Sie sind auf Seite 1von 10

http://www.scar.ac.

cn
Sciences in Cold and Arid Regions
Volume 7, Issue 5, October, 2015

Citation: Edil TB, Cetin B, 2015. Freeze-thaw performance of chemically stabilized natural and recycled highway materials. Sciences in Cold
and Arid Regions, 7(5): 0482–0491. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1226.2015.00482.

Freeze-thaw performance of chemically stabilized


natural and recycled highway materials

Tuncer B. Edil 1*, Bora Cetin 2

1. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, 53706, USA
2. College of Engineering, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, 30602, USA

*Correspondence to: Tuncer B. Edil, Professor Emeritus of Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, 53706, USA. Tel: +1-608-262-3225; E-mail: tbedil@wisc.edu

Received: March 19, 2015 Accepted: May 29, 2015

ABSTRACT

This article provides an overview of several previous studies that investigated the stiffness and strength performance of
chemically stabilized roadway materials under winter conditions (freeze-thaw cycling). The objective of this research was
to understand the behavior of different materials stabilized with different type of binders when they were subjected to
freeze-thaw cycling. Nine different materials including natural soils (organic soil, clay, silt, sand, and road surface gravel),
reclaimed pavement material, and recycled asphalt pavement stabilized with nine different binders (five different fly ashes,
lime, cement, lime kiln dust, cement kiln dust) were discussed. This article investigated how the volume, resilient modulus
and unconfined compressive strength of soils/materials stabilized with different binders change in response to freeze-thaw
cycling. Overall, the review results indicate that the stiffness and strength of all stabilized materials decrease somewhat
with freeze-thaw cycling. However, the reduced strength and stiffness of stabilized materials after freeze-thaw cycling was
still higher than that of unstabilized-unfrozen original soils and materials. In addition, materials stabilized with cement kiln
dust provided the best performance against freeze-thaw cycling.
Keywords: freeze-thaw; soil stabilization; cement; fly ash; lime

1 Introduction cluding fly ash, cement kiln dust (CKD), lime kiln
dust (LKD), steel slag, and aged concrete pavements.
Increased development and its associated increase Recycling to utilize these materials in highway pave-
in traffic and vehicle loads on highways require sig- ment systems can generate cost savings to the public
nificant upgrades to the roads at considerable expense. while having significant environmental benefits in
There is a strong interest in developing effective, terms of reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and
convenient, and economic methods to upgrade these energy consumption.
roads. Conventionally, large volumes of earthen ma- During the process of reconstructing a deteriorated
terials are used to replace the aged roadway structure roadway, a large supply of potentially useful materials
and rebuild the entire roadway infrastructure. Howev- could be conveniently located along the existing
er, this approach is generally very costly and cause roadway, leading to significant time and cost savings
environmental and ecological problems. relative to conventional total reconstruction costs.
In many cases, conventional materials can be re- These cost savings would result from less time and
placed with deteriorated pavement asphalt layer, expense spent on transportation and procurement of
pavement materials, and industrial byproducts in- new materials and the disposal of the old material.
Tuncer B. Edil et al., 2015 / Sciences in Cold and Arid Regions, 7(5): 0482–0491 483

Recycled pavement material (RPM), recycled as- on mechanical performance of chemically stabilized
phalt pavement (RAP) and road surface gravel (RSG) soils and recycled materials. The particular objective
are three materials that can be reused as new base of this study is to summarize the volume change, re-
course in road rehabilitation (Wen et al., 2004; Hati- silient modulus (Mr) and unconfined compressive
poglu et al., 2008; Li et al., 2008). Since RPM, RAP strength (qu) of different types of soils (gravel, sand,
and RSG may or may not perform as well as natural silt, clay) and recycled materials (RPM and RAP) that
high quality aggregates relative to strength, stiffness are stabilized with different type of binders (Class C
and rutting potential, the addition of a stabilizing ma- fly ash, Class F fly ash, cement, lime, CKD, and LKD
terial such as cement, fly ash, lime, LKD or CKD can subjected to freeze-thaw cycling.
improve their properties due to cementation.
In addition to base layer stabilization, the stiffness 2 Materials
and strength of subgrade layers in roadway systems is
very important during construction and in improving Six different soils and three different recycled
the overall performance of pavement structure. Pre- materials were used in this study. These materials
vious studies show that the inclusion of cement, lime, include both fine-grained and coarse-grained soils.
fly ash (Class C and/or F), LKD, and CKD binders is Results relating to Lawson organic soil, reclaimed
very beneficial in improving the mechanical perfor- pavement materials (RPM1 and RPM2), and RAP
mance of subgrade soils including sand, silt and clay were collected from Rosa (2009) while sand, silt,
(Acosta et al., 2003; Arora and Aydilek, 2005; Edil et and clay soils were collected from Su (2012). Road
al., 2006; Camargo, 2008; Cetin et al., 2010; Tastan et surface gravels (RSG1 and RSG2) were collected
al., 2011) and extend the service life. from Baugh (2008), Koostra (2009) and Cetin et al.
A considerable amount of research has been de- (2010), respectively. Figure 1 shows the grain size
voted to the stabilization of fine-grained soils, distribution of all materials. The fines contents of
coarse-grained soils and recycled pavement materials Lawson, silt, and slay soils were 97%, 60%, and
using different types of binders including fly ash, lime, 80%, respectively. The fines content of coarse-
cement, LKD, and CKD in highway base/subgrade grained soils and recycled materials were between
applications, which demonstrated improvement in 0.1% and 12%.
strength, compressibility and stiffness. However, there Index properties of all unstabilized materials are
is a limited amount of research regarding how these summarized in Table 1. All of the soils, except clay,
materials stabilized with fly ash behave after exposure and recycled materials did not possess any plasticity.
to winter conditions in the field. Soils were classified according to the Unified Soil
The main objective of this study is to provide an Classification System (USCS) and American Associa-
overview based on the results of the following studies, tion of State Highway and Transportation Officials
Baugh (2008), Koostra (2009), Rosa (2009), Cetin et (AASHTO). Table 1 presents the classification of soils
al. (2010), and Su (2012). These studies investigated and recycled materials discussed in this study and in-
the impact of winter conditions (freeze-thaw cycling) dicates that it includes a wide range of materials.

Figure 1 Grain size distributions of (a) coarse-grained soils/materials and (b) fine-grained soils
484 Tuncer B. Edil et al., 2015 / Sciences in Cold and Arid Regions, 7(5): 0482–0491

Nine different binders were used in these investi- low CaO content (0.7%–9.2%). This indicates that fly
gations (Table 2). Five of these binders were different ash possessing high CaO content pose a great poten-
fly ashes, including Columbia (Co), Riverside (Riv7), tial to initiate cementation reactions in the presence of
King, Class F, and Paul Smith (PS). The other four moisture while other fly ashes need an activator that is
binders were cement, lime, LKD and CKD. Co, Riv7, rich in CaO. These activators were lime, LKD and
and King fly ashes had high CaO content (23.3%– CKD. CaO contents of LKD and CKD were 60% and
25.8% by weight) while PS and Class F fly ash had 54%, respectively.

Table 1 Index properties of materials


wopt γdmax LL PI Gravel content Sand content Fines content Classification
Sample Gs
(%) (kN/m3) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) USCS AASHTO
a
Lawson 2.58 27.0 13.0 50 19 –– 3.0 97.0 OH A-7-5
RPM1a –– –– 20.0 NP NP 34.0 54.0 12.0 SC A-1-a
RPM2a –– –– –– NP NP 30.0 63.0 7.0 SW-SC A-1-b
RAPa –– –– 19.0 NP NP 35.0 56.0 9.0 SW-SC A-1-b
Sandb 2.69 11.0 18.7 NP NP 2.1 97.8 0.1 SP A-1-b
Siltb 2.72 10.5 19.4 18 NP 3.0 37.0 60.0 ML A-4
Clayb 2.62 16.0 17.0 39 19 2.0 18.0 80.0 CL A-6
RSG1c 2.64 13.0 19.0 NP NP 30.0 67.0 3.0 SP A-1-b
RSG2d,e 2.73 7.5 23.0 NP NP 29.0 59.0 12.0 SC-SM A-2-4
Gs: Specific gravity; wopt: optimum water content; γdmax: maximum dry unit weight; LL: liquid limit; PL: plastic limit; NP:
nonplastic; RPM: reclaimed pavement material; RAP: recycled asphalt pavement; RSG: road surface gravel. a Rosa (2009),
b
Su (2012), c Cetin et al. (2010), d Koostra (2009), e Baugh (2008).

Table 2 Physical and chemical properties of the fly ashes (all oxides are in percentage by weight)
Physical and chemical properties
Suitability of fly ash for
Fly ash LOI SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 CaO Classification
CaO/SiO2 CaO/Al2O3 pH stabilization ASTM
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) ASTM C618
D5239
Columbiaa 0.7 31.0 18.0 6.0 23.0 0.8 1.3 14 C Very self cementing fly ash
Riverside7a 0.9 32.0 19.0 6.0 24.0 0.8 1.3 –– C Very self cementing fly ash
Kinga 12.0 24.0 15.0 6.0 26.0 1.1 1.0 11 Off-Spec Very self cementing fly ash
Class Fb 5.0 8.0 15.0 6.0 9.2 1.2 0.6 8 F Non-self cementing fly ash
PSc 11.0 51.0 27.0 5.5 0.7 0.014 0.014 6 Off-Spec Non-self cementing fly ash
a b c
LOI: loss on ignition. Rosa (2009), Su (2012), Cetin et al. (2010). PS=Paul Smith.

3 Methods cles without access to water.

Table 3 presents the legend and composition of 3.1 Resilient modulus test
the mixtures discussed in the current study. These
mixtures include fine-grained soil-fly ash, The procedures outlined in AASHTO T307-99
coarse-grained soil-fly ash, fine-grained soil-cement, (2007), a protocol for testing highway base materials,
coarse-grained soil-cement, soil-fly ash-lime kiln dust were followed for resilient modulus for all mixtures
(LKD), soil-fly ash-lime, soil-lime, and soil-cement that were used in this study to allow a common basis
kiln dust (CKD) mixtures. All soil-binder mixtures for comparison. All specimens were compacted at
were cured for seven days at room temperature (21±2 their optimum moisture contents (OMC) to maximum
°C) and at 100% relative humidity before being sub- dry unit weight corresponding to modified compac-
jected to freeze-thaw cycles. tion energy (ASTM D1557).
After seven days of curing, the specimens were The resilient modulus of soil is usually nonlinear
frozen in a temperature chamber at −5 to −20 °C for and is dependent on the stress level. This nonlinear
24 hours and then thawed in a humidity chamber at behavior was defined in this study using the common
100% relative humidity and controlled temperature of model developed by Moosazadh and Witczak (1981):
21 ± 2 °C for 24 hours. Each mixture was subjected to K2
different numbers of freeze-thaw cycles up to 12 cy- M r = K1θ (1)
Tuncer B. Edil et al., 2015 / Sciences in Cold and Arid Regions, 7(5): 0482–0491 485

where, Mr is resilient modulus, K1 and K2 are constants, 3.2 Unconfined compressive strength (UCS) tests
θ (= σd + 3σc) is bulk stress where σc is the isotropic
confining pressure, and σd is the deviator stress. Mr was Unconfined compressive strength tests were
computed at a bulk stress of 208 kPa, following the conducted in accordance with ASTM D5102 (2004).
guidelines provided in NCHRP 1-28A for base course In some cases, unconfined compressive strength tests
layer. For stabilized materials, the effect of confining were performed on specimens subsequent to resilient
pressure in pavement layers is relatively small; how- modulus testing. Load levels used in resilient modu-
ever, unstabilized materials used are largely granular lus testing were such that no apparent damage was
and this model appropriately captures the effect of observed in the specimens. A strain rate of
bulk stress for such materials and was adopted to al- 0.21%/min was used during the shearing process.
low a common basis for comparison. Detailed infor- Detailed information regarding the unconfined com-
mation regarding the resilient modulus procedures pressive strength procedures followed in all studies
followed in all studies summarized here can be found summarized here can be found in the following ref-
in the following references of Baugh (2008), Koostra erences: Baugh (2008), Koostra (2009), Rosa (2009),
(2009), Rosa (2009), Cetin et al. (2010), and Su (2012). and Su (2012).

Table 3 Legend and composition of the mixtures


Soil type Legend of mixtures Binder type Binder content (%)
RPM1 + 10% Riv7 fly ash Riverside 7 fly ash 10.0
RPM2 + 10% Riv7 fly ash Riverside fly ash 10.0
RAP + 10% King fly ash King fly ash 10.0
Paul Smith fly ash 10.0
RSG1 + 10% PS + 2.5% LKD
Lime kiln dust 2.5
Coarse-grained Paul Smith fly ash 10.0
RSG1 + 10% PS + 5% LKD
soils/materials Lime kiln dust 5.0
Cement kiln dust 5.0
RSG2 + CKD Cement kiln dust 10.0
Cement kiln dust 15.0
Sand + 6% Cement Cement 6.0
Sand + 13% King fly ash C fly ash 13.0
Lawson + 20% Co fly ash Columbia fly ash 20.0
Silt + 8% Cement Cement 8.0
Clay + 12% Cement Cement 12.0
Fine-grained soils Silt + 13% King fly ash C fly ash 13.0
F fly ash 12.0
Silt + 12% F fly ash + 4% Lime
Lime 4.0
Clay + 6% Lime Lime 6.0
RPM: Reclaimed pavement material; RAP: Recycled asphalt pavement; RSG: Road surface gravel; Co: Columbia fly ash; Riv7:
Riverside fly ash; PS: Paul Smith fly ash, LKD: Lime kiln dust; CKD: Cement kiln dust.

4 Discussion higher than average sulfur content of this particular


CKD, reported as SO3, which is 12.5% compared to
4.1 Impact of freeze-thaw cycles on volume change typical 6.0% for most CKDs.
of chemically stabilized materials Volume changes of fly ash stabilized materials
(Lawson, RPM1, and RPM2) are shown as a function
The volume changes observed are summarized in of freeze-thaw cycling in Figure 2. A general trend of
Table 4 for the Lawson-Co fly ash and RPM1 and volume increase in response to freeze-thaw cycling is
RPM2-Riv7 fly ash and RSG2-CKD mixtures at the observed for all mixtures. The maximum volume in-
end of freeze-thaw cycling when specimens are com- crease was 2.7% for RPM after five freeze-thaw cy-
pletely thawed. These results indicate that specimens cles. Lawson-fly ash mixture, however, showed a
containing CKD had higher volume change as com- volume reduction after the first freeze-thaw cycle
pared to the specimens mixed with Co and Riv7 fly thereafter the volume increased but still remained
ashes (both Class C). The increase in volume of lower than the volume of the specimen before
specimens prepared with CKD is probably due to the freeze-thaw cycling.
486 Tuncer B. Edil et al., 2015 / Sciences in Cold and Arid Regions, 7(5): 0482–0491

Table 4 Volume change of specimens during freeze-thaw cycles


Specimen Binder type Binder content (%) Volume change (%) Final cycle
5 1.0 2
RSG+CKD Cement Kiln Dust 10 15.0 5
15 10.0 3
Lawson+20% Co Columbia Fly Ash 20 0.5 10
RPM1+ 10% Riv7 Riverside 7 Fly Ash 10 2.5 5
RPM2+ 10% Riv7 Riverside 8 Fly Ash 10 2.7 5
Co: Columbia; RPM1: Reclaimed pavement material 1; RPM2: Reclaimed pavement material 2; RSG: Road surface gravel;
CKD: Cement kiln dust.

Punthutaecha et al. (2006) determined volumetric Figure 3 presents the impact of freeze-thaw cycles
swell expansion above 5% to be problematic, espe- on resilient modulus of materials stabilized with dif-
cially for low overburden structures such as pave- ferent binders (MrN) at N freeze-thaw cycles normal-
ments and embankments. Based on this criterion, the ized by resilient modulus without freeze-thaw cycling
results summarized in Table 4 and Figure 2 indicate (Mr0). For the fly ash stabilized mixtures presented in
that the expansion associated with CKD, when its Figure 3a, the normalized resilient modulus decreases
content is more than 5%, could cause distress to in response to freeze-thaw cycling and then levels off
pavement structures while mixtures prepared with fly in approximately 1 to 5 cycles. The resilient modulus
ashes show acceptable volume change. of these materials in Figure 3a decreased in the range
of 15% to 45%.
In Figure 3b, RSG stabilized with off-spec fly ash
and LKD shows slight decrease in Mr (3% to 10%)
after four cycles, and then starts decreasing drastically
when samples are subjected to 8 and 12 freeze-thaw
cycles with the maximum decrease of about 60%. The
largest rate of decrease of Mr was observed between
the fourth and eighth cycle. Similar trends were ob-
served for unbound materials by Simonsen et al.
(2002).
Figure 3c shows that modulus of RSG stabilized
with CKD at various dosages decreases with increas-
ing freeze-thaw cycles. The relative decrease in mod-
ulus due to freeze-thaw cycles increases with CKD
content, but maximum decrease in Mr over 10 cycles
was about 50%. These results are less than the 67.5%
Figure 2 Volume change vs number of freeze-thaw cycles for decrease in modulus after eight cycles of freeze-thaw
Lawson-fly ash, RPM1-fly ash and RPM2-fly ash mixtures found by Zaman et al. (1999).
The results observed in Figure 3 indicate that RAP
4.2 Impact of freeze-thaw cycles on resilient modulus stabilized with King fly ash and RSG stabilized with
CKD possess superior stiffness performance under
Stabilized highway construction materials should harsh climatic conditions compared to other fly ash
be able to resist climatic stress, especially freeze-thaw mixtures.
cycles (Cetin et al., 2010). Measuring specimen
strength after freeze-thaw (F-T) cycles and recording 4.2.1 Resilient modulus of stabilized materials af-
the change in weight have been reported as indicators ter freeze-thaw cycles compared to the unfrozen
of durability. However, the evaluation of durability by material without binder
weight loss as a result of freeze-thaw cycles (ASTM
D560) has been dropped by some state agencies as the In Figure 4, resilient modulus of stabilized materi-
procedure is overly severe, and does not completely als after the last freeze-thaw cycle is compared to the
simulate field conditions and perhaps applicable to resilient modulus of unfrozen unstabilized original
exposed concrete. Therefore, this study focuses on material. A general trend of higher resilient modulus
impacts of freeze-thaw cycle on more relevant proper- when soils are stabilized with different binders even
ties such as resilient modulus and unconfined com- after freeze-thaw cycles is clearly evident when com-
pressive strength. pared to unstabilized materials without freeze-thaw
Tuncer B. Edil et al., 2015 / Sciences in Cold and Arid Regions, 7(5): 0482–0491 487

cycles. The increase in resilient modulus of the stabi- with increasing freeze-thaw cycles. The reduction in
lized soil and recycled materials after freeze-thaw modulus during the first freeze-thaw cycle can be at-
cycles range between 168% and 56% compared to tributed to freezing temperatures dominating and re-
unfrozen and unstabilized material. Two fly ash stabi- tarding the cementation reactions, thereafter both
lized materials (RPM and RAP) were an exception to freezing and thawing temperatures compensate each
this trend and showed minor decrease in resilient other and the variation in stiffness becomes minimal.
modulus after freeze-thaw cycling in a range of −2% Overall, the modulus dropped about 50%–65% in 12
and −15% compared to unfrozen/unstabilized original freeze-thaw cycles.
material. These results also indicate that LKD and Stabilized coarse-grained materials show a steady
CKD stabilized materials show particular resistance to drop in modulus ranging between 2% to 42%, with an
freeze-thaw cycling. average of 24.5% with 12 freeze-thaw cycles. Data
reported by Simonsen et al. (2002) on unstabilized
4.2.2 Effect of soil type coarse-grained soils indicated a reduction in resilient
modulus after one freeze-thaw cycle in the range of
Figure 5 presents the normalized resilient modulus 19% to 50%, with an average of 34%. Less reduction
of a fine-grained soil (i.e., Lawson) and several in stiffness were obtained in this study with more
coarse-grained materials (RSG, RPM, and RAP) sta- freeze-thaw cycles compared to their data. This can be
bilized with different binders as a function of attributed to the stabilization effect of fly ash. The
freeze-thaw cycles. In the stabilized fine-grained soil, reduction of stiffness during the first 1–4 freeze-thaw
resilient modulus decreased 35% in the first cycles can be attributed to the retardation of poz-
freeze-thaw cycle then the decrease appears to slow zolanic reactions.

Figure 3 Normalized resilient modulus vs freeze-thaw cycles for (a) Lawson + fly ash, RPM1 + fly ash, RPM2 + fly ash,
and RAP + fly ash, (b) RSG1 + fly ash + lime kiln dust, and (c) RSG2 + cement kiln dust
488 Tuncer B. Edil et al., 2015 / Sciences in Cold and Arid Regions, 7(5): 0482–0491

Figure 4 Comparison of the resilient modulus of unstabilized original materials not subjected to freeze-thaw with the resilient
modulus of stabilized materials with different binders after 5 or 10 freeze-thaw cycles

Figure 5 Normalized resilient modulus vs freeze-thaw cycles for (a) fine-grained soils and (b) coarse-grained soils/materials

4.3 Impact of freeze-thaw cycles on unconfined binder in Figure 6b. However, the reduction rate in
compressive strength strength of CKD stabilized materials during
freeze-thaw cycling are four times lower on average
4.3.1 Effect of binder type than those stabilized with self-cementation fly ashes.
This difference could be attributed to the higher CaO
Figure 6a shows that materials stabilized with content of CKD materials (54%) as compared to the
self-cementation fly ash display a consistent decrease CaO content of self-cementation fly ashes (<25.8%)
in unconfined compressive strength (quN) at N as given in Table 2.
freeze-thaw cycles normalized by unconfined com- The strength of soils/materials stabilized with ce-
pressive strength without freeze-thaw cycling (qu0) as ment and lime did not change significantly when these
a function of freeze-thaw cycling. Similar trends were samples were subjected to freeze-thaw cycling (Fig-
also observed with materials stabilized with CKD ures 6c and 6d). Nevertheless, the results presented in
Tuncer B. Edil et al., 2015 / Sciences in Cold and Arid Regions, 7(5): 0482–0491 489

Figures 6c and 6d indicate that strength of materials occurring at 1–3 freeze-thaw cycles.
stabilized with cement and lime decreased 40% to Overall, strength of stabilized coarse-grained soils
60% and 60%, respectively with freeze-thaw cycling. is affected less from freeze-thaw cycling than the
Based on these results it can be concluded that CKD strength of stabilized fine-grained soils (Figure 7).
binder among other binders used in this study seems Furthermore, the highest reduction in strength of sta-
to provide superior performance against freeze-thaw bilized coarse-grain soils were measured at
cycling although it may result in unacceptable volume freeze-thaw cycles higher than five. These results in-
increase. dicate that there are some differences in the
freeze-thaw behavior of fine-grained and
4.3.2 Effect of soil type coarse-grained soils/materials.
Figure 8 shows the impact of freeze-thaw cycling
The effect of grain size on freeze-thaw suscepti- on normalized unconfined compressive strength of
bility is presented in Figure 7. Fine-grained soils are stabilized natural soils in comparison to recycled ma-
identified with open symbols and the coarse-grained terials (RPMs, and RAP). As presented in Figure 8,
soils/materials are identified with closed symbols. strength of both stabilized natural soils and recycled
Figure 7 shows that strength of both fine-grained soils materials decreases with freeze-thaw cycling. The
and coarse-grained soils decrease with freeze-thaw cy- average reductions in unconfined compressive
cling. Moreover, fine-grained soils appear to be more strength of all soils and recycled materials are ap-
susceptible to freeze-thaw cycling than coarse-grained proximately 50%–55%. The average rate of decrease
soils. On average, the unconfined compressive strength of strength of stabilized natural soils is 2% per
of fine-grained soils stabilized with different binders freeze-thaw cycle while this average reduction rate is
dropped approximately 50% with the highest reduction 5% for stabilized RPMs and RAP materials.

Figure 6 Normalized unconfined compressive strength (quN/qu0) vs freeze-thaw cycles for specimens prepared with
(a) self-cementation fly ash, (b) off-spec fly ash, (c) cement, and (d) lime
490 Tuncer B. Edil et al., 2015 / Sciences in Cold and Arid Regions, 7(5): 0482–0491

Figure 7 Normalized unconfined compressive strength Figure 8 Normalized unconfined compressive strength
(quN/qu0) vs freeze-thaw cycles for fine-grained soils and (quN/qu0) vs freeze-thaw cycles for natural soils and
coarse-grained soils/materials. Open symbols: Fine grained recycled materials. Open symbols: Natural soils;
soil; Closed symbols: Coarse grained soil/material Closed symbols: RPM and RAP

5 Conclusions age reduction rate was 5% per cycle for stabilized


recycled materials.
An overview of various research studies undertaken 5) Fine-grained soils are more susceptible to
to investigate the effects of freeze-thaw cycles on vol- freeze-thaw cycling than coarse-grained soils. The
ume change, stiffness, and strength of chemically stabi- largest reduction in strength of stabilized fine-grained
lized natural soils and recycled materials is presented. soils occurred at the first freeze-thaw cycle. Stabilized
The conclusions are summarized as follows: coarse–grained soils were affected less from
1) Materials stabilized with cement kiln dust are freeze-thaw cycling than the stabilized fine-grained
the most susceptible mixtures to volume increase soils.
during freeze-thaw cycling and should be scrutinized. It is safe to recommend that an average 50% re-
Fly ash stabilized materials have small volume duction in unfrozen modulus of chemically stabilized
change. soils/materials is appropriate for freeze thaw effects in
2) For all the mixtures, resilient modulus decreas- design in seasonally cold climates.
es in response to freeze-thaw cycling. Results of this
study show that this reduced modulus of stabilized Acknowledgments:
soils/materials after freeze-thaw cycling is still mostly The authors acknowledge the Recycled Materials
higher than that of unstabilized/unfrozen original Resource Center (http://rmrc.wisc.edu) for its support
soils/materials. The exception to this was observed for of research and outreach of recycled materials and
recycled pavement material and recycled asphalt industrial byproducts for use in construction. En-
pavement stabilized with fly ash, which showed slight- dorsement by RMRC or the fly ash suppliers is not
ly lower modulus. Overall, binders reviewed in the implied and should not be assumed.
current study improve the stiffness of the materials un-
der winter conditions. Cement kiln dust appears to be
the most resistant binder against freeze-thaw effects. References:
3) Unconfined compressive strength of all
AASHTO T307, 2007. Determining the Resilient Modulus of Soils
soil-binder mixtures also decreases with freeze-thaw and Aggregate Materials. American Association of State
cycles. Materials stabilized with cement kiln dust Highway and Transportation Officials. Washington D.C.,
were the least impacted from freeze-thaw cycling. USA.
However, no consistent relationship was observed Acosta HA, Edil TB, Benson CH, 2003. Soil Stabilization and
between strength of soils stabilized with cement and Drying Using Fly Ash. Geo Engineering Report No. 03-03,
lime and number of freeze-thaw cycles. Geo-Engineering Program, University of Wisconsin-Madison,
4) The average rate of decrease in strength of sta- Madison, WI.
bilized natural soils was 2% per cycle while the aver- Arora S, Aydilek AH, 2005. Class f fly ash amended soils as high-
Tuncer B. Edil et al., 2015 / Sciences in Cold and Arid Regions, 7(5): 0482–0491 491

way base materials. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, Madison, WI, pp. 115.
17(6): 640–649. Li L, Benson CH, Edil TB, et al., 2008. Sustainable construction
ASTM C618, 1978. Standard Specification for Fly Ash and Raw case history: fly ash stabilization of recycled asphalt pavement
or Calcined Natural Pozzolan for Use as a Mineral Admixture material. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 26(2):
in Portland Cement Concrete. West Conshohocken, PA, USA. 177–188.
ASTM D1557, 2012. Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Moosazedh J, Witczak M, 1981. Prediction of subgrade moduli for
Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort. soil that exhibits nonlinear behavior. Journal of the Transporta-
West Conshohocken, PA, USA. tion Research Board, 810: 10–17.
ASTM D5102, 2004. Standard Test Method for Unconfined Com- NCHRP 1-28, 2003. A Harmonized Test Methods for Laboratory
pressive Strength of Compacted Soil-Lime Mixtures. West Determination of Resilient Modulus for Flexible Pavement
Conshohocken, PA, USA. Design Prepared for National Cooperative Highway Research
ASTM D5239, 2004. Standard Practice for Characterizing Fly Ash Program. Washington D.C..
for Use in Soil Stabilization. West Conshohocken, PA, USA. Punthutaecha K, Puppala AJ, Vanapalli SK, et al., 2006. Volume
ASTM D560, 2003. Standard Test Method for Freezing and change behaviors of expansive soils stabilized with recycled
Thawing Compacted Soil-Cement Mixtures. West Con- ashes and fibers. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering,
shohocken, PA, USA. 18(2): 295–306.
Baugh J, 2008. Suitability of Cement Kiln Dust for Reconstruction Rosa MG, 2009. Effect of Freeze and Thaw Cycling on Soils Sta-
of Bituminous Roads. MS Thesis, University of Wiscon- bilized Using Fly Ash. M.S. Thesis, University of Wiscon-
sin-Madison, Madison, WI, pp. 50. sin-Madison, Madison, WI, pp. 184.
Camargo FF, 2008. Strength and Stiffness of Recycled Base Mate- Simonsen E, Janoo V, Isacsson U, 2002. Resilient properties of
rials Blended with Fly Ash. M.S. Thesis, University of Wis- unbound road material during seasonal frost conditions. Jour-
consin-Madison, Madison, WI, pp. 123. nal of Cold Region Engineering, 16: 28–50.
Cetin B, Aydilek AH, Guney Y, 2010. Stabilization of recycled Su Z, 2012. Durability of Performance of Cementitiously Stabi-
base material using high carbon fly ash. Resources, Conserva- lized Layers. M.S. Thesis, University of Wisconsin-Madison,
tion and Recycling, 54: 879–892. Madison, WI, pp. 189.
Edil TB, Acosta AA, Benson CH, 2006. Stabilizing soft fi- Tastan O, Edil TB, Benson CH, et al., 2011. Stabilization of or-
ne-grained soils with fly ash. Journal of Materials in Civil En- ganic soils with fly ash. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvi-
gineering, 18(2): 283–294. ronmental Engineering, 137(9): 819–834.
Hatipoglu B, Edil T, Benson C, 2008. Evaluation of Base Prepared Wen H, Tharaniyil M, Ramme B, et al., 2004. Field performance
from Road Surface Gravel Stabilized with Fly Ash. evaluation of class C fly ash in full-depth reclamation: case
GeoCongress 2008 ASCE Geotechnical Special Publication, history study. Journal of the Transportation Research Board,
177, New Orleans, LA, pp. 288–295. 1869: 41–46.
Koostra B, 2009. Large Scale Model Experiments of Recycled Zaman MM, Zhu JH, Laguros JG, 1999. Durability effects on
Base Course Materials Stabilized with Cement and Cement resilient moduli of stabilized aggregate base. Journal of the
Kiln Dust. M.S. Thesis, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Transportation Research Board, 1687: 29–38.