

concentrations, Cw (%) ash used, kg water used, litres flocculant used, ml
45 6.75 8.25 412.5
50 8.00 8.00 400
55 8.80 7.20 360
60 9.60 6.40 320
65 10.725 5.775 288.75
To improve the settling of the pond ash after stowing and enhance the drainage of
water from the stowed pond ash, carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) flocculant is added
with the pond ash slurries before stowing. Earlier, from the settling test of fly ash and
pond ash samples by using jar test apparatus (Refer Chapter 4), it was found that the
addition of CMC flocculant has got a tremendous effect on the enhancement of the
settling of the ash particles. In case of the pond ash (P2) used here; a dosage of 5 ppm
of CMC flocculant gives minimum turbidity values of the pond ash-water suspension.
Hence, the same optimum flocculant dosage has been chosen to be added with the
pond ash slurries of all concentrations. The quantity of flocculant added to make a
dosage of 5 ppm is calculated with respect to the quantity of water used to prepare
slurries of various concentrations and given in Table 7.2.
In hydraulic stowing operations it is generally observed that complete filling of the

void is not possible in a single phase of stowing. Therefore, another phase of stowing
is required for complete filling of the void left behind between the stowed mass and
the roof of the mine after complete drainage of water from the stowed mass. It is
termed here as the 2nd phase of stowing. In the present study the actual stowing
operation is carried out in two phases, namely 1st and 2nd phase and the amount of
109
water drainage and stowing in each phase are determined for all slurry
concentrations.
7.3.1 Measurement of Drainage and Absorption of Water
To study the drainage of water from the stowed pond ash, the experiments are
conducted in two stages. First, the model is stowed only with the pond ash slurries of
all six concentrations one by one, thereafter; the same experiments are repeated with
pond ash slurries added with an optimum dosage of 5 ppm of carboxymethyl cellulose
(CMC) flocculant. In both the cases the same procedure of measurement of water
drainage is followed for comparison. The stowing with pond ash slurries of all
concentrations is conducted in two phases, whereas, only one phase stowing is
conducted in case of slurries added with flocculant.
After the 1st phase of stowing with slurry of a particular concentration, the
measurement of draining out water is made at a fixed time interval of 15 minutes for a
total duration of two and half hours (150 minutes). The remaining water drained out
after that is also measured and added with the previously collected water to give the
total water drainage. From the total quantity of water drained out, the total percentage
of water drainage is calculated, and it is deducted from 100 to give the total percentage
of water absorption by the stowed pond ash. The same procedure is followed for
stowing with all slurry concentrations. After the complete drainage of water from 1st
phase stowing, the 2nd phase stowing is conducted and the total amount of water
drainage is measured. Thereafter, the total percentages of water drainage and
absorption are calculated.
7.3.2 Measurement of Stowing and Void Percentages
The side view of the model stowed with pond ash slurry of 45% Cw after 1st phase is
110
Figure 7.2 Side view of the model stowed with pond ash slurry of 45% Cw
Slurry loading funnel
Stowing contours
Cw Mine model
65 %
60 %
Measured
55 % stowing heights
50 %
45 %
h30
h0 h5 h15 h20 h25 Barricade
Measuring
Stand cylinder
Figure 7.3 Schematic side view of the model showing the stowing contours of different
slurry concentrations and measurement of stowing heights
After complete drainage of water from the 1st phase and 2nd phase of stowing of a
particular pond ash slurry concentration, the stowing heights are measured at six
different locations along the dip, starting from the rise most point at distances of 5cm,
15cm, 20cm, 25 cm and 30 cm (dip most point) and labeled as h0, h5, h15, h20, h25 and h30
respectively. The schematic side view of the model (Figure 7.3) shows the stowing
111
contours of different slurry concentrations and measurement of stowing heights. The

purposes of the measuring the stowing heights are to draw the stowing contours for
each slurry concentration and measure the area under the contours for measurement
of stowing volume. The area so calculated is multiplied with the strike length of the
model to give the stowing volume. Thereafter, the percentages of stowing and void by
volume are calculated. The same procedure is followed in case of slurries of all other
concentrations.
7.4.1 Drainage and Absorption of Water
The outcomes of the study conducted for determination of the drainage and
absorption of water from the stowing with pond ash slurries of various concentrations
with and without flocculant are given as follows:
7.4.1.1 Drainage and absorption of water after 1st phase of stowing
The experimental results of the drainage of water from the 1st phase stowing of pond
ash slurries with and without flocculant for 45% Cw to 65% Cw are given in Table 7.3
to Table 7.7 respectively. From the results it is observed that the rate of water drainage
decreases with increment in time as well as increment in slurry concentrations in both
the cases. The drainage rate is highest in the initial 15 minutes of stowing, which
gradually decreases with time in all slurry concentrations. In case of higher slurry
concentrations the rate of drainage is lower as compared to the lower slurry
concentrations for all time intervals. From the 1st phase stowing, it is also noticed that
the absorption of water increases with the increment of slurry concentration in both
the cases. In case of stowing with pond ash slurries and slurries added with flocculant,
highest water absorption of 87.53% and 88.28% respectively is achieved by slurry
concentration of 65% Cw, whereas, lowest absorption of 52.42% and 54.11%
respectively is achieved by the concentration of 45% Cw.
112
Table 7.3 Drainage and absorption of water in case of stowing with pond ash slurry of
45 % Cw
Slurry without flocculant Slurry with flocculant

Elapsed
Drainage % of Total Drainage % of Total
time
of water water water of water water water
(min)
(ml) drainage absorption (ml) drainage absorption
15 895 10.85 1950 23.64
30 400 4.85 755 9.15
45 310 3.76 550 6.67
60 280 3.40 270 3.27
75 260 3.15 130 1.58
4325 ml 4464 ml
90 245 2.97 60 0.73
(52.42 %) (54.11 %)
105 230 2.79 30 0.36
120 205 2.48 15 0.18
135 185 2.24 10 0.12
150 175 2.12 6 0.07
Rest 740 8.97 10 0.12
4325 ml 4464 ml
Total 3925 47.58 % 3786 45.89%
(52.42 %) (54.11 %)
Table: 7.4 Drainage and absorption of water in case of stowing with pond ash slurry of
50 % Cw

Elapsed
time
(min)
15 681 8.51 1390 17.38
30 365 4.56 660 8.25
45 292 3.65 490 6.12
60 265 3.31 210 2.62
75 248 3.10 100 1.25
4980 ml 5082 ml
90 230 2.88 40 0.5
(62.25 %) (63.52 %)
105 195 2.44 16 0.2
120 185 2.31 6 0.08
135 175 2.19 4 0.05
150 156 1.95 2 0.03
Rest 228 2.85 0 0
4980 ml 5082 ml
Total 3020 37.75 % 2918 36.48
(62.25 %) (63.52 %)
113
55% Cw

Elapsed
Drainage Total Drainage Total
time % of water % of water
of water water of water water
(min) drainage drainage
(ml) absorption (ml) absorption
15 550 7.64 1030 14.30
30 320 4.44 470 6.53
45 260 3.61 320 4.44
60 235 3.26 105 1.46
75 215 2.99 34 0.47
5161 ml
90 190 2.64 12 0.17 5223 ml
(71.68 %)
105 125 1.74 4 0.06 (72.54 %)
120 70 0.97 2 0.03
135 37 0.51 0 0
150 22 0.31 0 0
Rest 15 0.21 0 0
5161 ml 5223 ml
Total 2039 28.32 % 1977 27.46
(71.68 %) (72.54 %)
60% Cw

Elapsed
time
(min)
15 436 6.81 635 9.92
30 275 4.30 320 5.00
45 225 3.52 75 1.17
60 90 1.41 19 0.30
75 31 0.48 7 0.11
90 16 0.25 3 0.05 5341 ml
5314 ml
105 9 0.14 0 0 (83.45 %)
(83.03 %)
120 4 0.06 0 0
135 0 0 0 0
150 0 0 0 0
Rest 0 0 0 0
5314 ml 5341 ml
Total 1086 16.97 1059 16.55
(83.03 %) (83.45 %)
114
65% Cw

Elapsed
time
(min)
15 340 5.89 415 7.18
30 240 4.15 180 3.12
45 75 1.30 60 1.04
60 40 0.70 15 0.26
75 16 0.28 5 0.09
5055 ml 5098 ml
90 09 0.15 2 0.03
(87.53 %) (88.28 %)
105 0 0 0 0
120 0 0 0 0
135 0 0 0 0
150 0 0 0 0
Rest 0 0 0 0
5055ml 5098 ml
Total 720 12.47 677 11.72
(87.53 %) (88.28 %)
The trend of water drainage from the stowing of different concentrations of pond ash
slurries and pond ash slurries added with flocculant are shown in Figure 7.4 and
Figure 7.5 respectively. It is clear that the percentage of water drainage reduces with
time as well as slurry concentrations.
Drainage of water from the stowing with pond ash slurries
12
45% Cw
50% Cw
10
55% Cw
60% Cw
8
Drainage %
65% Cw
0
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165
Time (min)
Figure 7.4 Percentage of drainage versus time curves for stowing with pond ash
slurries
115
Drainage of water from the stowing with pond ash slurries added
with flocculant
25
45% Cw
50% Cw
20
55% Cw
60% Cw
Drainage % 15 65% Cw
10
0
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165
Time (min)
Figure 7.5 Percentage of drainage versus time curves for stowing with pond ash
slurries added with flocculant
7.4.1.2 Drainage and absorption of water after 2nd phase of stowing
The results of the drainage and absorption of water in case 2nd phase stowing are
given in Table 7.8. From the results it can be noticed that the percentage of water
absorption is increased with increment of slurry concentrations like 1st phase of
stowing. A minimum of 45.09% and maximum of 70.00% of water absorption is
achieved from the 2nd phase stowing with slurry concentrations of 45% and 65% Cw
respectively. Comparatively, the percentage of water absorption by the stowed pond
ash after 2nd phase stowing is less than that of 1st phase stowing with slurries of all
concentrations. The comparison of total water absorption by the stowed pond ash after
1st and 2nd phase stowing is shown in Figure 7.6. The reason behind lesser water
absorption by the pond ash after 2nd phase stowing may be due to the placement of
slurries of 2nd phase stowing over fully saturated stowed mass of 1st phase stowing
which permitted higher quantity of water to drain out.
116
Table 7.8 Drainage and absorption of water after 2nd phase stowing with pond ash
slurries of different concentrations
Pond ash slurry concentrations (% Cw)

Parameters
45 50 55 60 65
Quantity of water used, ml 2750 1500 1125 520 350
Total quantity of water drained out, ml 1510 630 400 170 105
Total percentage of water drainage, % 54.91 42.00 35.56 32.69 30
Total quantity of water absorbed, ml 1240 870 725 350 205
Total percentage of water absorption, % 45.09 58.00 64.44 67.31 70.00
Water absorption by the stowed pond ash
100
1st phase stowing 2nd phase stowing
90
80
Absorption of water, %
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Slurry concentrations, % Cw
Figure 7.6 Absorption of water by the stowed pond ash after 1st and 2nd phase stowing
From the study it is evident that less quantity of water is required for making higher
concentration slurries. Therefore, higher amount of pond ash can be stowed using
lesser amount of water when stowed with higher pond ash slurry concentrations. A
higher percentage of water absorption or lesser amount of drainage is achieved when
stowed with higher slurry concentrations. Less amount of water drainage means less
requirement of energy for pumping which ultimately reduces the overall cost of
stowing. In addition to that, in case of stowing with higher slurry concentrations, the
stowed pond ash mass remains in position by its own without assistance of any
support after complete drainage of water and withdrawal of barricade.
117
7.4.1.3 Comparative study
A comparative study of drainage and absorption of water is made between the

stowing with pond ash slurries and pond ash slurries added with flocculant.
7.4.1.3.1 Comparison of water drainage
The comparison curves of drainage of water at different time intervals from the
stowing of pond ash slurries with and without flocculant are shown in Figure 7.7. The
values indicated on the curves represent the percentage of water drainage in that
corresponding time. From these curves it is noticed that the initial rate of water
drainage has drastically increased after addition of flocculant with the pond ash
slurries. The drainage rate almost doubled in case of slurries of 45% Cw, 50% Cw and
55% Cw added with flocculant, whereas, in case of slurries of 60% Cw and 65% Cw, it
has increased 1.46 and 1.22 times respectively of the pond ash slurries without
flocculant. After addition of flocculant, the drainage rate increased in such a manner
that the maximum proportion of the total drained out in the initial 45 minutes of
stowing and a very less quantity of water remains for subsequent drainage at a slower
rate. A decrease in drainage rate noticed after 45 minutes in case of 45% to 55% Cw,
after 30 minutes in case of 60% Cw and after 15 minutes in case of 65% Cw pond ash
slurries added with flocculant. The improvement in drainage rate in case of stowing
with slurries added with flocculant is because of quicker settling of the pond ash
particles (Tripathy and De, 2006; Hogg, 2000).
Drainage of water from stowing with slurry of 45% Cw Drainage of water from stowing with slurry of 50% Cw
Slurry without flocculant Slurry with flocculant Slurry without flocculant Slurry with flocculant
25 20
23.64 18
17.38
20 16
14
Drainage %
Drainage %
15 12
10.85 10
8.51 8.25
9.15
10 8
6.12
6.67 6
4.85 4.56
5 3.76 3.65 3.31 3.1
3.4 3.15 2.97 2.79 2.48 4 2.88 2.44
2.24 2.12 2.31 2.19 1.95
1.58 0.73 2.62 1.25
3.27 0.36 0.18 2
0.12 0.07 0.5 0.2 0.08 0.05 0.03
0 0
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165
118
Drainage of water from stowing with slurry of 55% Cw Drainage of water from stowing with slurry of 60% Cw
Slurry without flocculant Slurry with flocculant Slurry without flocculant Slurry with flocculant
16 12
14.3
14 9.92
10
12
8
Drainage %
Drainage %
10 6.81
7.64
8 6
6.53 5
6
4.44 4.44 4
4.3 3.52
4 3.26 2.99
2.64
3.61 1.74 2
2 1.46 1.17 1.41
0.47 0.97 0.51 0.31
0.17 0.06 0.3 0.48 0.25 0.14
0.03 0.06
0 0 0.11 0.05
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165
Drainage of water from stowing with slurry of 65% Cw
8
7.18
7
5.89
6
Drainage %
5
4.15
4
3 3.12
2
1.3
1 0.7
1.04 0.28 0.15
0.26 0.09 0.03
0
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165
Time (min)
Figure 7.7 Comparison of water drainage from the stowing of pond ash slurries added
with and without flocculant
7.4.1.3.2 Comparison of water absorption
The results of the percentage of water absorption by the stowed pond ash after 1st
phase of stowing of pond ash slurries with and without flocculant are presented in
Table 7.9. The trend of water absorption with slurry concentration is shown in Figure
7.8. From the results it can be observed that the water absorption increases with
increasing in slurry concentrations (Cw) in both the cases. However, a marginal
increase in water absorption is noticed in case of slurries added with flocculant as
compared to slurries without flocculant under all concentrations. A minimum of
52.42% and maximum of 87.53% of the total water is absorbed by the pond ash in case
of stowing with pond ash slurries of 45% Cw and 65% Cw respectively, whereas, in
119
case of slurries with flocculant a minimum of 54.11% and maximum of 88.28% water
absorption is noticed in the same respective concentrations.
Table 7.9 Absorption of water by the pond ash after 1st phase stowing of pond ash
slurries with and without flocculant
Slurry concentrations, Absorption of water (%)

% Cw Slurries without flocculant Slurries with flocculant
45 52.42 54.11
50 62.25 63.52
55 71.68 72.54
60 83.03 83.45
65 87.53 88.28
Slurries without flocculant Slurries with flocculant
100
88.28
87.53
83.45
83.03
90
72.54
71.68
80
63.52
Absorption of water, %
62.25
70
54.11
52.42
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
45 50 55 60 65
Slurry concentrations, Cw (%)
Figure 7.8 Trend of water absorption by the stowed pond ash after 1st phase stowing of
pond ash slurries with and without flocculant
The reason behind slight increase in water absorption in case of slurries added with
flocculant may be due to the coagulation and flocculation effect of the flocculant, by
which, the finer pond ash particles accumulate to form larger agglomerates known as
flocs (Hogg, 2000, Hocking et al., 1999; Hughes, 1990; Gregory, 1993). The higher
percentage of water absorption in case of stowing with higher concentration slurries
indicate that less quantity of water is drained out which helps in minimizing the
pumping cost of the same.
120
7.4.2 Percentage of Stowing and Void
The results of the stowing height measurements after 1st and 2nd phase stowing are
given in Table 7.10 and Table 7.11 respectively.
Table 7.10 Stowing heights measured at various locations after 1st phase stowing
Slurry concentrations, Stowing heights, cm

% Cw h0 h5 h15 h20 h25 h30
45 7.2 7.6 8.3 9.0 10.2 12.4
50 9.2 9.5 10.1 10.6 11.5 12.7
55 9.6 9.9 10.6 11.1 11.9 12.7
60 11.0 11.3 11.9 12.2 12.7 12.7
65 11.5 11.8 12.3 12.7 12.7 12.7
Table 7.11 Stowing heights measured at various locations after 2nd phase stowing
Slurry concentrations, Stowing heights, cm

% Cw h0 h5 h15 h20 h25 h30
45 10.2 10.6 11.4 11.8 12.2 12.7
50 11.2 11.5 12.2 12.4 12.5 12.7
55 12.3 12.6 12.6 12.7 12.7 12.7
60 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7
65 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7

45% Cw 50% Cw 55% Cw 60% Cw 65% Cw 45% Cw 50% Cw 55% Cw 60% Cw 65% Cw
12 12
10
Stowing height, cm
10
Stowing height, cm
8 8
6 6
4 4
2 2
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Measuring distance, cm Measuring distance, cm
Figure 7.9 Change in stowing heights with measurement locations after 1st and 2nd
phase stowing
The change in stowing heights with measurement locations in case of 1st and 2nd phase
stowing is shown in Figure 7.9. A rise in the stowed pond ash level is noticed towards
121
the dip side of the model where it subsequently touches the roof. In stowing with all
slurry concentrations the stowed pond ash totally covers the barricade which is
responsible for poor drainage rate. The results of the stowing and void percentages
determined after 1st and 2nd phase stowing with pond ash slurries of various
concentrations are given in Table 7.12 and the same are graphically shown in Figure
7.10. From the results it is evident that the percentage of stowing increases or in other
words the percentage of void decreases with increment in slurry concentrations.
Table 7.12 Stowing and void percentages after 1st and 2nd phase stowing with pond ash
slurries of various concentrations

Slurry
Stowing Stowing
concentrations, % of % of % of % of
volume volume
Cw (% ) stowing void stowing void
(cm3) (cm3)
45 8070.0 70.60 29.40 10305.0 90.16 9.84
50 9435.0 82.55 17.45 10867.5 95.08 4.92
55 9780.0 85.56 14.44 11355.0 99.34 0.66
60 10732.5 93.90 6.10 11430.0 100 0
65 11070.0 96.85 3.15 11430.0 100 0
1st phase stowing % 2nd phase stowing %
1st phase void % 2nd phase void %
100
90
80
70
60
50
%
40
30
20
10
0
40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Slurry concentrations, Cw (%)
Figure 7.10 Change in stowing and void percentages with slurry concentrations after
1st and 2nd phase stowing
A minimum of 70.60% stowing is achieved with a slurry concentration of 45% Cw in

the 1st phase stowing. At 65% Cw, highest of 96.85% stowing is achieved in the 1st
122
phase stowing itself, leaving only 3.15% of void to be filled in the 2nd phase. Thus the
requirement of stowing material in the 2nd phase stowing reduces in case of stowing
with higher concentration slurries. In case of 2nd phase stowing with slurries of 45%,
50% and 55% Cw, the model is stowed 90.16%, 95.08% and 99.34% respectively,
whereas, it is completely filled up (100% stowing) when stowed with slurry
concentrations of 60% Cw and 65% Cw, virtually leaving no void after complete
drainage of water. Thus, in lower concentrations like 45% and 50% Cw, still some
substantial amount of void remains unfilled after 2nd phase of stowing, providing
improper confinement to the roof and may require another phase of stowing. This
suggests that stowing with higher concentration slurries like 60% and 65% Cw gives
better results in terms of percentage of stowing which requires only two stowing
cycles to completely fill the void or even no 2nd phase stowing will serve the purpose.
Therefore, from this study it may be concluded that lower the slurry concentration,
more is the number of stowing cycles required for completely filling the void and vice
versa.
123
CHAPTER 8
CONSOLIDATION CHARACTERISTICS OF STOWED POND
ASH AND POND ASH-LIME MIXTURE
8.1 INTRODUCTION
The study of consolidation characteristics of stowed pond ash is extremely useful for
forecasting the magnitude and time rate of settlement of the superincumbent strata
above the stowed pond ash. Consolidation in relation to pond ash stowing is a
process, whereby the stowed pond ash particles are packed more closely together over
a period of time under the application of continued pressure of the over lying strata. It
is accompanied by drainage of water from the pore spaces between the solid pond ash
particles and also squeezing of the pore spaces. In the beginning, when the load is
applied on the saturated pond ash immediately after stowing, the entire load is carried
by the pore water. As the water drains out of the pond ash pores, the hydrostatic
pressure in water gets gradually dissipated and the load is gradually shifted to the
consolidated pond ash mass. Since, the permeability controls the speed at which the
pore water can escape through the pond ash mass, the rate of volume change, or
consolidation of pond ash after stowing is directly related to its permeability. In case
of sand and gravels, the permeability is so high that the time required for
consolidation after the application of load can be considered negligible and settlement
takes place in a short time. But in pond ash, because of their low permeability, the rate
of volume change and settlements take place over a much longer period after caving of
the super incumbent strata and cause major problems in strata control. Therefore, in
case of pond ash stowing, the estimation of rate of settlement of the stowed pond ash
and the time within which settlement will be virtually completed emerge as important
factors. This research work is an attempt to evaluate the effect of incremental load and
time on the consolidation behaviour of the stowed pond ash and pond ash-lime
mixture samples in the laboratory.
Consolidation Characteristics of Stowed Pond Ash and Pond Ash-Lime Mixture
8.2 FABRICATION OF MINE GOAF MODEL FOR STOWING
A mine goaf model of bord and pillar working fabricated in the laboratory for pond
ash and pond ash-lime mixture stowing is shown in Figure 8.1. The model is made of
wood with the inner portion lined with polythene sheet and covered with a glass on
the top. To allow the free drainage of water from the stowed pond ash after stowing,
the front side of the model is attached with a barricade made of cotton cloth and
supported in between by wooden props. A flume made of corrugated iron sheet is
attached to the dip most side of the model for collecting the drainage out water. The
specifications of the model are given in Table 8.1.
(a) Mine goaf model (a) Model stowed with pond ash
Figure 8.1 Mine goaf model used for pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture stowing
Table 8.1 Specifications of the mine goaf model for pond ash and pond ash-lime
mixture stowing
Model dimension 91.44 cm × 91.44 cm × 15.24 cm

Material Wood (Inner portion lined with polythene sheet )
Base area 91.44 cm × 91.44 cm
Height of the model 15.24 cm
No. of pillar in the goaf 04
Size of the pillar 12.7 cm × 12.7 cm × 15.24 cm
Gallery width 20.32 cm
Barricade Made of cotton cloth and supported by wooden props
Gradient maintained 1 in 12.5
125
8.3 STOWING THE MINE GOAF MODEL
The model is stowed completely with slurries of pond ash (P2) and pond ash-lime
mixture having 65% solid and 35% water (by weight). Slack lime of 7% (by weight) of
the total solid is mixed thoroughly with pond ash before making the pond ash-lime
slurry prior to stowing to observe the effect of lime addition on the consolidation and
settlement characteristics of the stowed pond ash-lime mixture. The specific gravity of
the pond ash-lime mixture (7% lime and 93% pond ash by weight) is found out to be
1.95. The pond ash-lime mixture slurry so prepared is of proportion lime : pond ash :
water = 4.55 : 60.45 : 35. During the stowing operation (of pond ash or pond ash-lime
mixture as the case may be), water is allowed to drain out completely from the stowed
mass through the barricade. Thereafter, the stowed samples are collected from the
mine model and tested at intervals of 7, 14, 21, 28 and 35 days of stowing to study the
variation in void ratio and coefficient of consolidation with successive incremental
load under various time periods.
8.4 CONSOLIDATION TEST OF THE STOWED SAMPLES
8.4.1 Collection and Preparation of Sample for Consolidation Test
1. Undisturbed sample cores of the stowed pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture
are collected in the consolidation ring from the centers of the galleries after
different time intervals as mentioned above.
2. Thereafter, the samples are trimmed properly by a straight edge for making the
both faces smooth and the ring is cleaned from outside for weighing.
3. The properly trimmed samples along with the consolidation ring are placed in
the consolidometer and properly assembled for consolidation test under the
varied applied load conditions.
126
8.4.2 Consolidation Test Procedure
One-dimensional consolidation test of the stowed pond ash and pond ash-lime
mixture samples is conducted as per Indian standard procedure IS-2720 (Part 15)
conforming ASTM D2435. The test procedure for the consolidation test of the
compacted fly ash and pond ash samples outlined in Chapter 5 is also followed here.
8.5.1 Consolidation Test of Stowed Pond Ash Samples
The results of the specimen measurements of the stowed pond ash samples made
during the consolidation test are given in Table 8.2. The time-compression data of the
consolidation test of the stowed pond ash samples under varied load conditions are
given in Appendix C. The square root time ( t) versus compression curves plotted
for calculating time for 90 % consolidation (t90) for each load increment are also given
in the same appendix. The computation sheets for void ratio (e) and coefficient of
consolidation (Cv) of the samples collected at different time (days) intervals are
presented in Table 8.3 to Table 8.7 respectively.
127
Table 8.2 Specimen measurements of the stowed pond ash samples during
consolidation test
Time of collection of stowed pond ash samples

Specimen measurements After 7 After 14 After 21 After 28 After 35
days of days of days of days of days of
stowing stowing stowing stowing stowing
Diameter, D (cm) 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00
π D2
Area, A = , cm2 28.274 28.274 28.274 28.274 28.274
4
Thickness (Initial height),
2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
H, cm
Specific gravity of
2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
specimen, Gs
Wt. of consolidation ring
143.72 148.81 160.43 143.71 148.82
(W1), g
Wt. of ring + specimen at
227.62 231.37 237.58 222.98 227.86
beginning of test (W2), g
Wt. of specimen, (W3) =
83.90 82.56 77.15 79.27 79.04
W2 – W1, g
Oven dry wt. of specimen
201.77 207.02 216.00 199.80 207.07
+ ring, (W4), g
Oven dry wt. of
specimen, (Ws) = W4 – 58.05 58.21 55.57 56.09 58.25
W1, g
Computed/equivalent
1.027 1.029 0.98 0.99 1.03
height of solids (Hs), cm
Initial height of voids
0.973 0.971 1.02 1.01 0.97
(Hv), cm
Initial void ratio, ei 0.947 0.944 1.041 1.02 0.942
128
Table 8.3 Computation sheet for e and Cv of stowed pond ash sample collected after 7
days of stowing
Change
Applied
load, Void
p ratio,
2
(kg/cm2) e
(mm) (mm) ∆H (cm)
(cm)
0 0 0 0 2.00 0.947 - - -
0.1 5.000 4.972 0.0028 1.9972 0.945 1.9986 9.0 0.1882
0.2 4.972 4.948 0.0052 1.9948 0.942 1.996 10.24 0.165
0.4 4.948 4.906 0.0094 1.9906 0.938 1.9927 11.56 0.1456
0.8 4.906 4.838 0.0162 1.9838 0.932 1.9872 16.81 0.0996
1.6 4.838 4.732 0.0268 1.9732 0.921 1.9785 33.64 0.0493
3.2 4.732 4.595 0.0405 1.9595 0.908 1.9664 51.12 0.0321
days of stowing
Change
Applied
load, Void
p ratio,
(kg/cm2) e
(mm) (mm) ∆H (cm)
(cm)
0 0 0 0 2.00 0.944 - - -
0.1 6.000 5.934 0.0066 1.9934 0.937 1.9967 16.81 0.1006
0.2 5.934 5.886 0.0114 1.9886 0.933 1.991 18.06 0.0931
0.4 5.886 5.817 0.0183 1.9817 0.926 1.9852 26.01 0.0642
0.8 5.817 5.694 0.0306 1.9694 0.914 1.9756 28.09 0.0589
1.6 5.694 5.520 0.048 1.952 0.897 1.9607 29.16 0.0559
3.2 5.520 5.292 0.0708 1.9292 0.875 1.9406 24.01 0.0665
129
days of stowing
Change
Applied
load, Void
p ratio,
2
(kg/cm2) e
(mm) (mm) ∆H (cm)
(cm)
0 0 0 0 2.00 1.041 - - -
0.1 7.000 6.925 0.0075 1.9925 1.033 1.9963 16.0 0.1056
0.2 6.925 6.830 0.017 1.983 1.023 1.9878 21.62 0.0775
0.4 6.830 6.682 0.0318 1.9682 1.008 1.9756 29.16 0.0568
0.8 6.682 6.498 0.0502 1.9498 0.990 1.959 40.96 0.0397
1.6 6.498 6.246 0.0754 1.9246 0.964 1.9372 49.0 0.0325
3.2 6.246 5.848 0.1152 1.8848 0.923 1.9047 40.96 0.0376
days of stowing
Change
Applied
load, Void
p ratio,
(kg/cm2) e
(mm) (mm) ∆H (cm)
(cm)
0 0 0 0 2.00 1.02 - - -
0.1 7.000 6.952 0.0048 1.9952 1.015 1.9976 17.64 0.0959
0.2 6.952 6.903 0.0097 1.9903 1.01 1.9928 27.04 0.0623
0.4 6.903 6.832 0.0168 1.9832 1.003 1.9868 29.16 0.0574
0.8 6.832 6.723 0.0277 1.9723 0.992 1.9778 33.06 0.0502
1.6 6.723 6.562 0.0438 1.9562 0.976 1.9643 36.0 0.0454
3.2 6.562 6.350 0.065 1.935 0.955 1.9456 39.69 0.0404
130
days of stowing
Change
Applied
load, Void
p ratio,
2
(kg/cm2) e
(mm) (mm) ∆H (cm)
(cm)
0 0 0 0 2.00 0.942 - - -
0.1 6.000 5.853 0.0147 1.9853 0.927 1.9927 18.49 0.0911
0.2 5.853 5.754 0.0246 1.9754 0.918 1.9804 28.09 0.0592
0.4 5.754 5.619 0.0381 1.9619 0.905 1.9687 28.09 0.0585
0.8 5.619 5.449 0.0551 1.9449 0.888 1.9534 42.25 0.0383
1.6 5.449 5.242 0.0758 1.9242 0.868 1.9346 31.92 0.0497
3.2 5.242 4.971 0.1029 1.8971 0.842 1.9107 79.21 0.0195
The results of the calculated void ratio (e) of the stowed pond ash samples collected
after different time (days) intervals under various applied loads are presented in Table
8.8.
Table 8.8 Void ratio (e) of stowed pond ash samples collected after different days of
stowing under various applied loads
Applied load, Void ratio (e)

p
After 7 After 14 After 21 After 28 After 35
(kg/cm2)
days days days days days
0 0.947 0.944 1.041 1.02 0.942
0.1 0.945 0.937 1.033 1.015 0.927
0.2 0.942 0.933 1.023 1.01 0.918
0.4 0.938 0.926 1.008 1.003 0.905
0.8 0.932 0.914 0.990 0.992 0.888
1.6 0.921 0.897 0.964 0.976 0.868
3.2 0.908 0.875 0.923 0.955 0.842
The loads vs. void ratio curves (compression curves) of the stowed samples are shown
in Figure 8.2. From the results it can be observed that the void ratio gradually
decreases with increment of the applied load for all samples irrespective of their time
131
of collection. This shows a decrease in compressibility of the specimens with the

applied load. The slopes of compression curves are quite small which indicates that
the change in void ratio is not considerable with the increment in the consolidation
pressure.
1.1
7 days
14 days
1.05
21 days
28 days
1 35 days
Void ratio, e
0.95
0.9
0.85
0.8
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4
Load (kg/cm2)
Figure 8.2 Load vs. void ratio curves of stowed pond ash samples collected after
different days of stowing
The void ratio is highest at applied load of 0.1 kg/cm2 and lowest at 3.2 kg/cm2 for all
samples. Pond ash samples collected after 21 days of stowing showed a maximum
void ratio of 1.033 at an applied load of 0.1 kg/cm2. A minimum void ratio value of
0.842 is found out at 3.2 kg/cm2 load in case of the sample collected after 35 days of
stowing. A decreasing trend in void ratio with time is noticed except, the samples
collected after 21 and 28 days of stowing. This decrease in void ratio of the stowed
pond ash samples with time indicates a decrease in compressibility.
The coefficient of consolidation (Cv) values determined for the stowed pond ash
samples collected at different time (day) intervals of stowing under various
incremental loads are presented in Table 8.9. The variation in Cv values with applied
load and time (days) are shown in Figure 8.3 and Figure 8.4 respectively.
132
Table 8.9 Coefficient of consolidation (Cv) of stowed pond ash samples collected after
different days of stowing under various applied loads
Applied load, Coefficient of consolidation, Cv (cm2/min)

p
(kg/cm2)
0.1 0.1882 0.1006 0.1056 0.0959 0.0911
0.2 0.165 0.0931 0.0775 0.0623 0.0592
0.4 0.1456 0.0642 0.0568 0.0574 0.0585
0.8 0.0996 0.0589 0.0397 0.0502 0.0383
1.6 0.0493 0.0559 0.0325 0.0454 0.0497
3.2 0.0321 0.0665 0.0376 0.0404 0.0195
0.2
Coefficient of consolidation, CV (cm2/min)
7 days
0.18 14 days
0.16 21 days
28 days
0.14
35 days
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4
Load (kg/cm2)
Figure 8.3 Load vs. Cv curves of stowed pond ash samples collected after different
days of stowing
0.2
0.1 kg/sq.cm.
0.18 0.2 kg/sq.cm.
0.16 0.4 kg/sq.cm.
0.8 kg/sq.cm.
0.14 1.6 kg/sq.cm.
0.12 3.2 kg/sq.cm.
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
0 7 14 21 28 35 42
Time (Days)
Figure 8.4 Variation in Cv with time of stowed pond ash samples under constant
applied loads
133
From these results it is noticed that the Cv values decreases with applied load in case of
samples collected after 7 days, 28 days and 35 days of stowing. In case of samples
collected after 14 days and 21 days of stowing, the Cv values decreased up to a load of
1.6 kg/cm2 and thereafter, slightly increased at an applied load of 3.2 kg/cm2. The
stowed pond ash sample collected after 7 days of stowing showed a highest Cv value
of 0.1882 cm2/min at the lowest applied load of 0.1 kg/cm2. A minimum Cv of 0.0195
cm2/min is found out at the maximum applied load of 3.2 kg/cm2 in case of sample
collected after 35 days of stowing. From the Figure 8.4 it is also observed that under
most of the applied loads, the Cv values decreases with time of sample collection
which may be due to the evaporation of water and increase in pore spaces of the
stowed samples. The decrease in Cv values with increment of applied load and time
indicates that the rate of settlement is slower at higher applied loads. The increase in
settlement time can be marked by the progressive increase in t90 values with applied
loads.
8.5.2 Consolidation Test of Stowed Pond Ash-Lime Mixture Samples
The results of the specimen measurements during the consolidation test of the stowed
pond ash-lime mixture samples collected after different time (day) intervals of stowing
are given in Table 8.10. The time-compression data of the consolidation test of the
stowed pond ash-lime mixture samples under varied load conditions are given in
Appendix C. The computation sheets for e and Cv of the samples collected after 7, 14,
21, 28 and 35 days of stowing are presented in Table 8.11 to Table 8.15 respectively.
134
Table 8.10 Specimen measurements of the stowed pond ash-lime mixture samples
during consolidation test
Time of collection of stowed pond ash-lime mixture

samples
Specimen Measurements After 7 After 14 After 21 After 28 After 35
days of days of days of days of days of
stowing stowing stowing stowing stowing
Diameter, D (cm) 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00
π D2
Area, A = , cm2 28.274 28.274 28.274 28.274 28.274
4
Thickness (Initial height),
2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
H, cm
Sp. Gravity of specimen,
1.95 1.95 1.95 1.95 1.95
Gs
Wt. of consolidation ring
160.43 143.71 148.98 143.69 160.55
(W1), g
Wt. of ring + specimen at
244.11 222.96 231.43 223.08 241.29
beginning of test (W2), g
Wt. of specimen, (W3) =
83.68 79.25 82.45 79.39 80.74
W2 – W1, g
Oven dry wt. of specimen
213.39 194.86 202.81 196.06 214.44
+ ring, (W4), g
Oven dry wt. of
specimen, (Ws) = W4 – 52.96 51.15 53.83 52.37 53.89
W1, g
Computed/equivalent
0.96 0.93 0.98 0.95 0.98
height of solids (Hs), cm
Initial height of voids
1.04 1.07 1.02 1.05 1.02
(Hv), cm
Initial void ratio, ei 1.083 1.151 1.041 1.105 1.041
135
Table 8.11 Computation sheet for e and Cv of stowed pond ash-lime mixture sample
collected after 7 days of stowing
Change
Applied
load, Void
p ratio,
2
(kg/cm2) e
(mm) (mm) ∆H (cm)
(cm)
0 0 0 0 2.00 1.083 - - -
0.1 7.000 6.939 0.0061 1.9939 1.077 1.9970 11.56 0.1463
0.2 6.939 6.850 0.0150 1.9850 1.068 1.9895 11.56 0.1452
0.4 6.850 6.658 0.0342 1.9658 1.048 1.9754 12.25 0.1351
0.8 6.658 6.524 0.0476 1.9524 1.034 1.9591 12.96 0.1256
1.6 6.524 6.154 0.0846 1.9154 0.995 1.9339 13.32 0.1191
3.2 6.154 5.719 0.1281 1.8719 0.950 1.8937 14.06 0.1081
Change
Applied
load, Void
p ratio,
(kg/cm2) e
(mm) (mm) ∆H (cm)
(cm)
0 0 0 0 2.00 1.151 - - -
0.1 6.000 5.903 0.0097 1.9903 1.140 1.9952 14.44 0.1169
0.2 5.903 5.843 0.0157 1.9843 1.134 1.9873 15.21 0.1101
0.4 5.843 5.633 0.0367 1.9633 1.111 1.9738 18.49 0.0893
0.8 5.633 5.549 0.0451 1.9549 1.102 1.9591 24.01 0.0678
1.6 5.549 5.207 0.0793 1.9207 1.065 1.9378 25.0 0.0637
3.2 5.207 4.733 0.1267 1.8733 1.014 1.8970 27.04 0.0564
136
Change
Applied
load, Void
p ratio,
2
(kg/cm2) e
(mm) (mm) ∆H (cm)
(cm)
0 0 0 0 2.00 1.041 - - -
0.1 7.000 6.956 0.0044 1.9956 1.036 1.9978 30.25 0.0559
0.2 6.956 6.911 0.0089 1.9911 1.032 1.9934 31.36 0.0537
0.4 6.911 6.861 0.0139 1.9861 1.027 1.9886 37.82 0.0443
0.8 6.861 6.728 0.0272 1.9728 1.013 1.9795 24.01 0.0692
1.6 6.728 6.539 0.0461 1.9539 0.994 1.9634 27.04 0.0604
3.2 6.539 6.284 0.0716 1.9284 0.968 1.9412 33.64 0.0475
Change
Applied
load, Void
p ratio,
(kg/cm2) e
(mm) (mm) ∆H (cm)
(cm)
0 0 0 0 2.00 1.105 - - -
0.1 6.000 5.960 0.004 1.9960 1.101 1.9980 9.61 0.1761
0.2 5.960 5.943 0.0057 1.9943 1.099 1.9952 10.89 0.155
0.4 5.943 5.898 0.0102 1.9898 1.095 1.9921 16.81 0.1001
0.8 5.898 5.750 0.025 1.9750 1.079 1.9824 24.01 0.0694
1.6 5.750 5.499 0.0501 1.9499 1.053 1.9625 34.81 0.0469
3.2 5.499 5.198 0.0802 1.9198 1.021 1.9349 40.32 0.0394
137
Change
Applied
load, Void
p ratio,
2
(kg/cm2) e
(mm) (mm) ∆H (cm)
(cm)
0 0 0 0 2.00 1.041 - - -
0.1 7.000 6.936 0.0064 1.9936 1.034 1.9968 33.64 0.0503
0.2 6.936 6.900 0.01 1.9900 1.031 1.9918 34.81 0.0483
0.4 6.900 6.794 0.0206 1.9794 1.020 1.9847 37.21 0.0449
0.8 6.794 6.618 0.0382 1.9618 1.002 1.9706 40.32 0.0408
1.6 6.618 6.376 0.0624 1.9376 0.977 1.9497 42.25 0.0381
3.2 6.376 6.054 0.0946 1.9054 0.944 1.9215 38.44 0.0407
The void ratio calculated for the stowed pond ash-lime mixture samples under
different applied loads are given in Table 8.16. The pond ash-lime mixture sample
collected after 14 days of stowing showed a maximum void ratio of 1.14 at an applied
load of 0.1 kg/cm2, whereas, the sample collected after 35 days of stowing showed a
minimum void ratio value of 0.944 at 3.2 kg/cm2 load. The compression curves (load
vs. void ratio) under different applied loads are shown in Figure 8.5. Like stowed
pond ash samples, a decreasing trend in void ratio values with increment of applied
loads is also observed in this case irrespective of the time of collection of the stowed
pond ash-lime mixture samples. This shows a decrease in compressibility of the
specimens with the applied loads which may be due to the pozzolanic activity
(hydration-related hardening) of the added lime. The slopes of the compression curves
are quite small which implies that the change in void ratio is not considerable as the
consolidation pressure increases.
138
Table 8.16 Void ratio (e) of stowed pond ash-lime mixture samples collected after
different days of stowing under various applied loads
Applied load, Void ratio (e)

p
(kg/cm2)
0 1.083 1.151 1.041 1.105 1.041
0.1 1.077 1.140 1.036 1.101 1.034
0.2 1.068 1.134 1.032 1.099 1.031
0.4 1.048 1.111 1.027 1.095 1.020
0.8 1.034 1.102 1.013 1.079 1.002
1.6 0.995 1.065 0.994 1.053 0.977
3.2 0.950 1.014 0.968 1.021 0.944
1.2
7 days
1.15 14 days
21 days
1.1 28 days
35 days
1.05
Void ratio, e
0.95
0.9
0.85
0.8
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4
Load (kg/cm2)
Figure 8.5 Load vs. void ratio curves of stowed pond ash-lime mixture samples
collected after different days of stowing
The coefficient of consolidation values determined from the consolidation test of the
stowed pond ash-lime mixture samples under different applied loads are given in
Table 8.17. The variation in Cv values with applied load and time of sample collection
are shown in Figure 8.6 and Figure 8.7 respectively. A similar trend of decreasing in Cv
values with the applied load are also noticed in this case irrespective of the time of
sample collection. Sample collected after 7 days of stowing showed highest and
sample after 35 days of stowing showed lowest Cv values at most of the corresponding
139
applied loads. Like stowed pond ash samples, a decreasing trend in Cv values with
time under constant load conditions can be observed from Figure 8.7 with few
exceptions like sudden rise in Cv values at applied loads of 0.1, 0.2, 0.4 and 0.8 kg/cm2
in case of sample collected after 28 days of stowing. This rise in Cv values indicates a
faster rate of settlement which may be due to hardening of the sample with time. After
a sudden rise in coefficient of consolidation of sample after 28 days of stowing at
applied loads of 0.1, 0.2, 0.4 and 0.8 kg/cm2, the values again dropped down after a
period of 35 days of stowing under the same applied load conditions.
Table 8.17 Coefficient of consolidation (Cv) of stowed pond ash-lime mixture samples
collected after different days of stowing under various applied loads
Applied Coefficient of consolidation, Cv (cm2/min)

load
(kg/cm2)
0.1 0.1463 0.1169 0.0559 0.1761 0.0503
0.2 0.1452 0.1101 0.0537 0.155 0.0483
0.4 0.1351 0.0893 0.0443 0.1001 0.0449
0.8 0.1256 0.0678 0.0692 0.0694 0.0408
1.6 0.1191 0.0637 0.0604 0.0469 0.0381
3.2 0.1081 0.0564 0.0475 0.0394 0.0407
0.2
7 days
0.18 14 days
0.16 21 days
28 days
0.14
35 days
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4
Load (kg/cm2)
Figure 8.6 Load vs. Cv curves of stowed pond ash-lime mixture samples collected after
different days of stowing
140
0.2
0.1 kg/sq.cm.
0.18 0.2 kg/sq.cm.
0.4 kg/sq.cm.
0.16
0.8 kg/sq.cm.
0.14 1.6 kg/sq.cm.
3.2 kg/sq.cm.
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
0 7 14 21 28 35 42
Time (Days)
Figure 8.7 Variation in Cv with time of stowed pond ash-lime mixture samples under
constant applied loads
8.5.3 Comparative Study
A comparative study is made between the void ratio (e) and coefficient of
consolidation (Cv) values of the stowed pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture samples
determined from the consolidation test. The detailed comparisons are given as follows:
8.5.3.1 Comparison between the void ratio of stowed pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture
samples
The comparison curves of the void ratio of the stowed pond ash and pond ash-lime
mixture samples collected after different time intervals are shown in Figure 8.8. From
these figures it is observed that the void ratio of both the samples decreases with the
applied load irrespective of their time of collection. The slopes of the load vs. void
ratio curves are quite small which implies that the change in void ratio is not
considerable as the consolidation pressure increases. However, at most of the applied
loads, the stowed pond ash-lime mixture samples showed a higher void ratio values
as compared to that of stowed pond ash samples irrespective of their time of
collection. This may be due to absorption of more amount of water from the mixture at
a faster rate due to the addition of slack lime. The reduction of water due to absorption
causes an increase in the void ratio of the pond ash-lime mixture which is probably
attributed to reduced compaction and some hydration-induced swelling.
141
1.1 1.2
Pond ash Pond ash
Pond ash‐lime mixture Pond ash‐lime mixture
1.15
1.05
1.1
1
Void ratio, e
Void ratio, e
1.05
0.95 1
0.9 0.95
0.9
0.85
0.85
0.8
0.8
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4
(a) After 7 days of stowing (b) After 14 days of stowing

1.1 1.15
Pond ash Pond ash
Pond ash‐lime mixture Pond ash‐lime mixture
1.05 1.1
1.05
1
Void ratio, e
Void ratio, e
1
0.95
0.95
0.9
0.9
0.85 0.85
0.8 0.8
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4
(c) After 21 days of stowing (d) After 28 days of stowing

1.1
Pond ash
Pond ash‐lime mixture
1.05
1
Void ratio, e
0.95
0.9
0.85
0.8
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4
Load (kg/cm2)
(e) After 35 days of stowing

Figure 8.8 Load vs. void ratio curves of stowed pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture
samples collected after different days of stowing
142
8.5.3.2 Comparison between the Cv values of stowed pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture
samples
The comparison curves of load vs. Cv values between the stowed pond ash and pond
ash-lime mixture samples collected after different time intervals under various applied
loads are shown in Figure 8.9. In case of the samples collected after 7 days of stowing,
it is found that the Cv values of the stowed pond ash sample are higher than that of
stowed pond ash-lime mixture sample at applied loads of 0.1, 0.2 and 0.4 kg/cm2. The
Cv values of both the samples equals at an approximate load of 0.5 kg/cm2 and
thereafter, the stowed pond ash-lime mixture sample showed higher Cv values as
compared to the stowed pond ash sample. The similar trend is also found in case of
the samples collected after 21 days of stowing. From the comparison curves of the
samples collected after 14 days of stowing, it is observed that except at applied load of
3.2 kg/cm2, the Cv values of stowed pond ash-lime mixture sample are higher as
compared to the stowed pond ash sample at rest of the applied loads. From the
comparison of Cv values of samples collected after 28 days of stowing under various
applied loads, it is clear that the Cv values of both the samples are almost equal at
loads of 1.6 kg/cm2 and 3.2 kg/cm2, and at all other applied loads stowed pond ash-
lime mixture sample showed a higher Cv values than that of stowed pond ash. After
35 days of stowing, the stowed pond ash-lime mixture sample showed lesser Cv values
than the stowed pond ash sample except at applied loads of 0.8 kg/cm2 and 3.2
kg/cm2.
After 7 days of stowing After 14 days of stowing
0.2 0.14
Pond ash Pond ash‐lime mixture Pond ash Pond ash‐lime mixture
0.18
0.12
0.16
0.14 0.1
(cm2/min)
(cm2/min)
0.12 0.08
0.1
0.06
0.08
0.06 0.04
0.04
0.02
0.02
0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4
143
After 21 days of stowing After 28 days of stowing
0.12 0.2
0.18
0.1 0.16
0.14
0.08
(cm2/min)
(cm2/min)
0.12
0.06 0.1
0.08
0.04
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.02
0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4
2
Load (kg/cm ) Load (kg/cm2)
After 35 days of stowing
0.1
Pond ash Pond ash‐lime mixture
0.09
0.08
0.07
(cm2/min)
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 3.4
Load (kg/cm2)
Figure 8.9 Load vs. Cv values of stowed pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture samples
collected after different days of stowing
The comparison curves of the change in the Cv values with time (days) of the stowed
samples for different applied loads are shown in Figure 8.10. From these figures it can
be noticed that the trend of change in coefficient of consolidation of the stowed
samples with time are same at applied loads of 0.1, 0.2 and 0.4 kg/cm2. At these loads,
the stowed pond ash-lime mixture samples collected after 14 and 28 days of stowing
showed a higher Cv values and rest of the samples showed lesser Cv values as
compared to the stowed pond ash samples. At an applied load of 0.8 kg/cm2, all
collected stowed pond ash-lime mixture samples showed higher Cv values than that of
the pond ash sample. In case of 1.6 kg/cm2 load, except the sample collected after 35
days of stowing all other stowed pond ash-lime mixture samples showed higher Cv
values than the pond ash samples. However, the pond ash-lime mixture samples
144
collected after 7, 21 and 35 days of stowing showed higher coefficient of consolidation

values or possess faster rate of settlement than the stowed pond ash samples at the
highest applied load of 3.2 kg/cm2.
At 0.1 kg/cm2 load At 0.2 kg/cm2 load
0.2 0.18
0.18
0.16
0.16 0.14
0.14
0.12
(cm2/min)
(cm2/min)
0.12
0.1
0.1
0.08
0.08
0.06
0.06
0.04 0.04
0.02 0.02
0 0
0 7 14 21 28 35 42 0 7 14 21 28 35 42
Time (Days) Time (Days)
0.16 0.14
0.14 0.12
0.12
0.1
0.1
(cm2/min)
(cm2/min)
0.08
0.08
0.06
0.06
0.04
0.04
0.02 0.02
0 0
0 7 14 21 28 35 42 0 7 14 21 28 35 42
0.14 0.12
0.12 0.1
0.1
0.08
(cm2/min)
(cm2/min)
0.08
0.06
0.06
0.04
0.04
0.02 0.02
0 0
0 7 14 21 28 35 42 0 7 14 21 28 35 42
Figure 8.10 Variation in Cv with time of stowed pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture
samples at different applied loads
145
Therefore, from overall analysis of the results, it may be concluded that mixing of lime
with the pond ash during hydraulic stowing showed an improvement in the
consolidation characteristics of the stowed pond ash-lime mixture specimens as a
result of hydration induced cementation (Indraratna, 1996). Even though the addition
of slack lime significantly increased the void ratio of the blended mix, the gain in
coefficient of consolidation (Cv) is considerable at 7% lime addition.
146
CHAPTER 9
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
9.1 INTRODUCTION
In this investigation, the suitability of the fly ash and pond ash for stowing in
underground coal mines are studied in details from various angles. The findings of
the present study established that the fly ash and pond ash possess suitable properties
to be used as a stowing material in underground coal mines. The summarized results
of the present investigation are delineated in this chapter. The conclusions based on
the interpretation of the experimental data are deliberated. The limitations,
recommendations and suggested areas for future research are also covered in this
chapter.
9.2 SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS
The findings of the present study can be summarized as follows:
9.2.1 Physico-Chemical and Engineering Properties
• The physico-chemical and engineering characterization provided sufficient useful

information regarding the physical, chemical and engineering properties of fly ash
and pond ash samples. It is found that the specific gravity of TTPS and TSTPS fly
ash samples varies in the range of 2.14 – 2.17 and 2.06 – 2.20 respectively, whereas,
for pond ash samples it varies in the range of 2.0 – 2.15 and 1.72 – 1.92 respectively.
The bulk density of fly ash samples of TTPS and TSTPS ranges between 1.00 – 1.06
gm/cm3 and 1.16 – 1.24 gm/cm3 respectively, whereas, in case of pond ash
samples it ranges between 0.95 – 1.05 gm/cm3 and 1.01 – 1.06 gm/cm3 respectively.
The porosity of TTPS and TSTPS fly ash samples varies between 51.15 – 53.27% and
40.29 – 46.30% respectively, whereas, in case of pond ash, it varies in the range of
Summary and Conclusions
51.16 – 54.21% and 40.63 – 43.33% respectively. This shows that the porosity of
TTPS ash samples is comparatively higher than the TSTPS ash samples.
• From the particle size analysis, it is found that the specific surface area of the fly
ash samples of TTPS and TSTPS varies in the range 0.5747 – 0.5845 m2/cc and
0.2714 – 0.5171 m2/cc respectively, whereas, in case of the TTPS pond ash samples
it varies in the range of 0.2435 – 0.3732 m2/cc. This represents that the pond ash
samples of both the power stations are comparatively coarser than the fly ash
samples. Comparatively the TSTPS pond ash samples are much coarser than the
pond ash of TTPS and the pond ash NP1 is the coarsest among all pond ash
samples. The particle morphology studied from the SEM micrographs revealed
that the fly ash and pond ash particles of both the power stations are almost
spherical in shape and porous in nature with varying sizes. Comparatively, the
pond ash particles are coarser in size, highly irregular in shape and porous in
nature than the fly ash particles.
• The WHC of fly ash samples of TTPS and TSTPS varies from 50.70 – 55.11% and
34.97 – 36.13% respectively, whereas, for pond ash samples it varies from 62.77–
66.79% and 50.10–60.67% respectively. Comparatively, the fly ash samples of
TSTPS possess lowest WHC among all samples. Therefore, the pond ash samples
which are comparatively coarser in particle size than the fly ash samples possess
higher WHC.
• The coefficient of permeability of fly ash and pond ash samples of TTPS varies in
the ranges of 1.373 – 1.4964 × 10-4 cm/s and 3.3507 – 7.2272 × 10-4 cm/s respectively,
whereas, in case of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash, it ranges between 0.2158 – 0.6946 ×
10-4 cm/s and 0.0453 – 0.261 × 10-1 cm/s respectively. This shows that the
permeability of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples and TSTPS fly ash samples are
equivalent to the permeability of silts. Comparatively, the permeability of TSTPS
pond ash samples is much higher than that of TTPS pond ash samples and
equivalent to the permeability of silty sand. The coefficient of permeability of fly
148
ash-sand mixtures gradually decreases with sequential increment of river sand up

to a proportion 60% by weight. Even, the values are less than the permeability
value of the fly ash sample itself in use. Thereafter, the permeability of the mixtures
increased exponentially with the increment of sand proportions.
• The pH values of fly ash samples of TTPS and TSTPS varies in the range of 5.71-
6.17 and 7.16-8.57 respectively, whereas, for pond ash samples it ranges from 6.76-
6.99 and 7.16-8.56 respectively.
• The study of chemical composition revealed that the ash samples of both the power
stations are mainly composed of higher amounts of SiO2, Al2O3 and lower amounts
of Fe2O3, TiO2, K2O, CaO and MgO etc. In the ash samples of TTPS and TSTPS, SiO2
ranges from 59.71 – 61.85% and 58.03 – 63.20%, Al2O3 ranges from 30.48 – 32.42%
and 24.56 – 29.07%, Fe2O3 ranges from 2.70 – 4.29% and 4.91 – 12.57%, and CaO
ranges from 0.61 – 0.95% and 0.75 – 1.76% respectively. The loss on ignition (LOI)
values of TTPS and TSTPS ash samples varies from 0.47% to 1.47% and 0.32% to
0.72% respectively. The major mineral phases identified in the ash samples of both
the power stations by XRD analysis are quartz (SiO2), mullite (Al6Si2O13) and some
heavy minerals of iron oxides like magnetite (Fe3O4) and hematite (Fe2O3).
• The proximate analysis results show that the ash samples of both the power
stations are highly enriched with ash content (> 90%), with very less amounts of
moisture, volatile matter (VM) and fixed carbon (FC) contents. In case of TTPS and
TSTPS ash samples, the moisture content varies from 0.22–0.79% and 0.17–0.32%,
the VM content varies in the range of 0.41–0.94% and 0.05–0.90%, and the FC
content varies in the range of 0.15–1.58% and 0.04–0.86% respectively. The CPT
test results revealed that no ash sample could reach the furnace temperature till
heating up to a temperature of 200ºC. This establishes that the ash samples of both
the power stations are not susceptible to spontaneous heating.
149
• The settling characteristics of the fly ash and pond ash samples drastically
enhanced by the addition of CMC flocculant. At optimum flocculant dosages, the
turbidity values of the suspensions containing fly ashes F1, F2 and F3 reduced to 5.9
NTU, 5.8 NTU and 11.6 NTU from their original values (without flocculant) of 467
NTU, 627 NTU and 242 NTU respectively after a settling time of 5 minutes.
Similarly, at optimum dosages, the turbidity values of the suspensions containing
pond ashes P1, P2 and P3 reduced to 27 NTU, 19.9 NTU and 5.7 NTU from their
original values of 1716 NTU, 1410 NTU and 997 NTU respectively after a settling
time of 5 minutes.
9.2.2 Geotechnical Properties
• From compaction test it is found that the maximum dry density of fly ash is 1.15
g/cm3 and the optimum moisture content (OMC) is 34.25 %. In case of pond ash,
the maximum dry density found out is 1.09 g/cm3 and the OMC is 34.97%. Fly ash,
due to finer in particle size, possesses lower OMC and higher dry density as
compared to the pond ash.
• From the consolidation test it is found that the void ratio of the compacted fly ash
and pond ash samples decreases with increment of load. Comparatively, pond ash
samples showed higher void ratio than fly ash. This represents that the
compressibility of fly ash is less as compared to pond ash. The compacted fly ash
samples F1 and F3 showed an increment in Cv values with increment of load. In
case of F2, the Cv values decreased at the first instance up to a load increment of 0.4
kg/cm2 and thereafter, they increased with increment of load. The increase in Cv
values with load increment indicates a faster rate of settlement of the ash samples
at higher applied loads which can be marked by lower t90 values. In case of pond
ash samples, an initial decrease in Cv values up to a load of 0.4 kg/cm2 is found out
for P3, whereas, for P1 and P2, a decreasing trend is noticed up to a load increment
of 0.8 kg/cm2. Thereafter, the Cv values increased with increment of load for all
150
samples except at the highest applied load of 3.2 kg/cm2 in case of P1 and P3, where
the Cv values again decreased. Therefore, the time rate of settlement is
comparatively slower at lower applied loads like 0.2, 0.4 and 0.8 kg/cm2 as noticed
in most of the cases. Comparatively, the compacted pond ash samples showed a
higher Cv values than fly ash samples.
9.2.3 Rheological Properties
• The fly ash and pond ash slurries of 30 – 65% Cw are prepared for studying the
rheological behaviour, however, beyond an ash concentration of 65%, slurry can
not be prepared since; it becomes a paste. It is observed that the apparent viscosity
of the fly ash and pond ash slurries increases with increment in solid
concentrations. A decrease in viscosity values with increasing shear rates is noticed
in most of the slurries irrespective of their solid concentrations. This is called shear-
thinning or non-Newtonian pseudoplastic behaviour of the slurries. For a
particular concentration, the variation in viscosity values of slurries containing
different ash samples may be due to the differences in their particle sizes. Since, fly
ash F1 is the finest of all, the slurries prepared with this fly ash posses highest
viscosity values as compared to others.
9.2.4 Model Study
• The study of water drainage from stowing shows that the initial rate of drainage
has drastically increased after addition of flocculant with the pond ash slurries. The
drainage rate almost doubled in case of slurries of 45% Cw, 50% Cw and 55% Cw
added with flocculant, whereas, in case of slurries of 60% Cw and 65% Cw, it has
increased 1.46 and 1.22 times respectively of the pond ash slurries without
flocculant. After addition of flocculant, the drainage rate increased in such a
manner that the maximum proportion of the total water drained out in the initial
45 minutes of stowing.
151
• It is also observed that the percentage of water absorption increases with

increasing slurry concentrations (Cw) in case of stowing with pond ash slurries
and slurries added with flocculant. In the 1st phase stowing, a minimum of 52.42%
and maximum of 87.53% of the total water is absorbed by the pond ash in case of
stowing with pond ash slurries of 45% Cw and 65% Cw respectively, whereas, in
case of slurries with flocculant a minimum of 54.11% and maximum of 88.28%
water absorption is noticed in the said respective concentrations. The reason for
marginal increase in water absorption in case of slurries added with flocculant may
be due to the coagulation and flocculation effect of the flocculant, by which, the
finer pond ash particles accumulate to form larger agglomerates.
• It is found that the percentage of stowing (by volume) increases or in other words
the percentage of void decreases with increment in slurry concentrations. A
minimum of 70.60% stowing is achieved with a slurry concentration of 45% Cw in
the 1st phase of stowing. At 65% Cw, highest of 96.85% stowing is achieved in the
1st phase of stowing itself, leaving only 3.15% of void to be filled in the 2nd phase.
Therefore, in case of stowing with higher slurry concentrations, the requirement of
stowing material in the 2nd phase stowing is less. In case of 2nd phase stowing with
slurries of 45%, 50% and 55% Cw, the model is stowed 90.16%, 95.08% and 99.34%
respectively, whereas, it is completely filled up (100% stowing) when stowed with
slurry concentrations of 60% Cw and 65% Cw, virtually leaving no void after
complete drainage of water. This suggests that stowing with higher concentration
slurries like 60% and 65% Cw require only two stowing cycles to completely fill the
void or even no 2nd phase stowing in the same area can serve the purpose.
9.2.5 Consolidation Characteristics of Stowed Samples
• The consolidation test results show that the void ratio of both the stowed pond ash
and pond ash-lime mixture samples decreases with the applied load irrespective of
their time of collection. This represents a decrease in compressibility of the
152
specimens with increment of loads. The slopes of the load vs. void ratio curves are
quite small which implies that the change in void ratio is not considerable as the
consolidation pressure increases. However, at most of the applied loads, the
stowed pond ash-lime mixture samples showed a higher void ratio values as
compared to that of the stowed pond ash samples. This may be due to absorption
of more amount of water from the mixture due to addition of slack lime which
causes an increase in the void ratio of the pond ash-lime mixture.
• The Cv values of stowed pond ash samples collected after 7 days, 28 days and 35
days of stowing decreased with increment of load. In case of samples collected
after 14 days and 21 days of stowing, the Cv values decreased up to a load of 1.6
kg/cm2 and thereafter, slightly increased at an applied load of 3.2 kg/cm2. Under
most of the applied loads, the Cv values decreased with time of sample collection.
A highest Cv of 0.1882 cm2/min is found at the lowest applied load of 0.1 kg/cm2 in
case of sample collected after 7 days of stowing, whereas, a lowest Cv of 0.0195
cm2/min is noticed at the highest applied load of 3.2 kg/cm2 in case of the sample
collected after 35 days of stowing.
• Like stowed pond ash samples, the pond ash-lime mixture samples showed a
decreasing trend in Cv values with increment of load irrespective of their time of
collection. Samples collected after 7 days and 35 days of stowing showed highest
and lowest Cv values respectively at most of the corresponding applied loads. A
decrease in Cv values with time under constant load conditions are also observed
with few exceptions like sudden rise in Cv values at applied loads of 0.1, 0.2, 0.4
and 0.8 kg/cm2 in case of sample collected after 28 days of stowing. The rise in Cv
values with time may be due to hardening of the stowed sample.
153
9.3 CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions are drawn based on the present research work.
i. From the study, it is found that the average specific gravity and bulk density of
fly ashes are more than that of pond ash. In most of the cases, the ash samples
with finer particle size showed slightly higher specific gravity as compared to
those with coarser particle size.
ii. The fly ash and pond ash particles are almost spherical in shape and porous in
nature with varying sizes. The spherical particle morphology may help in
improving the rheology of the slurry over sand and offer less friction to the
slurry flow in the stowing range.
iii. From the particle size analysis and permeability test it is concluded that the
pond ash samples are coarser in size and more permeable as compared to the
fly ash samples. Comparatively, the pond ash samples of TSTPS are much
coarser and highly permeable than the pond ash samples of TTPS. Therefore,
from particle size and drainage point of views, pond ash may be a better
alternative to fly ash for stowing; moreover, TSTPS pond ash is most suitable
for stowing.
iv. The coefficient of permeability of the fly ash-sand mixtures decreases with an
increment of sand proportions up to 60%. Thereafter, the permeability of the
mixtures increases with increment of sand proportions. Therefore, addition of
sand is not beneficial in improving the permeability of the mixtures.
v. The test results show that the water holding capacity of ash samples is a
function of their particle size. Fly ashes, due to finer particle size, possess lower
water holding capacity as compared to pond ashes. Pond ash due to higher
water holding capacity absorbs much quantity of water and allows minimum
drainage which may assist in reducing the pumping cost.
154
vi. It is found that the TTPS ash samples are slightly acidic in nature and the TSTPS
ash samples are alkaline in nature. The alkalinity nature of the TSTPS ash
samples may be due to the presence of higher free lime and alkaline oxides in
the ash samples.
vii. From the chemical characterization it is found that the major constituents of fly
ash and pond ash samples of both the power stations are silica (SiO2), alumina
(Al2O3) and Fe2O3 with little amounts of K2O, CaO, MgO, TiO2 etc. The ash
samples of TTPS, which showed higher values of LOI than TSTPS ash samples,
contain higher amounts of unburned carbon. This indicates that the combustion
process of the pulverized coal of the TSTPS is more efficient than TTPS.
viii. Since the sum total of SiO2, Al2O3 and Fe2O3 is more than 70% and the LOI
values are less than 6%, all the ash samples of both the power stations belong to
Class F as per ASTM C618.
ix. The presence of SiO2 in abundance in all the ash samples, may help in
increasing the strength of the stowing material and offer more load bearing
strength to take the load of the overlying strata after stowing. The presence of
CaO imparts self hardening and helps in improving the strength of the stowed
pond ash with time due to pozzolanic properties. Comparatively, the TSTPS
ash samples possess higher amounts of CaO than TTPS ash samples, and hence
more pozzolanic in nature.
x. The mineralogical composition studied by XRD technique shows that the

mineral phases present in fly ash and pond ash samples of TTPS and TSTPS are
quartz, mullite, hematite, and magnetite and therefore, suitable for stowing.
xi. The results of the proximate analysis and CPT test indicate that the ash samples
of TTPS and TSTPS are not liable to spontaneous heating and can be safely
utilized as a stowing material in the underground coal mines.
xii. The flocculation jar test results revealed that addition of CMC flocculant
155
enhanced the settling of the ash particles due to coagulation and flocculation
action and hence, can be used in stowing for improving water drainage.
xiii. From the compaction test it is found that the optimum moisture content (OMC)
of fly ash (F1) is 34.25% at the maximum dry density of 1.15 g/cm3, whereas, the
OMC of pond ash (P1) is 34.97% at a maximum dry density of 1.09 g/cm3. This
concludes that the pond ash with higher mean particle size possess higher
OMC and lower dry density than the fly ash.
xiv. From the consolidation test it is found that the compacted pond ash samples
showed higher Cv values as compared to fly ash samples which indicates the
rate of consolidation and settlement of pond ash is faster than fly ash. This
represents that the pond ash possesses a better load bearing characteristics as
compared to fly ash and more suitable for stowing.
xv. The decrease in void ratio of compacted fly ash and pond ash samples with
increment of load is due to closing of pore spaces. Pond ashes due to coarser
particle size possess higher void ratio as compared to fly ash samples. This
represents that the pond ash will allow faster drainage of water after stowing.
xvi. The rheological analysis established that the fly ash and pond ash slurries
follow shear-thinning or non -Newtonian pseudoplastic behaviour.
xvii. The results of the model stowing in the laboratory show that the rate of water
drainage from the stowing of pond ash slurries with and without flocculant is
initially very high and thereafter, it gradually decreases with time in all the
slurry concentrations.
xviii. Addition of CMC flocculant with pond ash slurries has drastically improved
the initial drainage rate of water from the stowed pond ash. After 15 minutes of
stowing, the drainage rate almost doubled in case of stowing with slurries of
45% Cw, 50% Cw and 55% Cw added with flocculant, whereas, in case of
slurries of 60% Cw and 65% Cw, it increased 1.46 and 1.22 times respectively of
156
the pond ash slurries without flocculant.
xix. In both the cases, the percentage of water absorption by the stowed pond ash is
higher when stowed with higher slurry concentrations. However, a marginal
increase in water absorption is noticed in case of slurries added with flocculant.
xx. In case of stowing with higher slurry concentrations, higher percentages of

stowing are achieved in the 1st phase it self and therefore, very less quantity of
material is required in the 2nd phase stowing to completely fill the void. Pond
ash stowing with slurry concentration of 65% Cw is the most suitable one
which gives best results in terms of highest percentage of stowing in the 1st
phase and minimum amount of drainage.
xxi. In case of stowing with higher slurry concentrations, higher amounts of pond
ash are stowed, number of stowing cycles are reduced, requirement of water is
less and drainage from the stowed mass is reduced which may help in
minimizing the total stowing cost.
xxii. The void ratio of stowed pond ash and pond ash-lime mixture samples
decreases with the applied load irrespective of their time of curing which shows
a decrease in compressibility with increment of load. Comparatively, the void
ratio of the stowed pond ash-lime mixture is higher than that of the stowed
pond ash irrespective of their time of curing. Hence, it is evident that addition
of slack lime assists to absorb more water from the mixture and causes increase
in the void ratio of the blended mix which is probably attributed to reduced
compaction and some hydration-induced swelling.
xxiii. A decrease in Cv values with increment of time is noticed during consolidation

test of stowed pond ash samples. Therefore, the pond ash (Class F) used for
stowing which contains a very little amount of free lime (CaO = 0.72%),
responses very little to self hardening with time.
xxiv. Mixing of lime with the pond ash during hydraulic stowing showed an
157
improvement in the consolidation characteristics of the stowed pond ash-lime

mixture specimens due to hydration induced cementation. Even though, the
addition of slack lime significantly increased the void ratio of the blended mix,
the gain in coefficient of consolidation (Cv) is considerable at 7% lime addition.
xxv. Finally, it may be concluded that the fly ash and pond ash of both the power
stations are suitable for stowing in underground coal mines; however, pond ash
is better stowing martial as compared to the fly ash. Due to coarser particle size,
TSTPS pond ash is most suitable for stowing.
9.4 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
The present research involves a lot of experimental works which are very much labour
intensive and time consuming. Like complexity in fly ash composition, the
experimental works are also very critical and always associated with unavoidable
experimental errors. Although the study has a significant contribution in this area, it
has some limitations which are listed below.
a) The rheological behaviour of fly ash and pond ash slurries could have been
studied in a better way by using a coaxial tube rheometer which is most
suitable for the fly ash/pond ash slurries. Due to unavailability of the same in
the laboratory, the rheometer with parallel plate geometry was used.
b) In some of the experiments like compaction and consolidation tests, due to time
constraint, only the fly ash and pond ash samples of TTPS could be tested. The
same studies could have been conducted for the fly ash and pond ash samples
of TSTPS for better generalization of the results.
c) The model study is based on our own concepts and does not use similitude
principles. However, the results of the study may be used as a guide only.
158
9.5 RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations may be made from this research work.
a) It is already evaluated from the study that pond ash is better than fly ash for
stowing in underground coal mines. Therefore, the mining sector should go for
large scale pond ash stowing which is locked in the ash ponds.
b) Among the pond ashes, comparatively the pond ash of TSTPS is better than that
of TTPS from particle size and permeability points of view and can be a better
option for stowing.
c) Government, along with both the power and mining sectors, should take
initiatives whole heartedly and come forward for the effective bulk utilization
of the unused pond ash in stowing. If implemented successfully, the mining
sector will find a suitable alternative material for stowing at a minimum cost
and the power sector will find a safe disposal site for the unused pond ash
locked in the ash ponds. Their mutual cooperation can solve the problems at
both the ends.
d) More participation and R&D are required for development of new stowing
technology for successfully carrying out large scale pond ash stowing in
underground mines.
9.6 FUTURE SCOPE OF RESEARCH
The present study can be further extended by considering the following areas:
a) Hydraulic gravity transportation aspects of fly ash/pond ash slurries through

pipeline can be explored for stowing of the fly ash/pond ash in mines. The
analysis may be supplemented by applying computational fluid dynamics
(CFD).
159
b) Another potential area of research is field study. The stowing technology

should be implemented in the field for large scale stowing of fly ash/pond ash
and various stowing parameters should be monitored in actual field conditions.
c) Stress distribution and load bearing characteristics of the stowed fly ash/pond
ash in mines is another area to be studied. The stress distribution on the stowed
mass can be analyzed by applying finite element method (FEM) in the
laboratory and field conditions.
d) There is a need for designing a stowing plant specifically for conducting fly ash
stowing operation. The existing sand stowing plant can not be efficiently used
for fly ash stowing. Since, fly ash is fine in nature; it needs a specially designed
stowing plant with stirring arrangements for proper mixing of fly ash with
water before stowing, which otherwise may create problems like, settling of fly
ash and jamming of pipeline.
160
REFERENCES
ASTM C618–03, ‘Standard specification for coal fly ash and raw or calcined natural
pozzolan for use in concrete’, Annual book of ASTM Standards, Vol. 04.02.
ASTM D2434-68 (2006), ‘Standard test method for permeability of granular soils
(constant head)’.
ASTM D854-06, ‘Standard test methods for specific gravity of soil solids by water
pycnometer’, Annual book of ASTM Standards, Volume: 04.08.
Bayat, O. (1998), ‘Characterization of Turkish fly ashes’, Fuel, Vol. 77, No. 900, pp.
1059-1066.
Berry, E. E. (1985), ‘Fly ash for use in concrete, Part-1’, The Canadian Centre for
Mineral and Energy Technology (CANMET).
Bhattacharya, J. and Banerjee, S. S. (1997), ‘An investigation to find the suitability of fly
ash as fill material in underground mines’, Transaction of MGMI, Vol. 93, No. 2,
March, pp. 49 – 71.
Biswal, D. R. and Singh, R. P. (2004), ‘Characterisation of carboxymethyl cellulose and
polyacrylamide graft copolymer’, Carbohydrate Polymers, Vol. 57, Issue 4,
September, pp. 379-387.
Boger, D., Scales, P. , and Sofra, F. (2007), ‘Rheological concepts’, Chapter 3, in Paste
and Thickened Tailings – A Guide (Second Edition), (ed.) Richard Jewell and
Andy Fourie, Australian Centre for Geomechanics, pp. 25 – 37.
Bradecki, W. (2001), ‘Waste management in Polish coal industry’, Journal of Mines,
Metals and Fuels, Vol. XLIX, Nos. 8&9, August-September.
Bratby, J. (2006), ‘Coagulation and flocculation in water and wastewater treatment’,
2nd Edition, IWA Publishing, 450 pp.
Capco (1990), ‘Pulverized fuel ash as a reclamation fill’, Report, China Light and
Power Co. Ltd., Hong Kong, pp.1–34.
Chang, A. C., Lund, L. J., Page, A. L. and Warneke, J. E. (1977), ‘Physical properties of
fly ash amended soils’, J. Environmental Quality, Vol. 6(3), pp. 267 – 270.
Chryss, A. and Pullum, L. (2007), ‘A new viscometric technique to successfully
measure shear thickening behaviour, if and when it occurs’, Hydrotransport 17,
The Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and the BHR Group,
pp. 15 – 27.
Chugh, Y. P., Biswas, D. and Deb, D. (2002), ‘Underground placement of coal
processing waste and coal combustion by-products based paste backfill for
References
enhanced mining economics’, Final Report submitted to United States

Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory, June, Project
No. DE-FC26-99FT40553.
Chugh, Y. P., Deb, D. and Raju, C. B. (2000), ‘Physical and engineering properties of
coal combustion by-products’, in K. C. Vories and D. Throgmorton (ed.), Proc.
The Use and Disposal of Coal Combustion By-Products at Coal Mines: A Tech.
Interactive Forum, April 10 – 13, Morgantown, West Virginia. 272 pp. #M12014,
pp. 26 – 37.
Chugh, Y. P., Patwardhan, A. and Munish, S. (2007), ‘Demonstration of cattle feeding
pads using coal combustion byproducts including sulfite-rich scrubber sludge’,
2007 World of Coal Ash (WOCA), May 7-10, Covington, Kentucky, USA.
Das, S. K. and Yudhbir (2006), ‘Geotechnical properties of low calcium and high
calcium fly ash’, Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, Vol. 24, No. 2, April, pp.
249 – 263.
DGMS Circular – 1994.
Georgakopoulos, A. (2003), ‘Chemistry and morphology of fly ash samples from the
main lignite power stations of northern Greece’, Proceedings of the 8th
International Conference on Environmental Science and Technology, Lemnos Island,
Greece, 8 – 10 September, Vol. B, pp. 256 – 263.
Ghosh, C. N., Kumar, V., Prashant and Mondal, P. K. (2005), ‘Hydraulic ash stowing
in underground coal mines – a case study’, International congress on fly ash India
2005, New Delhi, December 4-7, pp. IX 1.1 - VII 1.15.
Ghosh, C. N., Mondal, P. K. and Prashant, (2006), ‘Suitability of fly ash as a stowing
material for underground coal mines – some studies’, 1st Asian Mining Congress,
16 – 18 January, MGMI, Kolkata, pp.113 – 123.
Gray D. H. and Lin, Y. K. (1972), ‘Engineering properties of compacted fly ash’, J. Soil
Mech. Foundation Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 98, pp. 361–380.
Gregory, J. (1993), ‘Stability and flocculation of suspension’, in Proc. Solid-Liquid
Dispersions, P. Ayazi Shamlou (ed.), Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd., Ch.3.
Gupta R. P., Wall T. F., Kajigaya I., Miyamae S. and Tsumita Y. (1998), ‘Computer-
controlled scanning electron microscopy of minerals in coal-implications for ash
deposition’, Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, Vol. 24, No. 6, pp. 523 –
543.
Hocking, M. B., Klimchuk, K. A. and Lowen, S. (1999), ‘Polymeric flocculants and
flocculation’, J. Macromol. Sci., Rev. Macromol. Chem. Phys. C39, pp. 177–203.
Hogg, R. (2000), ‘Flocculation and dewatering’, Int. J. Mineral Processing, Vol. 58, pp.
223– 236.
162
References
Horiuchi, S., Kawaguchi, M. and Yasuhara, K. (2000), ‘Effective use of fly ash slurry as
fill material’, Journal of Hazardous Materials, Vol. 76, pp. 301 – 337.
Hughes, M. A. (1990), ‘Coagulation and flocculation, Part 1’, in Solid-Liquid Separation,
3rd ed., L. Svarosky, (ed.), Butterworth & Co (Publishers) Ltd, 74.
Indraratna, B. (1996), ‘Utilization of lime, slag and fly ash for improvement of a
colluvial soil South,Wales, Australia’, Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 14,
pp. 169-191.
IS: 2386 (Part III) – (1963), ‘Specific gravity of the fly ash and pond ash samples of both
the power stations are determined by using Water Pycnometer’.
IS: 2720 (Part 15)-(1986), ‘Methods of Test for Soils: Part 15’, Determination of
Consolidation Properties, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
Iyer, R. S. and Stanmore, B. (1999), ‘The effect of water absorption and the role of fines
on the yield stress of dense fly ash slurries’, Cement and Concrete Research, Vol.
29, pp. 765 – 767.
Iyer, R. S. and Stanmore, B. (2000), ‘The distortion of the diffuse double layer and its
effect on flow properties of dense fly ash slurries’, Colloids and Surfaces A:
Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects 166, pp. 133 – 144.
Kaniraj, S. R. and Gayathri, V. (2004), ‘Permeability and consolidation characteristics
of compacted fly ash”, Journal of Energy Engineering, Vol. 130, No. 1, pp. 18-43.
Karfakis, M. G., Bowman, C. H. and Topuz, E. (1996), ‘Characterization of coal-mine
refuse as backfilling material”, Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, Vol. 14,
pp.129-150.
Karmakar, N. C. (1998), ‘Application of polymeric flocculants for solid-liquid
separation in mineral fines with special reference to coal’, Ph.D. thesis, IIT,
Kharagpur.
Khanra, S., Mallick, D., Dutta, S. N. and Chaudhuri, S. K. (1998), ‘Studies on the phase
mineralogy and leaching characteristics of coal fly ash’, Water, Air, and Soil
Pollution, Vol. 107, No. 1-4, October, pp. 251–275.
Koukouzas, N. et al. (2007), ‘Mineralogical and elemental composition of fly ash from
pilot scale fluidised bed combustion of lignite, bituminous coal, wood chips and
their blends’, Fuel 86, pp. 2186–2193.
Kumar, V. et al. (2003), ‘Hydraulic stowing of pond ash in underground mines of
Manuguru, India’, Proceedings of 3rd International Conference on Fly ash Disposal
and utilization, Feb 19–21, New Delhi, India, pp. VI-1–7.
Kumar, H., Mishra, D. P. and Das S. K. (2006), ‘Settling characteristics of fly ash of
Talchar thermal power station’, in 1st Asian Mining Congress, 16 – 18 January,
MGMI, Kolkata, pp. 135 – 139.
163
References
Kumar, V., Zacharia, K. A. and Sharma, P. (1999), ‘Fly ash utilisation: Indian scenario
& case studies’, Proceedings of the Indo European workshop on Handling &
Utilisation of coal combustion By-products from Indian Power Stations (NTPC,
Punjab, April 1999).
Lee, S. H., Sakai, E., Daimon M. and Bang, W. K. (1999), ‘Characterization of fly ash
directly collected from electrostatic precipitator’, Cement and Concrete
Research,
Vol. 29, Issue 11 , pp. 1791-1797.
Liu, G. et al. (2004), ‘Petrological and mineralogical characterizations and chemical
composition of coal ashes from power plants in Yanzhou mining district,
China’, Fuel Processing Technology 85, pp. 1635– 1646.
Mahasneh, B. Z. and Shawabkeh, R. A. (2005), ‘Compressive strength and permeability
of sand-cement-clay composite and application for heavy metals stabilization’,
EJGE-2005, Paper-0528.
Malvern 3601 Particle Size Analyzer, Operation manual.
Marrero, J. et al. (2007), ‘Characterization and determination of 28 elements in fly
ashes collected in a thermal power plant in Argentina using different
instrumental techniques’, Spectrochimica Acta, Part B 62, pp. 101–108.
McCarthy, G. J. (1988), ‘X-ray powder diffraction for studying the mineralogy of fly
ash’, in Fly Ash and Coal Conversion By-Products: Characterization, Utilization and
Disposal IV. Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc., 113:75-86.
McCarthy, G. J., J. K. Solem, J. A. Bender, and K. E. Eylands (1993), ‘Mineralogical
analysis of advanced coal conversion residuals by x-ray diffraction’, Proceedings:
Tenth International Ash Use Symposium, Vol. 2: (58)1-14: Ash Use R&D and Clean
Coal By-Products, American Coal Ash Association.
Metcalfe, R. D., Connor, J. N., Druskovich, D., Blackford, M. G. and Short, K. (2006),
‘The influence of fly ash morphology and phase distribution on collection in an
electrostatic precipitator’, Australian Institute of Physics 17th National Congress
2006 – Brisbane, 3-8 December, Paper No. WC0083.
Monte, M. D. and Sabbioni, C. (1984), ‘Morphology and mineralogy of fly ash from a
coal-fueled power plant’, Journal of Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics, Vol. 35,
Nos. 1-2, pp. 93 – 104.
Moody, G. M. (1990), ‘Role of polyacrylamide and related products in treatment of
mineral processing effluent’, Trans. Instn. Min. Metall. C: Mineral Process. Extr.
Metall., 99, C 137.
Moreno, N. et al. (2005), ‘Physico-chemical characteristics of European pulverized coal
combustion fly ashes’, Fuel 84, vol. 84, Issue 11, pp. 1351–1363.
164
References
Moulton, K. L. (1978), ‘Technology and utilization of power plant ash in structural fills
and embankments’, West Virginia University.
Naik, T. R. and Singh, S. S. (1993), ‘Fly ash generation and utilization - an overview’, in
Recent Trends in Fly Ash Utilization, Society of Forest & Environmental Managers
(SOFEM), India, March, pp. 1-25.
Olhero, S. M. and Ferreira, J. M. F. (2004), ‘Influence of particle size distribution on
rheology and particle packing of silica-based suspensions’, Powder Technology,
Vol. 139, pp. 69 – 75.
Openshaw, S. C. et al. (1992), ‘Utilization of coal fly ash’, Executive summary, Report
#92-3, Florida center for solid and hazardous waste management, State
University System of Florida.
Pandey, J. K. and Kumbhakar, D. (2007), ‘Coal ash as mine fill – possibilities &
prospects’, The Indian Mining & Engineering Journal, Vol. 46, No. 07, July, pp. 23
– 27.
Pandian, N. S. (2004), ‘Fly ash characterization with reference to geotechnical
applications’, J. Indian Inst. Sci., Vol. 84, pp. 189–216.
Pandian, N. S. and Balasubramonian, S. (1999), ‘Permeability and consolidation
behavior of fly ashes’, Journal of Testing and Evaluation, JTEVA, Vol. 27, No. 5,
pp. 337–342.
Pandian, N. S., Rajasekhar, C. and Sridharan, A. (1998), ‘Studies of the specific gravity
of some Indian fly ashes’, Journal of Testing and Evaluation, ASTM, 26(3), pp.177–
186.
Pandian, N. S. and Balasubramonian, S. (2000), ‘Leaching studies on ASTM type F fly
ashes by an accelerated process method’, Journal of Testing Evaluation, ASTM, 28,
pp. 44 – 51.
Parker, D. G. and Thornton, S. I. (1976), ‘Permeability of fly ash and fly ash stabilized
soils’, Final report on highway research project no. 47. Report No. PB-265229,
December 01, Arkansas Univ., Fayetteville (USA), Dept. of Civil Engineering.
Pati, M., Mahadevan, M.R. and Bera, J. (2001), ‘Fly ash: a case study of solid waste
management’, in Environmental Issues and Waste Management in Mining and
Allied Industries, EWM-2001, Dept. of Mining Engineering, NIT Rourkela, Feb.
23 & 24.pp. 90 – 95.
Porbaha, A., Pradhan, T. B. S. and Yamane, N. (2000), ‘Time effect on shear strength
and permeability of fly ash’, Journal of Energy Engineering, Vol. 126, No. 1, April,
pp. 15 – 31.
Prabakar, J., Dendorkar, N. and Morchhale, R. K. (2004), ‘Influence of fly ash on
strength behavior of typical soils’, Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 18,
pp. 263 – 267.
165
References
Prashant et al. (2006), ‘Model study to optimize barricade configuration for ash
stowing’, Journal of Mines, Metals & Fuels, June-July, pp. 142 – 146.
Rahman, Z. (2005), ‘Thermal power fly ash/pond ash in mine stowing at Durgapur
Rayatwari Colliery (W.C.L)’, International congress on fly ash India 2005, New
Delhi, December 4-7, pp. IX 3.1 - IX 3.10.
Rai, R. S. (2001), Project proposal Entitled ‘Fly ash hydraulic stowing at Jarangdih
Colliery (Kathara Area-CCL) Near Bokaro Thermal Power Station’, February.
Ramanujam, G. (2005), ‘Pond ash as mine fill and its quality as stowing material’,
International congress on Fly ash India 2005, New Delhi, December 4-7, pp. IX 12.1
- IX 12.7.
Ramlu, M. A. (1985), ‘Mine Disasters and Mine Rescue’, Oxford and IBH Publishing Co.,
New Delhi.
Ramme, B. W., Naik, T. R and Kolbeck, H. J. (1994), ‘Use of fly ash slurry for
underground facility construction’, Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 8,
No. 1, pp. 63 – 67.
Rankine, K. J. and Sivakugan, N. S. (2005), ‘Drainage characteristics and behaviour of
hydraulically placed mine fill and fill barricades’, Proceedings of the 16th
ISSMGE, Osaka, Vol. 2, pp. 579-582.
Rao, B. B., Rao, P. V., Kumar, V. and Hussain, M. F. (2005), ‘Techno-economic
viability of ash stowing in coal mines – a case study’, International congress on fly
ash India, New Delhi, December 4-7, pp. IX 4.1 - IX 4.8.
Rao, Narasimha A.V. (1999), ‘Characteristics of fly ash and its application-a brief
review’, Proceedings of the national seminar on fly ash characterization and its
geotechnical application, I. I. Sc. Bangalore, August 30.
Ravina, D. (1998), ‘Mechanical properties of structural concrete incorporating a high
volume of Class F fly ash as partial fine sand replacement’, Materials and
Structures, Vol. 31, pp. 84-90.
Rokita, J. and Tomaszewski, S. (1988), ‘A new technology of hydraulic transport and
storage of fly-ash and energetistic slag in the form of a mixture with high
percentage of the solid phase’, Paper J3, Hydrotransport 11, Stanford-upon-
Avon, UK: 19-21 October, pp. 481 – 493.
Sanyal, B. (2002), ‘Coal PSUs may use fly ash for back-filling in mines-study advocates
tech for hydraulic stowing’, Article published in The Hindu Business Line on
Thursday, Oct 03.
Sarkar , A. and Rano, R. (2007), ‘Water holding capacities of fly ashes: effect of size
fractionation’, Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental
Effects, Vol. 29, Issue 5, January, pp. 471 – 482.
166
References
Sarkar, A., Rano, R., Udaybhanu G. and Basu, A.K. (2006), ‘A comprehensive
characterisation of fly ash from a thermal power plant in Eastern India’, Fuel
Processing Technology, Vol. 87, Issue 3, pp. 259-277.
Seals, P. L., Moulton, L. K. and Ruth, B. E. (1972), ‘Bottom ash: an engineering
material’, JSMFD, ASCE, 98, No. SM4, pp. 311-325.
Sengupta, P. (2002), ‘Fly ash for acidic soils’, Sci Tech, The Hindu on Thursday, Feb 28.
Shah, S. N. and Jeong, Y. T. (2003), ‘The flow characteristics of fly ash slurry for
plugging abandoned wells using coiled tubing’, International Ash Utilization
Symposium, Centre for Applied Energy Research, University of Kentucky, Paper
# 110.
Shao, H., Liang, K., Zhou, F., Wang, G. and Peng, F. (2004), ‘Characterization of
cordierite-based glass-ceramics produced from fly ash’, Journal of Non-
Crystalline Solids, Vol. 337, Issue 2, pp. 157-160.
Siddique, R. (2007), ‘Coal fly ash’, in Waste Materials and By-Products in Concrete,
Chapter 6, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 177-234.
Singh, V., Gupta, P. and Singh, T. N. (2005), ‘Application of fly ash in mine safety and
stability’, Conference on Technological Advancements and Environmental Challenges
in Mining and Allied Industries in the 21st Century, 5 -6, February, NIT, Rourkela,
India, pp. 621 – 627.
Sobota, J. and Plewa, F. (2000), ‘Global and local characteristics of ash mixture flows’,
Electronic Journal of Polish Agricultural Universities, Series: Environmental
Development, Vol. 3, Issue 2.
Streat, M. (1986), ‘Dense phase flow of solid-water mixtures in pipelines: a state-of-the-
art review’, BHRA, Hydrotransport 10, pp. 39 – 54.
Tishmack, J. K. (1996), ‘Bulk chemical and mineral characteristics of coal combustion
by-products (CCB)’, Proceedings of the Coal Combustion By-Products Associated
with Coal Mining-Interactive Forum, SIUC at Carbondale October 29-31, ed. by
Yoginder P. Chugh, Brandi M. Sangunett and Kimery C. Vories.
Toth, P. S., Chan, H. T. and Cragg, C. B. (1988), ‘Coal ash as structural fill with special
reference to Ontario experience’, Can. Geotech. J., Vol. 25, pp. 694–704.
Tripathy, T. and De, B.R. (2006), ‘Flocculation : a new way to treat the waste water’,
Journal of Physical Sciences, Vol. 10, pp. 93 – 127.
Trivedi, A. and Singh, S. (2004), ‘Geotechnical and geoenvironmental properties of
power plant ash’, Vol. 85 (August), IE (I) Journal-CV, pp. 93-99.
Usui, H., Kishimoto, K. and Suzuki, H. (2001), ‘Non-Newtonian viscosity of dense
slurries prepared by spherical particles’, Chemical Engineering Science, Vol. 56,
pp. 2979 – 2989.
167
References
Usui, H., Li, L. and Suzuki, H. (2001), ‘Rheology and pipeline transportation of dense
fly ash-water slurry’, Korea-Australia Rheology Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, March, pp.
47 – 54.
Vassilev, S. V. and Vassileva, C. G. (2006), ‘A new approach for the classification of
coal fly ashes based on their origin, composition, properties, and behaviour’,
Fuel, Vol. 86, Issue 10-11, July-August, pp. 1490-1512.
Verkerk, C. G. (1982), ‘Transport of fly ash slurries’, BHRA, Hydrotransport 8, p. 307.
Web, D. L. and Hughes, T. S. (1987), ‘The consolidation characteristics of fly ash’, Ash,
a valuable resource, CSIR Conf., Pretoria.
White, S. C. and Case, E. D. (1990), ‘Characterization of fly ash from coal-fired power
plants’, Journal of Materials Science 25, pp. 5215-5219.
http://edugreen.teri.res.in/EXPLORE/air/flyash.htm
http://pib.nic.in/release/release.asp?relid=5754, FLY ASH BRICKS, press release,
Thursday, December 16, 2004, Ministry of Environment and Forests, India.
http://www.acaa-usa.org/CCP.htm
http://www.answers.com/topic/fly-ash
http://www.ashtechindia.com/
http://www.ce.washington.edu/~geotech/courses/cee366/arduino/exercise5.PDF
http://www.ecoba.com/
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/Pavement/recycling/fafacts.pdf
http://www.flyash.com/
http://www.flyash.info/
http://www.flyash.org/
http://www.flyashdirect.com/
http://www.flyashdirect.com/ash_industry.asp
http://www.hvfacprojectindia.com/
http://www.iflyash.com/products.htm
http://www.korba.nic.in/kwflyash.htm
http://www.ntpc.co.in/infocus/ashutilisation.shtml
http://www.rmajko.com/flyash.html
http://www.tfhrc.gov/hnr20/recycle/waste/cfa51.htm
http://www.tifac.org.in/do/fly/fly.htm
168
APPENDIX A
A.1 Results of Particle Size Analysis of Fly Ash and Pond Ash Samples
The results of the particle size analysis of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples are
given in Table A.1.1 and Table A.1.3 respectively. The results of the particle size
analysis of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples are given in Table A.1.2.
Table A.1.1 Results of the particle size analysis of TSTPS fly ash samples by Malvern
particle size analyzer
Fly ash
Particle size,
NF1 NF2 NF3 NF4
microns
Percent finer Percent finer Percent finer Percent finer
270 100 100 100 100
233 100 100 99.9 100
201 100 100 99.7 100
173 100 100 99.3 100
149 100 100 97.5 100
129 100 100 94.5 99.9
111 99.8 100 91.1 99.5
95.9 99.2 100 88.0 98.6
82.7 97.1 99.9 83.8 96.4
71.4 92.5 99.7 77.9 92.4
61.6 87.3 98.9 71.5 87.6
53.1 82.5 97.3 65.5 82.6
45.8 78.0 95.0 60.0 77.5
39.5 73.5 92.1 54.9 72.3
34.1 68.6 88.8 49.8 67.0
29.4 63.3 84.7 44.5 61.1
25.4 57.7 79.3 38.9 54.7
21.9 51.8 72.4 33.4 47.9
18.9 46.2 64.6 28.4 41.3
16.3 41.0 57.0 24.2 35.3
14.1 36.2 49.7 20.5 30.0
12.1 31.1 41.7 17.0 24.7
10.5 26.5 34.3 14.0 20.2
9.03 21.7 26.8 11.1 15.8
7.79 17.3 20.4 8.52 12.0
6.72 12.9 14.7 6.19 8.64
5.80 9.36 10.4 4.37 6.06
Appendix A
Table A.1.2 Results of the particle size analysis of TTPS fly ash and pond ash samples
by Malvern particle size analyzer
Fly ash Pond ash

Particle
F1 F2 F3 P1 P2 P3
size,
Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent
microns
finer finer finer finer finer finer
188 100 100 100 100 100 100
162 100 100 100 100 99.9 99.9
140 100 100 100 99.8 99.6 99.4
121 100 100 100 99.2 98.8 98.2
104 100 100 99.9 98.2 97.3 95.8
89.9 100 99.9 99.8 96.7 94.9 92.2
77.5 99.9 99.8 99.6 94.3 91.3 86.9
66.9 99.8 99.6 99.3 91.1 86.3 79.7
57.7 99.7 99.4 98.8 86.9 79.9 70.3
49.8 99.3 98.7 98.0 83.0 73.9 62.8
42.9 98.6 97.6 96.7 79.8 68.9 58.1
37.1 97.3 95.7 94.8 76.0 63.6 53.7
32.0 94.3 92.2 91.3 70.9 56.9 48.3
27.6 87.7 85.5 84.8 62.9 48.9 41.2
23.8 75.7 74.3 74.0 51.2 39.4 31.7
20.5 64.8 64.1 64.0 41.2 31.4 24.0
17.7 58.1 57.6 57.6 35.7 26.5 20.2
15.3 52.7 52.1 52.2 31.5 22.7 17.6
13.2 47.2 46.5 46.7 27.4 19.2 15.0
11.4 40.9 40.2 40.6 22.8 15.6 12.1
9.81 34.1 33.5 34.0 18.1 12.2 9.14
8.46 27.7 27.2 27.9 14.0 9.44 6.81
7.30 22.2 21.8 22.4 10.9 7.26 5.12
6.30 17.4 17.1 17.7 8.53 5.59 3.92
5.43 13.5 13.2 13.7 6.57 4.21 2.89
4.69 10.2 9.99 10.5 4.93 3.08 2.00
4.05 7.63 7.49 7.95 3.55 2.17 1.26
3.49 5.55 5.48 5.93 2.44 1.46 0.72
3.01 3.94 3.92 4.34 1.63 0.95 0.38
2.60 2.75 2.76 3.12 1.08 0.60 0.20
2.24 1.87 1.90 2.18 0.71 0.38 0.10
1.93 1.32 1.35 1.57 0.49 0.26 0.06
170
Appendix A
Table A.1.3 Sieve analysis results of TSTPS pond ash samples
Sieve openings NP1 NP2 NP3 NP4 NP5 NP6

(mm) Cumulative % passing (Percent Finer)
2.36 97.25 94.56 97.59 97.92 98.96 97.65
1.18 94.7 90.81 95.72 96.21 97.94 95.22
0.600 90.23 81.69 92.41 92.78 96.0 90.66
0.425 86.54 73.58 88.98 89.31 93.93 86.8
0.300 79.97 60.3 81.45 81.83 89.03 80.36
0.150 52.72 26.6 51.57 51.86 57.0 55.5
0.075 29.68 11.46 28.03 28.16 25.66 34.65
A.2 Results of Crossing Point Temperature (CPT) Test of Fly Ash and Pond Ash Samples
The results of CPT test of TTPS ash samples are given in Table A.2.1, whereas, the
results of TSTPS fly ash and pond ash samples are given in Table A.2.2 and A.2.3
respectively.
Table A.2.1 Results of crossing point temperature (CPT) test of TTPS fly ash and pond
ash samples
Fly ash samples Pond ash samples

F1 F2 P1 P2
Furnace Ash Furnace Ash Furnace Ash Furnace Ash
Time Time Time Time
Temp. Temp. Temp. Temp. Temp. Temp. Temp. Temp.
(min) (min) (min) (min)
(0C) (0C) (0C) (0C) (0C) (0C) (0C) (0C)
0 24 24 0 25 26 0 27 27 0 26 27
5 29 27 5 30 28 5 32 29 5 31 29
10 34 32 10 35 31 10 37 34 10 36 33
15 39 37 15 40 35 15 42 38 15 41 37
20 44 42 20 45 41 20 47 43 20 46 42
25 49 47 25 50 46 25 52 48 25 51 46
30 54 52 30 55 51 30 57 53 30 56 51
35 59 57 35 60 56 35 62 58 35 61 56
40 64 62 40 65 61 40 67 63 40 66 62
45 69 67 45 70 65 45 72 68 45 71 67
50 74 72 50 75 71 50 77 73 50 76 72
55 79 77 55 80 76 55 82 78 55 81 77
60 84 82 60 85 81 60 87 83 60 86 82
65 89 87 65 90 86 65 92 88 65 91 87
70 94 92 70 95 91 70 97 93 70 96 93
171
Appendix A
75 99 97 75 100 97 75 102 99 75 101 98

80 104 101 80 105 102 80 107 104 80 106 103
85 109 106 85 110 107 85 112 109 85 111 108
90 114 111 90 115 112 90 117 114 90 116 113
95 119 116 95 120 117 95 122 119 95 121 118
100 124 121 100 125 122 100 127 124 100 126 123
105 129 126 105 130 127 105 132 129 105 131 129
110 134 131 110 135 133 110 137 134 110 136 134
115 139 136 115 140 138 115 142 139 115 141 139
120 144 141 120 145 143 120 147 144 120 146 144
125 149 146 125 150 148 125 152 150 125 151 149
130 154 151 130 155 153 130 157 155 130 156 154
135 159 155 135 160 159 135 162 160 135 161 159
140 164 160 140 165 164 140 167 165 140 166 164
145 169 165 145 170 169 145 172 170 145 171 169
150 174 170 150 175 174 150 177 175 150 176 174
155 179 175 155 180 179 155 182 180 155 181 179
160 184 180 160 185 184 160 187 185 160 186 184
165 189 186 165 190 189 165 192 190 165 191 189
170 194 191 170 195 194 170 197 195 170 196 194
175 199 196 175 200 199 173 200 198 174 200 198
176 200 197 - - - - - - - - -
Table A.2.2 Results of crossing point temperature (CPT) test of TSTPS fly ash samples
Fly ash samples

NF1 NF2 NF3
Furnace Ash Furnace Ash Furnace Ash
Time Time Time
Temp. Temp. Temp. Temp. Temp. Temp.
(min) (min) (min)
(0C) (0C) (0C) (0C) (0C) (0C)
0 28 29 0 24 25 0 24 24
5 33 31 5 29 27 5 29 27
10 38 35 10 34 31 10 34 32
15 43 40 15 39 37 15 39 37
20 48 45 20 44 41 20 44 42
25 53 50 25 49 45 25 49 47
30 58 56 30 54 51 30 54 52
35 63 60 35 59 56 35 59 56
40 68 64 40 64 60 40 64 62
45 73 69 45 69 65 45 69 66
50 78 74 50 74 71 50 74 71
55 83 79 55 79 76 55 79 77
172
Appendix A
60 88 85 60 84 79 60 84 81
65 93 90 65 89 84 65 89 87
70 98 94 70 94 91 70 94 91
75 103 99 75 99 95 75 99 96
80 108 105 80 104 101 80 104 101
85 113 109 85 109 106 85 109 106
90 118 114 90 114 111 90 114 111
95 123 120 95 119 117 95 119 116
100 128 124 100 124 122 100 124 121
105 133 129 105 129 126 105 129 126
110 138 135 110 134 131 110 134 131
115 143 139 115 139 136 115 139 136
120 148 145 120 144 142 120 144 142
125 153 150 125 149 147 125 149 147
130 158 154 130 154 152 130 154 152
135 163 160 135 159 157 135 159 157
140 168 164 140 164 162 140 164 162
145 173 169 145 169 167 145 169 167
150 178 175 150 174 172 150 174 172
155 183 179 155 179 177 155 179 177
160 188 184 160 184 182 160 184 182
165 193 190 165 189 187 165 189 188
170 198 195 170 194 191 170 194 193
172 200 197 175 199 197 175 199 198
- - - 176 200 198 176 200 199
Table A.2.3 Results of crossing point temperature (CPT) test of TSTPS pond ash
samples
Pond ash samples

NP1 NP2 NP3
Furnace Ash Furnace Ash Furnace Ash
Time Time Time
Temp. Temp. Temp. Temp. Temp. Temp.
(min) (min) (min)
(0C) (0C) (0C) (0C) (0C) (0C)
0 24 25 0 24 25 0 26 27
5 29 27 5 29 27 5 31 29
10 34 32 10 34 32 10 36 34
15 39 36 15 39 36 15 41 38
20 44 40 20 44 41 20 46 42
25 49 45 25 49 46 25 51 47
30 54 50 30 54 51 30 56 52
35 59 55 35 59 56 35 61 57
173
Appendix A
40 64 60 40 64 61 40 66 62
45 69 65 45 69 66 45 71 67
50 74 70 50 74 71 50 76 72
55 79 75 55 79 76 55 81 77
60 84 80 60 84 81 60 86 82
65 89 86 65 89 86 65 91 88
70 94 91 70 94 91 70 96 93
75 99 97 75 99 97 75 101 98
80 104 102 80 104 102 80 106 103
85 109 107 85 109 107 85 111 108
90 114 112 90 114 112 90 116 113
95 119 117 95 119 117 95 121 118
100 124 122 100 124 122 100 126 123
105 129 127 105 129 127 105 131 128
110 134 132 110 134 132 110 136 133
115 139 137 115 139 137 115 141 138
120 144 142 120 144 142 120 146 143
125 149 147 125 149 148 125 151 148
130 154 152 130 154 153 130 156 153
135 159 157 135 159 158 135 161 158
140 164 162 140 164 163 140 166 163
145 169 167 145 169 168 145 171 169
150 174 172 150 174 173 150 176 173
155 179 177 155 179 178 155 181 179
160 184 183 160 184 183 160 186 183
165 189 188 165 189 188 165 191 189
170 194 193 170 194 193 170 196 194
175 199 198 175 199 198 174 200 198
176 200 199 176 200 199 - - -
174
APPENDIX B
B.1 Time-Compression Data of Consolidation Test of Compacted ‘TTPS’ Ash
Samples
Table B.1.1 Time-compression data at different load increments for compacted fly ash
F1
Test results of fly ash F1
Elapsed
Applied loads, p
time,
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.6 3.2
t
kg/cm 2 kg/cm 2 kg/cm 2 kg/cm 2 kg/cm 2 kg/cm2
(min)
Dial reading (mm)
0 5.830 5.746 5.626 5.467 5.275 5.064
0.25 5.825 5.664 5.509 5.334 5.112 4.893
1 5.823 5.663 5.508 5.325 5.109 4.884
2.25 5.821 5.661 5.508 5.319 5.106 4.880
4 5.819 5.659 5.507 5.316 5.102 4.877
6.25 5.818 5.659 5.503 5.314 5.099 4.874
9 5.815 5.657 5.502 5.312 5.097 4.872
12.25 5.812 5.656 5.493 5.299 5.096 4.870
16 5.812 5.654 5.491 5.297 5.093 4.868
20.25 5.796 5.654 5.490 5.296 5.091 4.866
25 5.781 5.653 5.490 5.296 5.091 4.865
36 5.781 5.651 5.488 5.293 5.090 4.863
49 5.780 5.649 5.486 5.291 5.086 4.861
64 5.776 5.647 5.485 5.290 5.085 4.859
81 5.776 5.645 5.482 5.290 5.084 4.857
100 5.766 5.644 5.480 5.289 5.083 4.856
1440 (24 hr) 5.746 5.626 5.467 5.275 5.064 4.838
Dial reading vs. √t curve for 0.1 kg/cm2 load Dial reading vs. √t curve for 0.2 kg/cm2 load
5.83 5.67
d0 d0
5.82 5.665
5.81 5.66
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
5.655
5.8
5.65
5.79
d90 5.645
5.78 d90
5.64
5.77
5.635
5.76 5.63
5.75 5.625
5.74 5.62
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
Remarks: d0 = Dial reading corresponding to 0% consolidation

d90 = Dial reading corresponding to 90% consolidation
Appendix B
5.515 5.34
5.51
5.505 d0
5.33 d0
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
5.5 5.32
5.495
5.49 5.31
5.485 d90 5.3

5.48
5.475 5.29 d90
5.47
5.28
5.465
5.46 5.27
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
5.12 4.9
d0
4.89 d0
5.11
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
4.88
5.1
4.87
d90 d90
5.09
4.86
5.08
4.85
5.07 4.84
5.06 4.83
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
Figure B.1.1 Dial reading vs.

t curves at different applied loads for compacted fly ash
F1
F2
Elapsed
Applied loads, p
time,
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.6 3.2
t
(min)
Dial reading (mm)
0 5.526 5.474 5.400 5.261 5.062 4.857
0.25 5.509 5.433 5.304 5.131 4.914 4.690
1 5.508 5.432 5.302 5.128 4.909 4.682
2.25 5.507 5.430 5.300 5.126 4.906 4.678
4 5.506 5.429 5.299 5.124 4.903 4.675
6.25 5.506 5.429 5.298 5.121 4.900 4.673
9 5.505 5.428 5.297 5.118 4.899 4.671
12.25 5.504 5.427 5.295 5.117 4.898 4.669
16 5.504 5.426 5.294 5.115 4.897 4.668
20.25 5.504 5.426 5.292 5.112 4.895 4.667
25 5.503 5.425 5.290 5.109 4.894 4.666
176
Appendix B
36 5.503 5.424 5.287 5.104 4.892 4.664

49 5.502 5.423 5.285 5.101 4.890 4.663
64 5.501 5.423 5.283 5.099 4.888 4.662
81 5.500 5.422 5.282 5.097 4.886 4.661
100 5.499 5.421 5.281 5.095 4.885 4.660
1440 (24 hr) 5.474 5.400 5.261 5.062 4.857 4.631
5.515 5.435
d0
5.51 d0
5.43
5.505 d90 5.425 d90
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
5.5
5.42
5.495
5.415
5.49
5.41
5.485
5.405
5.48
5.475 5.4
5.47 5.395
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
5.31 5.14
d0 d0
5.305 5.13
5.3
5.12
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
5.295
5.29 5.11
5.285 5.1 d90

d90
5.28 5.09
5.275
5.08
5.27
5.07
5.265
5.26 5.06
5.255 5.05
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
4.92 4.7
d0 4.69
4.91 d0
4.68
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
4.9
4.67
4.89 d90 d90
4.66
4.88
4.65
4.87
4.64
4.86 4.63
4.85 4.62
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
Figure B.1.2 Dial reading vs. t curves at different applied loads for compacted fly ash
F2
177
Appendix B
F3
Elapsed
Applied loads, p
time,
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.6 3.2
t
kg/cm2 kg/cm2 kg/cm 2 kg/cm2 kg/cm2 kg/cm2
(min)
Dial reading (mm)
0 5.645 5.570 5.446 5.305 5.186 5.012
0.25 5.614 5.500 5.345 5.223 5.058 4.857
1 5.613 5.497 5.343 5.219 5.055 4.853
2.25 5.609 5.496 5.341 5.217 5.051 4.850
4 5.608 5.494 5.339 5.215 5.049 4.848
6.25 5.607 5.493 5.337 5.213 5.047 4.846
9 5.606 5.492 5.336 5.212 5.046 4.845
12.25 5.606 5.490 5.334 5.212 5.044 4.844
16 5.605 5.489 5.333 5.211 5.043 4.843
20.25 5.605 5.488 5.332 5.209 5.042 4.842
25 5.604 5.487 5.331 5.208 5.041 4.842
36 5.603 5.486 5.330 5.201 5.039 4.841
49 5.603 5.485 5.328 5.198 5.037 4.840
64 5.602 5.484 5.326 5.197 5.036 4.839
81 5.601 5.483 5.325 5.195 5.034 4.839
100 5.599 5.481 5.323 5.193 5.033 4.838
1440 (24 hr) 5.570 5.446 5.305 5.186 5.012 4.823
5.62 5.51
5.615
d0 d0
5.5
5.61
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
5.605
d90 5.49
d90
5.6
5.595
5.48
5.59 5.47
5.585
5.58 5.46
5.575
5.45
5.57
5.565 5.44
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
178
Appendix B
5.35 5.225
d0 d0
5.345 5.22
5.34 5.215
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
5.335
d90 5.21 d90
5.33
5.205
5.325
5.2
5.32
5.195
5.315
5.31 5.19
5.305 5.185
5.3 5.18
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
5.07 4.86
d0
5.06 d0 4.855
4.85
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
5.05
d90 4.845 d90
5.04
4.84
5.03
4.835
5.02
4.83
5.01 4.825
5 4.82
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
Figure B.1.3 Dial reading vs.t curves at different applied loads for compacted fly ash
F3
Table B.1.4 Time-compression data at different load increments for compacted pond
ash P1
Test results of pond ash P1
Elapsed
Applied loads, p
time,
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.6 3.2
t
(min)
Dial reading (mm)
0 5.110 5.025 4.917 4.762 4.604 4.392
0.25 5.052 4.960 4.806 4.649 4.439 4.184
1 5.049 4.956 4.800 4.644 4.431 4.176
2.25 5.044 4.953 4.796 4.640 4.428 4.172
4 5.042 4.950 4.792 4.636 4.425 4.168
6.25 5.041 4.947 4.791 4.634 4.422 4.165
9 5.040 4.946 4.790 4.632 4.420 4.163
12.25 5.039 4.941 4.788 4.631 4.418 4.161
16 5.039 4.939 4.787 4.630 4.416 4.159
20.25 5.038 4.938 4.785 4.629 4.415 4.157
25 5.037 4.938 4.784 4.627 4.413 4.156
179
Appendix B
36 5.036 4.937 4.781 4.624 4.411 4.153

49 5.036 4.935 4.778 4.621 4.408 4.151
64 5.036 4.934 4.777 4.620 4.406 4.149
81 5.034 4.933 4.774 4.618 4.404 4.147
100 5.033 4.932 4.770 4.618 4.403 4.146
1440 (24 hr) 5.025 4.917 4.762 4.604 4.392 4.130
5.055 4.965
d0
4.96
5.05
d0 4.955
5.045 4.95
4.945
Axis Title
5.04
Axis Title
4.94
d90 d90
5.035 4.935
4.93
5.03 4.925
4.92
5.025
4.915
5.02 4.91
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
Axis Title Axis Title
4.81 4.655
4.805 4.65
d0
4.8 4.645
d0
4.795 4.64
4.79 4.635
Axis Title
Axis Title
4.785 4.63
4.78 d90 4.625
4.775 4.62
d90
4.77 4.615
4.765 4.61
4.76 4.605
4.755 4.6
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
4.45 4.19
d0
4.44 4.18
d0
4.43 4.17
Axis Title
4.16
Axis Title
4.42
d90
d90
4.41 4.15
4.4 4.14
4.39 4.13
4.38 4.12
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
Figure B.1.4 Dial reading vs. t curves at different applied loads for compacted pond
ash P1
180
Appendix B
ash P2
Elapsed
Applied loads, p
time,
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.6 3.2
t
kg/cm2 kg/cm2 kg/cm 2 kg/cm 2 kg/cm2 kg/cm2
(min)
0 6.000 5.967 5.856 5.694 5.524 5.298
0.25 5.995 5.893 5.732 5.570 5.350 5.062
1 5.994 5.890 5.728 5.560 5.343 5.052
2.25 5.993 5.888 5.726 5.556 5.338 5.048
4 5.993 5.886 5.724 5.554 5.336 5.044
6.25 5.991 5.885 5.722 5.552 5.333 5.040
9 5.990 5.884 5.721 5.551 5.331 5.038
12.25 5.989 5.884 5.720 5.550 5.329 5.036
16 5.988 5.883 5.719 5.550 5.328 5.035
20.25 5.988 5.882 5.718 5.548 5.327 5.034
25 5.987 5.882 5.718 5.547 5.326 5.032
36 5.986 5.880 5.716 5.545 5.324 5.030
49 5.986 5.878 5.714 5.544 5.322 5.028
64 5.985 5.876 5.712 5.543 5.320 5.026
81 5.984 5.875 5.711 5.542 5.319 5.024
100 5.983 5.874 5.710 5.541 5.318 5.022
1440 (24 hr) 5.967 5.856 5.694 5.524 5.298 5.002
6 5.895
d0
d0 5.89
5.995
5.885
5.99 d90
d90 5.88
Axis Title
Axis Title
5.985 5.875
5.98 5.87
5.865
5.975
5.86
5.97
5.855
5.965 5.85
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
181
Appendix B
5.735 5.58
d0
5.73
5.57
5.725
5.72 5.56
d90 d0
Axis Title
Axis Title
5.715
5.55
5.71
d90
5.705 5.54
5.7
5.53
5.695
5.69 5.52
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
5.36 5.07
5.35 5.06 d0
d0
5.05
5.34
5.04
d90
Axis Title
Axis Title
5.33
d90 5.03
5.32
5.02
5.31
5.01
5.3 5
5.29 4.99
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
Figure B.1.5 Dial reading vs.t curves at different applied loads for compacted pond
ash P2
ash P3
Elapsed
Applied loads, p
time,
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.6 3.2
t
(min)
Dial reading (mm)
0 4.955 4.861 4.778 4.688 4.575 4.383
0.25 4.890 4.812 4.721 4.608 4.437 4.170
1 4.885 4.808 4.717 4.604 4.432 4.159
2.25 4.883 4.807 4.715 4.601 4.429 4.154
4 4.882 4.806 4.713 4.599 4.424 4.150
6.25 4.881 4.805 4.712 4.597 4.422 4.147
9 4.880 4.804 4.711 4.595 4.420 4.144
12.25 4.879 4.803 4.710 4.594 4.419 4.142
16 4.879 4.802 4.709 4.593 4.417 4.140
20.25 4.878 4.801 4.708 4.592 4.416 4.138
25 4.877 4.800 4.708 4.591 4.415 4.137
182
Appendix B
36 4.877 4.800 4.707 4.590 4.413 4.134

49 4.876 4.799 4.705 4.588 4.411 4.131
64 4.876 4.798 4.705 4.588 4.410 4.129
81 4.875 4.798 4.704 4.587 4.408 4.127
100 4.874 4.798 4.702 4.586 4.407 4.124
1440 (24 hr) 4.861 4.778 4.688 4.575 4.383 4.109
4.895 4.815
d0
4.89 4.81
d0
4.885 4.805
4.88 4.8 d90

d90
Axis Title
Axis Title
4.875 4.795
4.87 4.79
4.865 4.785
4.86 4.78
4.855 4.775
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
4.725 4.61
d0
4.72 4.605
d0
4.715 4.6
4.71 4.595
d90
Axis Title
Axis Title
d90
4.705 4.59
4.7 4.585
4.695 4.58
4.69 4.575
4.685 4.57
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
4.44 4.18
d0
4.17
4.43
d0
4.16
4.42
d90 4.15
Axis Title
Axis Title
4.41 4.14 d90
4.13
4.4
4.12
4.39
4.11
4.38 4.1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
Figure B.1.6 Dial reading vs. t curves at different applied loads for compacted pond
ash P3
183
APPENDIX C
C.1 Time-Compression Data of Consolidation Test of Stowed Pond Ash Samples
Table C.1.1 Time-compression data at different applied loads for stowed pond ash
sample collected after 7 days of stowing
Test results of stowed pond ash after 7 days of stowing
Elapsed
Applied loads, p
time,
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.6 3.2
t
(min)
Dial reading (mm)
0 5.000 4.972 4.948 4.906 4.838 4.732
0.25 4.984 4.958 4.922 4.859 4.762 4.637
1 4.980 4.957 4.920 4.857 4.756 4.630
2.25 4.979 4.956 4.919 4.855 4.754 4.627
4 4.978 4.956 4.918 4.854 4.752 4.624
6.25 4.977 4.956 4.917 4.853 4.751 4.622
9 4.977 4.956 4.917 4.852 4.750 4.621
12.25 4.977 4.956 4.916 4.852 4.749 4.620
16 4.977 4.955 4.916 4.851 4.748 4.619
20.25 4.976 4.955 4.916 4.851 4.747 4.618
25 4.976 4.955 4.915 4.850 4.746 4.617
36 4.976 4.955 4.915 4.849 4.745 4.615
49 4.975 4.954 4.915 4.848 4.744 4.613
64 4.974 4.954 4.914 4.848 4.743 4.612
81 4.974 4.954 4.913 4.847 4.742 4.611
100 4.974 4.953 4.912 4.846 4.741 4.610
1440 (24 hr) 4.972 4.948 4.906 4.838 4.732 4.595
4.986 4.96
d0
4.984 4.958
d0
4.982
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
4.956
d90
4.98
4.954
4.978
d90 4.952
4.976
4.95
4.974
4.972 4.948
4.97 4.946
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
Appendix C
4.924 4.865
4.922 d0
4.86 d0
4.92
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
4.918
4.855
4.916 d90
d90
4.914 4.85
4.912
4.845
4.91
4.908
4.84
4.906
4.904 4.835
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
4.765 4.64
4.635
4.76
d0 d0
4.63
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
4.755 4.625
4.75 4.62
4.615
4.745
d90 d90
4.61
4.74 4.605
4.6
4.735
4.595
4.73 4.59
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
Figure C.1.1 Dial reading vs. t curves at different applied loads for stowed pond ash
Elapsed
Applied loads, p
time,
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.6 3.2
t
kg/cm2 kg/cm2 kg/cm2 kg/cm2 kg/cm2 kg/cm2
(min)
Dial reading (mm)
0 6.000 5.934 5.886 5.817 5.694 5.520
0.25 5.951 5.906 5.849 5.732 5.569 5.354
1 5.949 5.905 5.844 5.726 5.560 5.343
2.25 5.948 5.904 5.841 5.723 5.555 5.339
4 5.947 5.904 5.840 5.722 5.552 5.335
6.25 5.946 5.903 5.839 5.720 5.550 5.332
9 5.945 5.903 5.839 5.719 5.548 5.330
12.25 5.945 5.903 5.838 5.718 5.546 5.327
16 5.944 5.903 5.837 5.716 5.545 5.325
20.25 5.944 5.902 5.836 5.715 5.543 5.324
25 5.943 5.902 5.835 5.714 5.542 5.323
185
Appendix C
36 5.941 5.901 5.834 5.713 5.540 5.320

49 5.941 5.900 5.833 5.711 5.539 5.318
64 5.940 5.900 5.832 5.709 5.537 5.315
81 5.940 5.899 5.831 5.708 5.536 5.313
100 5.939 5.898 5.828 5.707 5.534 5.311
1440 (24 hr) 5.934 5.886 5.817 5.694 5.520 5.292
5.952 5.91
d0
5.95 d0
5.948 5.905
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
5.946
d90 d90
5.944 5.9
5.942
5.94 5.895
5.938
5.936 5.89
5.934
5.932 5.885
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
5.855 5.735
5.85 5.73 d0
d0 5.725
Dial reading, mm
5.845
Dial reading, mm
5.72
5.84
5.715 d90
d90
5.835
5.71
5.83 5.705
5.825 5.7
5.695
5.82
5.69
5.815
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t
√t
5.58 5.36
5.35 d0
5.57
d0 5.34
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
5.56
5.33
5.55 d90
5.32
d90
5.54
5.31
5.53
5.3
5.52 5.29
5.51 5.28
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
186
Appendix C
Elapsed
Applied loads, p
time,
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.6 3.2
t
(min)
Dial reading (mm)
0 7.000 6.925 6.830 6.682 6.498 6.246
0.25 6.950 6.866 6.734 6.561 6.317 5.958
1 6.948 6.862 6.728 6.553 6.308 5.938
2.25 6.947 6.859 6.724 6.548 6.302 5.928
4 6.946 6.858 6.722 6.544 6.297 5.922
6.25 6.945 6.856 6.720 6.540 6.294 5.916
9 6.944 6.854 6.718 6.538 6.292 5.910
12.25 6.944 6.854 6.716 6.536 6.290 5.906
16 6.943 6.853 6.714 6.534 6.287 5.902
20.25 6.943 6.852 6.714 6.532 6.285 5.899
25 6.942 6.852 6.712 6.531 6.283 5.896
36 6.941 6.850 6.710 6.529 6.280 5.894
49 6.940 6.849 6.708 6.526 6.277 5.890
64 6.939 6.848 6.706 6.524 6.275 5.886
81 6.938 6.846 6.704 6.522 6.273 5.882
100 6.937 6.845 6.702 6.520 6.270 5.878
1440 (24 hr) 6.925 6.830 6.682 6.498 6.246 5.848
6.955 6.87
d0
d0 6.865
6.95
6.86
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
6.945
d90 6.855
d90
6.94 6.85
6.935 6.845
6.84
6.93
6.835
6.925
6.83
6.92 6.825
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
187
Appendix C
6.74 6.57
d0 6.56
6.73
d0
6.55
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
6.72
6.71
d90 6.54
6.53 d90
6.7
6.52
6.69
6.51
6.68 6.5
6.67 6.49
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
6.33 5.98
6.32
5.96
6.31
d0
Dial reading, mm
5.94 d0
6.3
Dial reading
6.29 5.92
6.28
d90 5.9
d90
6.27
5.88
6.26
5.86
6.25
6.24 5.84
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
Elapsed
Applied loads, p
time,
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.6 3.2
t
(min)
Dial reading (mm)
0 7.000 6.952 6.903 6.832 6.723 6.562
0.25 6.972 6.923 6.859 6.762 6.610 6.414
1 6.970 6.922 6.856 6.758 6.604 6.406
2.25 6.969 6.921 6.854 6.755 6.600 6.400
4 6.968 6.921 6.852 6.753 6.598 6.396
6.25 6.968 6.920 6.852 6.752 6.596 6.393
9 6.967 6.920 6.851 6.750 6.594 6.391
12.25 6.967 6.919 6.850 6.749 6.592 6.388
16 6.966 6.919 6.849 6.748 6.591 6.386
20.25 6.966 6.918 6.848 6.747 6.590 6.384
25 6.965 6.918 6.848 6.746 6.589 6.382
188
Appendix C
36 6.965 6.918 6.847 6.745 6.586 6.380

49 6.964 6.917 6.846 6.744 6.585 6.377
64 6.964 6.916 6.845 6.742 6.584 6.375
81 6.963 6.916 6.844 6.741 6.582 6.374
100 6.962 6.915 6.843 6.740 6.580 6.372
1440 (24 hr) 6.952 6.903 6.832 6.723 6.562 6.350
6.975 6.925
d0
d0
6.97 6.92
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
d90
d90
6.965 6.915
6.96 6.91
6.955 6.905
6.95 6.9
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
6.865 6.765
6.86 6.76 d0
d0 6.755
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
6.855
6.75
6.85 d90
6.745
d90
6.845 6.74
6.735
6.84
6.73
6.835
6.725
6.83 6.72
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
6.62 6.42
6.41
6.61
d0 d0
6.4
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
6.6
6.39
6.59
d90 6.38
d90
6.58
6.37
6.57
6.36
6.56 6.35
6.55 6.34
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
189
Appendix C
Elapsed
Applied loads, p
time,
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.6 3.2
t
(min)
Dial reading (mm)
0 6.000 5.853 5.754 5.619 5.449 5.242
0.25 5.890 5.794 5.664 5.505 5.312 5.024
1 5.886 5.790 5.658 5.497 5.302 5.012
2.25 5.883 5.788 5.656 5.492 5.295 5.004
4 5.882 5.787 5.654 5.490 5.291 5.003
6.25 5.880 5.785 5.652 5.487 5.288 5.003
9 5.878 5.784 5.650 5.484 5.285 5.002
12.25 5.877 5.782 5.648 5.483 5.283 5.001
16 5.876 5.781 5.647 5.482 5.282 5.000
20.25 5.876 5.780 5.646 5.480 5.281 4.999
25 5.874 5.779 5.645 5.478 5.279 4.998
36 5.873 5.778 5.644 5.476 5.277 4.997
49 5.872 5.776 5.642 5.474 5.275 4.996
64 5.871 5.775 5.641 5.473 5.272 4.994
81 5.870 5.774 5.640 5.471 5.270 4.991
100 5.869 5.773 5.639 5.470 5.268 4.989
1440 (24 hr) 5.853 5.754 5.619 5.449 5.242 4.971
5.895 5.8
d0 5.795
5.89
d0
5.885 5.79
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
5.785
5.88
d90 5.78
d90
5.875
5.775
5.87
5.77
5.865
5.765
5.86 5.76
5.855 5.755
5.85 5.75
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
190
Appendix C
5.67 5.51
5.665
d0 5.5
5.66 d0
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
5.655 5.49
5.65
5.645 5.48
d90 d90
5.64
5.47
5.635
5.63 5.46
5.625
5.45
5.62
5.615 5.44
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
5.32 5.03
5.31
5.02
d0
5.3
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
5.01 d0
5.29
5.28 5
d90
d90
5.27 4.99
5.26
4.98
5.25
4.97
5.24
5.23 4.96
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
C.2 Time-Compression Data of Consolidation Test of Stowed Pond Ash-Lime
Mixture Samples
Table C.2.1 Time-compression data at different applied loads for stowed pond ash-
lime mixture sample collected after 7 days of stowing
Test results of stowed pond ash-lime mixture after 7 days of stowing
Elapsed
Applied loads, p
time,
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.6 3.2
t
(min)
Dial reading (mm)
0 7.000 6.939 6.850 6.658 6.524 6.154
0.25 6.966 6.896 6.712 6.596 6.242 5.837
1 6.963 6.887 6.699 6.579 6.224 5.812
2.25 6.962 6.882 6.692 6.570 6.214 5.798
4 6.960 6.878 6.688 6.564 6.206 5.786
6.25 6.958 6.874 6.684 6.558 6.200 5.779
9 6.957 6.872 6.682 6.554 6.196 5.772
12.25 6.956 6.870 6.679 6.552 6.191 5.768
16 6.956 6.869 6.678 6.550 6.188 5.764
191
Appendix C
20.25 6.955 6.868 6.675 6.547 6.186 5.760

25 6.954 6.867 6.674 6.546 6.182 5.756
36 6.953 6.866 6.672 6.542 6.179 5.750
49 6.952 6.864 6.670 6.540 6.176 5.746
64 6.951 6.862 6.668 6.538 6.174 5.743
81 6.950 6.861 6.667 6.537 6.172 5.740
100 6.948 6.860 6.666 6.536 6.169 5.738
1440 (24 hr) 6.939 6.850 6.658 6.524 6.154 5.719
6.97 6.9
d0
d0
6.965 6.89
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
6.96
6.88
d90
6.955
6.87 d90
6.95
6.86
6.945
6.94 6.85
6.935 6.84
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
6.72 6.6
6.71 6.59 d0
d0
6.58
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
6.7
6.57
6.69
6.56
6.68
d90 d90
6.55
6.67
6.54
6.66 6.53
6.65 6.52
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
6.25 5.86
6.24 d0 5.84
6.23 d0
Dial reading, mm
5.82
Dial reading, mm
6.22
6.21 5.8
6.2
6.19 d90 5.78
d90
6.18 5.76
6.17
5.74
6.16
5.72
6.15
6.14 5.7
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
Figure C.2.1 Dial reading vs. t curves at different applied loads for stowed pond ash-
192
Appendix C
Elapsed
Applied loads, p
time,
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.6 3.2
t
(min)
Dial reading (mm)
0 6.000 5.903 5.843 5.633 5.549 5.207
0.25 5.944 5.877 5.696 5.590 5.297 4.856
1 5.935 5.871 5.682 5.586 5.276 4.828
2.25 5.931 5.868 5.674 5.584 5.263 4.812
4 5.928 5.866 5.668 5.581 5.257 4.801
6.25 5.925 5.864 5.666 5.580 5.251 4.793
9 5.923 5.862 5.663 5.578 5.246 4.787
12.25 5.922 5.861 5.661 5.576 5.243 4.781
16 5.920 5.860 5.660 5.575 5.240 4.777
20.25 5.919 5.860 5.658 5.574 5.237 4.774
25 5.918 5.859 5.657 5.574 5.235 4.770
36 5.916 5.859 5.655 5.572 5.231 4.765
49 5.915 5.858 5.653 5.570 5.229 4.761
64 5.915 5.857 5.651 5.569 5.227 4.758
81 5.912 5.856 5.650 5.568 5.225 4.756
100 5.912 5.854 5.646 5.563 5.223 4.753
1440 (24 hr) 5.903 5.843 5.633 5.549 5.207 4.733
5.95 5.88
5.945
d0 5.875 d0
5.94
5.87
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
5.935
5.865
5.93
d90
5.925 5.86
d90
5.92 5.855
5.915
5.85
5.91
5.845
5.905
5.9 5.84
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
193
Appendix C
5.7 5.595
5.59
d0
5.69
d0 5.585
5.68
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
5.58
5.67
5.575 d90
5.66 5.57
d90
5.65 5.565
5.56
5.64
5.555
5.63 5.55
5.62 5.545
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
5.31 4.88
5.3
4.86
5.29
Dial reading, mm
5.28 d0 4.84
Dial reading, mm
d0
5.27 4.82
5.26
4.8
5.25
5.24 4.78
d90 d90
5.23
4.76
5.22
4.74
5.21
5.2 4.72
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
Elapsed
Applied loads, p
time,
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.6 3.2
t
(min)
Dial reading (mm)
0 7.000 6.956 6.911 6.861 6.728 6.539
0.25 6.979 6.940 6.886 6.775 6.597 6.360
1 6.976 6.936 6.884 6.764 6.582 6.340
2.25 6.975 6.934 6.882 6.758 6.574 6.330
4 6.974 6.932 6.882 6.755 6.569 6.323
6.25 6.973 6.931 6.880 6.752 6.566 6.319
9 6.972 6.930 6.879 6.750 6.563 6.315
12.25 6.971 6.929 6.878 6.748 6.561 6.312
16 6.970 6.928 6.877 6.748 6.560 6.310
20.25 6.970 6.928 6.876 6.747 6.558 6.308
25 6.969 6.927 6.876 6.746 6.557 6.306
194
Appendix C
36 6.967 6.924 6.874 6.742 6.555 6.304

49 6.965 6.923 6.873 6.741 6.552 6.302
64 6.965 6.922 6.872 6.740 6.551 6.300
81 6.964 6.920 6.871 6.739 6.550 6.298
100 6.963 6.918 6.870 6.738 6.549 6.297
1440 (24 hr) 6.956 6.911 6.861 6.728 6.539 6.284
Dial reading vs. √t urve for 0.1 kg/cm2 load Dial reading vs. √t urve for 0.2 kg/cm2 load
6.985 6.945
6.98 6.94
d0 d0
Dial reading, mm
6.935
Dial reading, mm
6.975
6.93
6.97
d90 d90
6.925
6.965
6.92
6.96
6.915
6.955 6.91
6.95 6.905
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
6.89 6.78
d0
6.885 6.77
d0
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
6.88
6.76
6.875
d90
6.75
6.87 d90
6.74
6.865
6.86 6.73
6.855 6.72
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
6.6 6.37
6.36
6.59
6.35
d0
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
6.58
6.34
d0
6.57 6.33
6.56 6.32
d90
6.31
6.55 d90
6.3
6.54
6.29
6.53 6.28
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
195
Appendix C
Elapsed
Applied loads, p
time,
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.6 3.2
t
(min)
Dial reading (mm)
0 6.000 5.960 5.943 5.898 5.750 5.499
0.25 5.969 5.956 5.928 5.799 5.563 5.283
1 5.968 5.954 5.923 5.786 5.548 5.261
2.25 5.968 5.952 5.920 5.780 5.538 5.248
4 5.967 5.951 5.918 5.776 5.532 5.240
6.25 5.967 5.950 5.917 5.773 5.528 5.235
9 5.967 5.950 5.915 5.771 5.525 5.230
12.25 5.967 5.950 5.914 5.769 5.523 5.227
16 5.966 5.949 5.914 5.768 5.521 5.224
20.25 5.966 5.949 5.912 5.766 5.520 5.222
25 5.966 5.948 5.912 5.764 5.518 5.220
36 5.965 5.948 5.910 5.763 5.515 5.217
49 5.964 5.948 5.909 5.761 5.514 5.215
64 5.964 5.947 5.907 5.760 5.512 5.214
81 5.963 5.947 5.905 5.759 5.511 5.212
100 5.962 5.947 5.904 5.758 5.510 5.210
1440 (24 hr) 5.960 5.943 5.898 5.750 5.499 5.198
5.97 5.958
d0 d0
5.969
5.956
5.968
5.954
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
5.967
d90
5.966 5.952
5.965
5.95
5.964 d90
5.963 5.948
5.962 5.946
5.961
5.944
5.96
5.959 5.942
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
196
Appendix C
5.93 5.81
d0
5.925 5.8
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
5.92 5.79
d0
5.915 5.78
d90
5.91 5.77
d90
5.905 5.76
5.9 5.75
5.895 5.74
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
5.57 5.29
5.56 5.28
5.27
5.55
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
5.26
d0
5.54
5.25 d0
5.53 5.24
5.52 5.23
d90 5.22
5.51 d90
5.21
5.5 5.2
5.49 5.19
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
Elapsed
Applied loads, p
time,
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.6 3.2
t
(min)
Dial reading (mm)
0 7.000 6.936 6.900 6.794 6.618 6.376
0.25 6.960 6.918 6.831 6.670 6.443 6.135
1 6.956 6.916 6.824 6.658 6.426 6.114
2.25 6.953 6.914 6.820 6.652 6.418 6.104
4 6.952 6.914 6.818 6.648 6.410 6.096
6.25 6.951 6.913 6.815 6.644 6.408 6.090
9 6.949 6.912 6.814 6.642 6.404 6.086
12.25 6.948 6.912 6.812 6.640 6.402 6.082
16 6.947 6.910 6.811 6.638 6.400 6.079
20.25 6.946 6.910 6.810 6.637 6.398 6.078
25 6.945 6.909 6.808 6.636 6.396 6.075
197
Appendix C
36 6.943 6.908 6.807 6.634 6.394 6.073

49 6.942 6.907 6.806 6.632 6.392 6.070
64 6.941 6.906 6.805 6.630 6.390 6.068
81 6.940 6.905 6.804 6.628 6.389 6.067
100 6.939 6.905 6.803 6.626 6.388 6.066
1440 (24 hr) 6.936 6.900 6.794 6.618 6.376 6.054
6.965 6.92
6.918 d0
6.96
d0 6.916
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
6.955 6.914
6.912
6.95
6.91
d90
6.945 6.908
d90 6.906
6.94 6.904
6.902
6.935
6.9
6.93 6.898
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
6.835 6.68
6.83
6.67
6.825
d0
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
6.66
6.82 d0
6.815 6.65
6.81 6.64
d90
6.805 d90
6.63
6.8
6.62
6.795
6.79 6.61
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
6.45 6.14
6.44 6.13
6.12
6.43
Dial reading, mm
Dial reading, mm
6.11 d0
6.42 d0 6.1
6.41 6.09
6.4 6.08
d90 d90
6.07
6.39
6.06
6.38 6.05
6.37 6.04
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
√t √t
198
PUBLICATIONS
a) Journals
D. P. Mishra and S. K. Das (2008): ‘Compaction and consolidation behaviour of fly

ash and pond ash for stowing in underground mines’, Accepted for publication in
the MGMI Transactions.
D. P. Mishra and S. K. Das (2007): ‘Assessment of permeability characteristics of fly

ash and fly ash-sand mixtures for stowing’, Mining Engineers’ Journal, Vol. 9, No. 4,
November, pp. 9 – 14.
D. P. Mishra (2007): ‘Fly ash stowing in India-an emerging technology’, Journal of

Mines, Metals and Fuels, Vol. 55, No. 5, May, pp. 156 – 160.
b) In Conferences/ Symposia
D. P. Mishra and S. K. Das (2008): ‘Application of flocculant in pond ash stowing

for improving water drainage-a model study’, Indo-Korean Joint International
Symposium on Geo-Science and Technology: Utilization of Geospace as a Solution for
Energy and Environment (GTEE-08), 12-14 Feb, Department of Mining Engineering,
IIT Kharagpur, pp. 188 – 201.
D. P. Mishra and S. K. Das (2008): ‘Suitability of pond ash slurry for stowing in
underground mines-a model study’, Conference on Emerging Trends in Mining and
Allied Industries (ETMAI-2008), February 2-3, Department of Mining Engineering,
NIT Rourkela, pp. 284 – 295.
D. P. Mishra and S. K. Das (2007): ‘Fly ash stowing in India-a future perspective’,
Indian Mining Congress on Emerging Trends in Mineral Industry, 13-15 July, Mining
Publications
Engineers’ Association of India National Headquarters and Rajasthan Chapter, pp.

279 – 284.
D. P. Mishra and S. K. Das (2006): ‘Chemical and morphological characterization of

fly ash for stowing in the underground coal mines’, National Seminar on
Underground Coal Mining & Expo-2006, Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad,
November 9-10, pp. 143 – 149.
H. Kumar, D. P. Mishra and S. K. Das (2006): ‘Settling characteristics of fly ash of

Talcher thermal power station’, 1st Asian Mining Congress, 16–18 January, MGMI,
Kolkata, pp. 135 – 139.
D. P. Mishra, H. Kumar and S. K. Das (2005): ‘A study of rheological properties of

fly ash slurries of Talcher thermal power station for stowing in the underground
coal mines’, International Symposium on Advances in Mining Technology and
Management, Nov 30-Dec2, Department of Mining Engineering, IIT, Kharagpur, pp.
495 - 503.
c) Communicated
D. P. Mishra and S. K. Das: ‘Consolidation characteristics of stowed pond ash and

pond ash-lime mixture”, Communicated for possible publication in the Journal of
Institute of Engineers (India).
D. P. Mishra and S. K. Das: ‘Characterization of fly ash and pond ash for stowing
in the underground coal mines’, Communicated for possible publication in the
Minetech.
200
CURRICULUM VITAE
Devi Prasad Mishra

devi_agl@yahoo.com
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Permanent Address
At: Baniabahal
P.O.: Hulurisingha
Dist.: Angul
State: Orissa, India, PIN – 759 132
EDUCATION
Pursuing THE INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (IIT), KHARAGPUR

Doctor of Philosophy in Mining Engineering
• Suitability of fly ash and pond ash for stowing in underground coal mines-An
Investigation
• Date of Submission: 28th March, 2008
June, 2004 THE INDIAN SCHOOL OF MINES (ISM), DHANBAD

Master of Technology in Mine Planning and Design
• CGPA 4.01/5
June, 2001 THE NORTH ORISSA UNIVERSITY (NOU), BARIPADA, ORISSA, INDIA
Bachelor degree in mining engineering
• Percentage of Marks 82.26
June, 1995 THE STATE COUNCIL OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION & VOCATIONAL TRAINING,
ORISSA, INDIA
Diploma in Mining Engineering

June, 1992 THE COUNCIL OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, ORISSA, INDIA

Higher Secondary Education (10+2 Science)
June, 1990 THE BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, ORISSA , INDIA

Secondary Education (10th)
Curriculum Vitae
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
R & D Project DETERMINATION OF RATE OF CONSOLIDATION, FLOW RATE, SETTLEMENT

AND LOAD BEARING CHARACTERISTICS OF FLY ASH SLURRY AFTER
STOWING
Sponsored By : TIFAC, New Delhi
Duration : 2nd July, 2004 to 1st June, 2007
• Studied the physical and engineering properties of fly ash and pond
samples of Talcher Thermal Power Station (TTPS) and Talcher Super
Thermal Power Station (TSTPS), Kaniha
• Studied the chemical and mineralogical composition of the ash samples by
SEM and XRD techniques.
• Studied the geotechnical properties of the fly ash and pond ash samples.
• Studied the rheological properties of the fly ash and pond ash slurries using
Advanced Rheometer (Model: AR 1000).
• Studied the gravity flow aspects of the pond ash slurries of various solid
concentrations in different pipeline diameters.
• Developed a scale model of the part of HT1 panel of Handidhua Colliery,
Talcher Area, MCL for conducting fly ash stowing.
• Designed a fly ash stowing plant to be used for fly ash stowing in the
underground mines.
M. Tech. A STUDY OF ENERGY CONSUMPTION PROFILE OF MAIN MINE

VENTILATION FANS AND DEVELOPMENT OF A TECHNIQUE TO REDUCE
THE ENERGY REQUIREMENT OF SUCH SYSTEMS
• Implemented 1st time energy efficient Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic (FRP)
fan in Bhelatand-A Colliery of Tata Steel.
• Achieved savings in energy by the FRP fan in comparison to the
conventional aluminium alloy bladed fans.
TEACHING EXPERIENCE
• TEACHING
• Worked as Lecturer in Mining Engineering at Kalinga Institute of Mining
Engineering and Technology (KIMET), Angul, Orissa from Dec. 2001 to July
2002.
• LABORATORY CLASSES (IIT KHARAGPUR)
• Associated with Engineering Drawing class for B. Tech. students from
July-Dec. 2004.
• Associated with AutoCAD laboratory class for B. Tech. students from Jan.-
June 2005.
202
Curriculum Vitae
• Associated with Rock Mechanics laboratory class for B. Tech. and M. Tech
students from July-Dec. 2005 and Jan.-June 2006.
• Associated with Mine Environmental Engineering laboratory class for B.
Tech and M. Tech. students from July-Dec. 2007 and Jan. 2008-till date.
• SHORT-TERM COURSES (IIT KHARAGPUR)
• Conducted Mine Fire and Explosion lab classes for short-term course
participants in the Short Term Course “Mines Safety and Legislation”. 14-
18 November 2005, at IIT Kharagpur. (Coordinator, Dr. Samir Kumar Das)
PRACTICAL TRAINING EXPERIENCE
• 90 days (3 months) training in Talcher Colliery (Underground Coal), MCL,

Coal India Ltd., Orissa, India.
• 30 days (1 month) training in Nandira Colliery (Underground Coal), MCL,
Coal India Ltd., Orissa, India.
• 90 days (3 months) training in Joda East Iron Ore Mine (Opencast Metal),
Tata Steel, Orissa, India.
• 120 days (4 months) training in Sukinda Chromite Mines (Opencast Metal),
Tata Steel, Orissa, India.
• 30 days (1 month) training in Kiriburu Iron Ore Mine (Opencast Metal),
Steel Authority of Indian Ltd. (SAIL), Orissa, India.
SKILLS AND INTERESTS
• SOFTWARE LANGUAGES KNOWN

• C/C++, HTML
• OPERATING SYSTEMS WORKED
• MS-DOS, Red Hat Linux 7.2, WINDOWS 95/98/2000/XP.
• RESEARCH INTERESTS
• Geomechanics and Strata Control
• Mine Ventilation
• Environmental Engineering
• Underground Coal Mining Methods
CAREER OBJECTIVES
• To expertise in the areas of Geomechanics and Strata Control, Environmental

Engineering and Mine Ventilation.
• To carry out Research and Developmental activities in ‘Utilization of Fly Ash in
Stowing Underground Mines’.
203

Ash ND Pond

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Ash ND Pond

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Suitability of Fly Ash and Pond Ash for Stowing in

Underground Coal Mines - An Investigation

A thesis submitted to the Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur in partial

DEPARTMENT OF MINING ENGINEERING

for Stowing in Underground Coal Mines - An Investigation”, submitted

Dr. Samir Kumar Das

Firstly, it is a great pleasure and privilege for me to convey my deepest gratefulness

Further, I would like to thank Prof. J. Bhattacharya, HoD, Department of Mining

I wish to express my beloved gratitude to my friends Bijay, Anand, Gyan Prakash,

I express my special thanks to all other staff members of Department of Mining

Devi Prasad Mishra

1.1 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................................ 1

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

CHAPTER 4: PHYSICO-CHEMICAL AND ENGINEERING PROPERTIES OF FLY

CHAPTER 5: GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES OF FLY ASH AND POND ASH

5.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 87

CHAPTER 6: RHEOLOGY OF FLY ASH AND POND ASH SLURRIES

CHAPTER 7: STOWING WITH POND ASH SLURRIES-A MODEL STUDY

CHAPTER 8: CONSOLIDATION CHARACTERISTICS OF STOWED POND ASH

CHAPTER 9: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Figure 2.1 Scanning electron micrographs of fly ash particles ................................................................ 15

Stowing operation in underground coal mines is an important activity in which the

adopting the principle of “Place it back from where it originates”. In countries

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The objectives of this research are outlined as follows:

b) To study the geotechnical properties of fly ash and pond ash.

e) To determine the rate of consolidation, settlement and load bearing

1.4 SCOPE OF THE WORK

1.5 ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS

The organization of the thesis is as follows:

Chapter 2 reviews the literature pertaining to the present investigation. It mainly

1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

e) The significance of application of flocculant for enhancing the settling

2.2 FLY ASH: ITS GENERATION AND UTILIZATION

2.2.1 What is Fly Ash?

2.2.2 Generation of Fly Ash

2.2.3 Types of Coal Ash

a. Dry fly ash

• Large volume (structural fills, embankments, unstabilized road sub-base)

• Cementitous/Pozzolonic (cement/concrete, flowable fills, structural materials,

• Chemical/Neutralization properties (acid mine drainage, mine reclamation)

• Mineralogical properties (magnetite removal, aluminum alloys, silicon alloys,

• Soil enhancement properties (artificial soils, soil amendments)

Year, 2005-06 Year, 2006-07

2.3 PROPERTIES OF FLY ASH

Physical composition Chemical composition

2.3.1 Physical Properties of Fly Ash

2.3.1.2 Bulk density

2.3.1.3 Specific gravity

Gs = 1.6091D50 -0.0464 … (2.1)

2.3.1.4 Particle morphology

Figure 2.1 Scanning electron micrographs of fly ash particles

(tendency of fines to stick together) in presence of moisture. The microscopic

Colour Grain structure Species

2.3.1.5 Particle size distribution

‘Permeability’ which refers to the propensity of a material to allow fluid to move

2.3.1.7 Water holding capacity (WHC)

2.3.2 Chemical Composition of Fly Ash

Fly ash is a complex inorganic-organic mixture with unique, polycomponent,

Components Bituminous Sub-bituminous Lignite

Compounds Fly ash Pond ash Bottom ash