Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191

https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-021-00555-4

STATE-OF-THE-ART PAPER

Utilization of recycled aggregates in cement‑treated bases:

a state‑of‑the‑art review
Sarella Chakravarthi1   · S. Shankar1

Received: 11 March 2021 / Accepted: 28 May 2021

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021

Abstract
Recycled materials with suitable engineering properties can be used as substitutes for natural aggregates (NA), an economi-
cally feasible and environmentally friendly alternative. Various recycled materials such as reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP),
recycled concrete aggregate (RCA), crushed brick (CB), fine recycled glass (FRG), Steel Slag, waste rock (WR), recycled
masonry aggregate (RMA), electrolyte manganese residue (EMR), red mud (RM) and plastic wastes, were used globally in
pavement construction. Extensive research is in progress to utilize recycled materials in flexible and rigid pavement bases
with and without stabilization. Cement stabilization is widely used among the various stabilization techniques due to the
proven process/technology and benefits. The recycled aggregates content, type, cement content, gradation, curing period,
and other factors influence the mechanical properties of the cement-treated bases. In the process, there is a need to assess
the performance of cement-treated bases at varying percentages of recycled materials to understand the real-time conditions
for different climatic conditions. The optimization of the recycled materials and cement is necessary to improve the perfor-
mance and make the recycled bases economically viable. A detailed review of cement-treated bases using different recycled
materials is carried and presented in the current paper. Besides, the indigenous characteristics of various recycled materials
with cement stabilization are presented. The extensive literature survey concluded that Cement-treated bases showed better
performance than conventional bases in terms of stiffness, strength, economic, environmental, and sustainable perspectives.

Keywords  Recycling · RAP · RCA​ · Stabilization · Cement

Introduction (WMM), water bound macadam (WBM), and crusher run

Road transportation plays a significant role in the movement
of people and goods from one place to another to improve
the socio-economic conditions of any nation. Among the
infrastructure, pavement is the hard surface that provides
safe movement of vehicles. Generally, the pavement has sev-
eral layers, including a natural subgrade, compacted sub-
grade, sub-base, base, binder course, and an asphalt surface
course. The base and sub-base courses transfer the traffic
load onto the subgrade safely without causing excessive
deformation and reduce stress levels. Traditionally, bases are
composed of granular materials such as wet mix macadam
* Sarella Chakravarthi
chakravarthi.sarella@student.nitw.ac.in
S. Shankar
ss@nitw.ac.in
1
Department of Civil Engineering, Transportation Division,
NIT, Warangal 506004, India
macadam (CRM) made of natural aggregates. However, to
meet the demands of infrastructure for developmental activi-
ties, natural aggregates are continuously extracted, leading to
the depletion of natural resources that increase construction
costs. Preservation of these natural resources for the sustain-
able development of roads remains a challenge around the
world. So, there is a pressing need to adopt recycled materi-
als for infrastructure construction globally, particularly in
developing countries. These recycled materials are gener-
ally in service for several years before recycling into the
aggregates. During the service period, there is a possibility
of deterioration due to traffic, climatic, and environmental
factors. As a result, these materials cannot be used directly
for construction as they do not satisfy all the required engi-
neering properties as conventional pavement materials.
RCA is obtained from the construction and demolition
waste of concrete structures, and RAP is obtained from the
removal of in-service distressed flexible pavements. RCA
is widely used for landfills and shoulders. Similarly, glass

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 191   Page 2 of 22
is obtained from industries, and fly ash is the waste derived
from the thermal power plant. Apart from this, EMR, which
is the wastage from the manganese production plant, red
mud is a by-product of the bauxite calcination process, and
Slag is the by-product of steel plants are some industrial
wastes. This industrial wastage cannot be induced directly
into the pavements, which require appropriate treatment and
should be assessed for strength and durability issues.
RAP consists of valuable aggregates which are covered
by a coating of bitumen. RCA consist of aggregates and
cement mortar. Usage of these materials will create a sus-
tainable environment and decrease conventional aggregates’
usage. RAP can be used in pavement layers in the surface
course, binder course, bases, and sub-bases in different
percentages. Also, recommended to use RAP as a granular
material, shoulders, backfills, bicycle tracks, parking areas,
etc., [1].
Similarly, RCA can be used as base and sub-base courses
in pavement construction. FRG, CB, WR, and RMA can be
used in bases and sub-bases with the combination of other
recycled materials or with additives. Apart from these mate-
rials, some other wastes and recycled materials like orna-
mental stone processing, waste from the manufacturing of
wind turbine like glass fiber embedded in epoxy resin, fib-
ers from the palm tree fruits, Sludge wastes from the paper
industry, recycled Cathode ray tubes, and recycling paper
industry effluent sludges are used in the cement mortars as
partial replacement of aggregates [2–7]. The utilization of
these wastes from industries helps in cleaner production with
less pollution and low carbon footprints. These materials are
used to prepare mortars that can be used in the pavement
bases as well. Cement stabilization of these recycled waste
materials will improve the load-bearing capacity and pro-
vides stiffer bases [8]. Though nationally and internationally
research is contributed besides the specifications, using recy-
cled materials is limited in engineering communities. With
this background, it is necessary to comprehend the research
works in various regions worldwide on cement-treated bases
using recycled aggregates.
Statistics of the utilization of aggregates: world
scenario
The demand for the usage of NA for the present and future
is increasing day by day. According to the Freedonia Group,
world road construction aggregates of 2017, 43 billion tons
of non-metallic minerals are extracted for usage worldwide.
The aggregates demand is more for the Asia/Pacific region
[9, 10]. Non-metallic minerals include limestone, manga-
nese, mica, gypsum, coal, dolomite, phosphate, granite, etc.
Among these, the highest consumption is limestone used to
construct roads, buildings, and railways.
13
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191
In the case of Construction and Demolition (C&D) waste,
it is estimated that 850 million tonnes are generated accord-
ing to the 2008 census. Moreover, more percentage of recy-
cling takes place in Denmark, followed by Netherlands [11].
A typical percentage of C&D waste generation of total waste
and the percentage of recycling of C&D is shown in Fig. 1.
Concerning India, which is the second-largest country in
terms of population, the entire C&D waste is around 23 mil-
lion tonnes generated every year, and 5% is recycled. Out of
all C&D waste, 1.8 million tons of RCA have been gener-
ated annually [12]. A study estimated that the C&D waste
generation using material flow patterns which accounts for
around 112–431 million tones which is more than that of the
official figures [13]. However, the percentage of recycling is
not well documented. The statistics reveal that the genera-
tion of recycled aggregates will surpass natural aggregates
production in the future. This will increase the generation
of C&D and natural aggregates as well. If the same trend is
continued, there might be no NA to cater needs of the future
generation. Nowadays, recycled aggregates are considered
waste materials and dumping at the roadsides used for land
fillings. To preserve the natural aggregates and protect the
environment, recycling these aggregates is the only option
available. The utilization of recycled aggregates is cheaper
and consumes less energy than that of the processing of the
natural aggregates. The only thing is to identify recycled
materials from different sources like roads, industries, build-
ings, etc., and conserving them for present and future pave-
ment construction activities.
The composition of C&D waste varies between coun-
tries based on the construction and demolition activities. A
typical composition of C&D waste in India is presented in
100
Percentage of C&D in total waste
90 Percentage Recycling of C&D
80
% Percentage of Aggregates
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
lia zil ark and any ng an aly nds ay ain UK USA
stra Bra enm Finl erm g Ko Jap It herla Norw Sp
Au D G Hon
Ne
t
Country
Fig. 1  Statistics of C&D in different countries [11]
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191 Page 3 of 22  191
Fig. 2. More than 50% of the total C & D is comprised of
brick, masonry, and concrete demolition.
Recycled aggregates in base course
applications
Several researchers studied to include recycled aggregates in
pavement bases, but a few limitations are noticed. Some of
these include using RCA above the water table due to envi-
ronmental factors like contamination of the drinking water
and its poor performance toward freeze and thaw cycles
[14–16]. Likewise, RAP aggregate usage in the pavements
concerns strength reduction, more permanent deformation,
poor distribution of stresses and less durability, and recom-
mended stabilization [17, 18]. The lower strength of the RAP
aggregates is due to asphalt binder coating, which exhibits
large permanent deformations due to viscous behavior [19,
20]. So, blending with quality aggregates is preferred while
using RAP in pavement sub-bases to increase interlocking
capacity [21]. However, the combined gradation should have
good packing; otherwise, more permanent strains may occur
[22]. Likewise, the recommended ratio is 85:15 at 59–78%
of OMC when RCA and RAP are combined, satisfying the
repeated load triaxial test (RLT). Beyond this limit, there
is a decline in the stiffness properties [21]. Arulrajah et al.
[23] recommend using RAP/RCA blends in low-traffic roads
due to strength issues. Also, Disfani et al. [24] showed that
FRG could be used as an alternative to the NA, which has
similar properties as NA and has lower leachate concentra-
tions. Arulrajah et al. [25] concluded that the CB, RAP, and
FRG properties should be modified by blending or adding
additives due to insufficient strength and engineering proper-
ties. To address the issues associated with recycled materials
and increase their utilization in the high-volume roads, the
stabilization of recycled materials is considered.
Given the gaps in recycled unbound materials, the
cement stabilization of recycled materials is a good option.
1%
2%
2%
5%
Soil, Sand & Gravel
Brick & Masonary
Concrete
36%
Metals
23%
Bitumen
Wood
Others
31%
Fig. 2  Composition of C&D in India [88]
Cement-treated base is obtained by stabilization of aggre-
gate or soil material with cement, compacted and allowed
to cure for a particular period to improve its mechanical
properties. The properties of the recycled materials can be
enhanced with additives or blending with superior quality
materials [25]. Moreover, cement stabilized materials have
high fatigue strength, and their bearing capacity is more
than that of unbound materials [26]. Besides, there is an
improvement in the stiffness of the base with the cement
stabilization. Further, it reduces the deflections, increases
the pavement life even at higher traffic loads, and serves
better than NA bases [27].
Further, strength and durability issues can be alleviated if
recycled materials are treated with suitable chemical agents.
These factors motivated to move toward the stabilization of
recycled bases. Among stabilization, cement stabilization
is one of the widely preferred options because of the easy
availability of cement, early strength gain, and durability
aspects. Also, Taha et al. [28] proved that cement-treated
RAP bases are more economical than the untreated NA. The
utilization of conventional aggregates is a costly process as it
involves quarrying, crushing, and transportation. The recy-
cled materials considered waste and utilization of the same
with some stabilizer are always environmentally friendly and
economical.
Cement stabilization is mainly used to strengthen the
weak subgrade, base, and sub-base course, increasing the
pavement’s load transfer efficiency. Different studies were
carried on the stabilization of recycled materials in com-
bination with NA. The adopted cement contents in these
studies ranged from 2 to 10%, depending on the strength
requirements. These stabilization levels purely depend on
material properties, traffic conditions, strength, and durabil-
ity characteristics. The performance parameters considered
to study the cement-treated bases are unconfined compres-
sive strength (UCS), flexural strength (FS), indirect tensile
strength (ITS), modulus, permanent deformation, fatigue,
etc. Each of these materials is analyzed in critical condi-
tions to understand their behavior in real-time conditions.
Likewise, RAP materials are sensitive to temperature, and
RCA materials are susceptible to water.
Cement‑treated recycled bases
Cement-treated bases can be evaluated using different
parameters. The literature shows that the percentage of
studies carried using different parameters is presented in
Fig. 3. UCS is the primary parameter adopted by more than
70% of the researchers, followed by Resilient Modulus
(MR). The measurement of cohesion is represented in terms
of UCS. Every country has its specification limits of UCS
for base material. Besides, ITS is an important parameter
13
 191   Page 4 of 22
Fig. 3  Parameters used in the
studies
that determines the resistance toward tensile cracks. The
modulus is used to characterize the materials and to design/
analysis of pavements. Durability studies include wet-dry
cycles and freeze–thaw cycles that replicate the long-lasting
nature of the pavement bases. All these parameters are pre-
sented in this section at different curing periods and cement
contents. Some studies used recycled materials directly, and
others treated them before using them. Some mixes need to
be designed appropriately with suitable aggregate combina-
tions. Likewise, a balanced mix designed electric arc furnace
slag and NA can be used as an alternative to the conventional
base and sub-bases [29]. In this way, most recycled materi-
als are induced into the pavement base layers by cement
stabilization.
Further, industrial wastes like EMR, RM, and RCA
from the concrete industry were pretreated before sta-
bilization using cement. The pre-treatment of RCA
requires covering the pores that are existing. Several
methods are available, like sodium silicate solution and
silica fume–Portland cement combination. The silica
fume–cement slurry-treated mixes achieved the highest
compressive strength and other mechanical properties
compared with sodium silicate solution treatment and
untreated mixes [30]. Similarly, polyvinyl chloride (1.5
or 2%)-treated RCA along with cement stabilization (3%)
achieved better mechanical properties by improving ductil-
ity and shear strength [31]. Besides, the cathode ray tubes
(CRT), the waste generated during the technology up-gra-
dation of television, is a significant recycled material. The
use of the cement-treated CRT and the masonry recycled
aggregates as a sub-base proved to be sustainable in terms
of strength and environmental point of view [7]. Plastics
13
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191
obtained from solid waste can be used in the bases. The
combination includes polyethylene terephthalate, recycled
waste from the waste bottles, CB and RCA in the cement-
treated bases. Arulrajah et al. [32] recommended using
small amounts of plastic (up to 5%) as it decreases the
mechanical properties of the bases with further addition.
On the other hand, research is done on the cement-treated
RAP aggregates with different amounts of residual binder,
type of bitumen binder, and aging. It is reported that there
is no significant impact of the bitumen content on the
properties of the cement-treated bases [18, 33]. In contrast,
there is a decrease in mechanical properties of the base
with the increase in the number of RAP aggregates which
increases the asphalt surface and inhibits the formation
of cement bonds between the aggregates and the cement
[34–37]. Fedrigo et al. [38] concluded that the age of the
RAP, amount of binder, and type of binder significantly
affect the compaction and mechanical characteristics of the
mixes. There exist differences in the influence of cement-
treated recycled materials on the mechanical properties.
Cement-treated bases are different from the concrete
mixtures, which are lightly cemented (2–10%) than concrete
mixtures (10–15%). The amount of cement is selected based
on the required compressive strength for both mixes. The
utilization of super-plasticizers is adopted in concretes to
achieve early strength, curing, and some particular purposes.
However, pre-treatment is done for recycled materials using
super-plasticizers or other additives to achieve adequate
strength. Also, the aggregate composition of the cement-
treated bases is entirely different from the concrete mixtures.
In addition to the super-plasticizers, some air-entertaining
agents for particular concrete application purposes are used.
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191 Page 5 of 22  191
Compaction characteristics
of cement‑treated recycled bases
Compaction characteristics include optimum moisture
content (OMC) and maximum dry density (MDD) that
are important in achieving the excellent compactabil-
ity of the bases. The compaction is performed generally
using a modified proctor testing procedure according to
the AASTHO T180 protocol. In this test, a mold size of
102 mm diameter and 127 mm height is used, and each
layer is compacted using a 4.5 kg hammer from a free fall
of 457 mm. OMC and MDD depend on the water absorp-
tion capacity of the ingredients in the mixture and its
compatibility. The behavior of the cement-treated bases
is different from the normal bases as it involves different
percentages of recycled aggregate contents and cement
contents. Fedrigo et  al. [39] concluded that OMC and
MDD are not significantly influenced by the cement con-
tent and percentage of RAP content. Xuan et al. [40] con-
cluded that the MDD for recycled mixes (RMA and RCA)
are influenced by compaction method and energy where
OMC increases and MDD decreases with an increase in
RMA in the mix. Higher OMC is observed for RCA mixes
compared with conventional aggregates because of higher
water absorption of the RCA, and also coarse RCA has a
higher demand for water than that of the fine RCA [41].
Liu et al. [42] observed an increase in MDD and OMC
with the increase in the steel slag content. A typical com-
parison of different recycled materials at constant cement
content is shown in Fig. 5. RAP has low OMC and high
dry density, and RCA has the opposite with high OMC
and lowers dry density [43, 44]. The nature of more water
absorption of RCA is due to the porous nature of the sur-
rounding mortar, and the lower OMC of RAP is due to
the asphalt coating that prevents the water absorption of
the RAP. For cement-treated recycled bases, MDD might
not replicate the compressive strength as many factors
influence strength development. Lim and Zollinger [41]
revealed that two different materials, namely recycled con-
crete and crushed limestone with the same MDD, achieved
different strengths. Typically, Leite [45] concluded that the
determination of the OMC for the C&D waste mixtures
is slightly tricky due to the differences in the variability
in the constituent’s materials due to breakage during the
compaction process. The same phenomenon is observed
in the cement-treated RCA-NA mixtures where the OMC
did not follow the proper trend with RCA content [46].
Besides, Guo et al. [47] used a combination of NA and
RCA from cement stabilized macadam at various percent-
ages. It is observed that an increase in the OMC and MDD
with the cement content observed a reduction in MDD and
an increase in OMC with RCA. Chakravarthi et al. [46]
concluded that the RAP content significantly influences
the OMC and MDD in which OMC and MDD decrease
with the RAP content, and an increase in OMC is observed
with the cement content. While the MDD of NA is signifi-
cantly higher than that of the recycled aggregates, there is
no particular trend observed in the case of OMC from the
studies [28, 48]. The lower MDD of recycled materials is
due to their combination with other materials. For exam-
ple, the RAP is a combination of aggregates and asphalt;
RCA combines aggregates and mortar; crushed brick is a
combination of brick and mortar.
Water and cement are the two critical components that
impart workability and strength. It is reported that there is a
decline in the strength of the base with the increase in water
to cement ratio irrespective of the type of recycled mate-
rial [44] and improves the workability. The properties like
compressive strength, density, water absorption capacity,
porosity, and flexural strength were affected by increasing
the water to cement ratio [48]. Hence, the water content shall
be selected so that the maximum strength is achieved, and it
is better to skip the construction of the treated bases in wet
conditions. The water should be optimum to complete the
hydration reaction, and more water leads to the voids in the
mixture after the evaporation process. The recommended
water to cement ratio is less than or equal to 0.5 [44]. Gener-
ally, OMC is considered to counteract this problem. How-
ever, laboratory conditions might not exist in the field as
free moisture exists in the aggregate before mixing due to
environmental factors. All these factors and field conditions
should be taken while constructing a pavement base.
Unconfined compressive strength (UCS)
of cement‑treated recycled bases
UCS is one of the parameters used to measure bound mate-
rials’ strength and cohesive nature, like chemically treated
soil or aggregate specimens. Generally, the specimen size
used in this test is 100 mm in diameter and 200 mm in height
according to the ASTM D1632 protocol and compacted at
OMC. In some studies, 100 mm diameter and 100 mm height
are adopted. The prepared samples are cured at various peri-
ods and tested for compressive strength using a standard
compression testing machine. This parameter is mainly used
to define the bound bases’ resilience and to optimize the
stabilizer. The acceptable range of UCS approximately is
between 300 and 600 psi (2.1–4.1 MPa). Several studies
were carried on UCS of cement/cement kiln dust (CKD)
stabilized recycled aggregate blends [28, 33, 34, 43, 49] dis-
cussed in the following sections. Besides, some industrial
waste materials like EMR and RM are used in some stud-
ies. However, pre-treatment is required for such materials to
prevent leachate problems and unwanted reactions [50]. In
13
 191   Page 6 of 22 Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191

addition, Guo et al. [47] used additives and early strength

anti-cracking materials, which improves the strength within
the 7 days of curing period compared with normal mixtures.
UCS depends on several factors like material type, grada-
tion, stabilizer, curing period, RAP or RCA or ceramic or
glass or any other recycled materials percentage, cement
type, the addition of fibers, etc. Some of the factors that
influence the strength of the bases are presented in Table 1.
On the other hand, several studies were carried out on
RCA with different percentages of cement contents, size
fractions, and the combination of other demolition waste.
Demolition waste includes CB, FRG, ceramic materials,
RMA, RAP, etc. From the laboratory study, Chakravarthi
et al. [46] showed that RCA bases have significant strengths Fig. 4  OMC and MDD for different aggregates at constant cement
content [44]
than RAP bases at constant cement and curing period. Some
of the results of UCS are summarized in Table 2.

14
Variation of UCS with cement or CKD content OMC
MDD 2.06
12
UCS increases with the cement content linearly irrespective 2.04
of the type of RAP material, as shown in Fig. 5 [33, 34, 39, 10

MDD (Mg/m3)
43, 51]. However, the UCS increases up to 15% in CKD
OMC (%)

utilization and starts to decline [28]. Further, a similar trend
of increase in UCS with cement content is observed for 50%
RAP blended with NA [33, 34, 52]. The strength increases
with the amount of binder through pozzolanic reactions and
establishes strong bonds. The gain in strength of 100% RAP
is low and requires more cement to reach the desired strength
than other blends. This is because of the improper bonding
with less cement as the RAP material is asphalt coated and
has more slip surfaces. In a study by Suebsuk et al. [53], two
materials, namely RAP and laterite soils, were stabilized
using cement. It is evident that the rate of gain in strength
more when cement content is less than 10% and decreases
when it exceeds 10%. The cement requirement varies from
type of cement, type of base material, depth of milling, and
type of recycled material. When utilizing the cement by-
products like CKD, it is necessary to determine optimum
dosage; otherwise, there might be a decline in strength at
some point [43]. A typical comparison is made with the
specifications mentioned in Table 3 with the researchers’
results, as shown in Figs. 6 and 7. There is variability in
meeting the required specifications, which depend on the
cement content, recycled aggregate type, and aggregate con-
tent. However, most of the results achieved the requirement
as a base, and the sub-base with the cement content less than
5%. The efficiency of the cement byproducts like CKD and
fly ash are less than that of the cement as large amounts are
required for stabilization. Further, optimization is needed
for cement by-products, whereas the cement stabilized bases
proportionally increased their strengths.
8 2.02
6 2
4
1.98
2
1.96
0
RAP CB RCA
Aggregate Type
Fig. 5  Percentage of studies adopted different recycled aggregates
Overall the strength of the RAP blended mixes increases
with the cement and NA in which cement acts as a bonding
material, and NA results in better interlocking in between
the RAP and NA. Similarly, there is an improvement in the
UCS when cement is added to the RCA irrespective of the
type of material. Studies conducted on RCA stabilized with
cement are shown in Fig. 4 [41, 44, 54–56]. Figure 4 shows the
strength variation of NA, RAP, and RCA cement-treated bases.
It is observed that the rate of gain in strength of RCA-treated
bases is more with the addition of cement compared with RAP
and NA. RAP has a significantly lower rate of strength gain
with the addition of cement because of asphalt coating. In
addition to the cement, the existing mortar in the RCA con-
tributed to the higher strengths.

13
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191 Page 7 of 22  191

Table 1  Influence of different parameters on UCS of RAP materials

Parameter Yuan et al. [33] Guthrie et al. [34] Taha et al. [43] Taha et al. [28] Suebsuk et al. [53]

RAP content UCS decreases UCS decreases – UCS decreases UCS decreases
Cement content/CKD UCS increases UCS increases UCS increases up UCS increases UCS increases
to 15% (CKD)
Curing period – – UCS increases UCS increases UCS increases
Asphalt content No impact on strength – – – Have a significant
effect on the strength
of CTB

Table 2  Influence of different parameters on UCS of RCA materials

Parameter Faysal et al. [54] Mohammadinia et al. [44] Lim and Zollinger [41] Arulrajah et al. [55]

RCA content UCS increases – – RCA-FRG blends have

more UCS than pure
RCA​
Cement content UCS increases UCS increases –
Curing period – UCS increases UCS increases UCS increases
OMC 100% RCA has high OMC RCA has higher OMC com- RCA has more OMC than NA RCA has higher OMC
pared with other C &D

Table 3  Summary of UCS Country/Code UCS (MPa)

specifications for road bases at
seven days of curing period India [64] Low volume road (traffic < 2 msa) High-volume road (traffic > 3 msa)
Sub-base Base Sub-base Base
1.70 2.76 1.5–3.0 4.5–7.0
China [40] Secondary road Highway
1.5–2.0 1.5–2.5 1.5–2.5 3.0–5.0
Britain [40] CBM 1 CBM 2 CBM 3 CBM 4
2.5–4.5 4.5–7.5 6.5–10.0 10.0–15.0
South Africa [40] C1 C2 C3 C4
4–8 2–4 1–2 0.5–1
New Zealand [89] 3
Portland Cement Asso- 2.1–5.5
ciation [90]
Spain [91] 2.5–4.5
Australia [29] > 3
Brazil [29] > 3.5
Spain [29] 4.5–6
USA [29] 3.5–6.9 for PCC, 5.2–6.9 for HMA
Italy [29] 2.5–5.5

CBM 1, CBM 2, CBM 3, CBM 4 are classified based on gradation according to Britain, and C1, C2, C3,
C4 are classified based on the South Africa specification

Variation of UCS with recycled aggregate
content
The UCS of cement-treated bases gradually decreases
with the increase in the percentage of RAP independent
of the stabilization levels, as shown in Fig. 8 [17, 33, 39,
46, 51, 52, 57]. Hundred percentage of RAP has a low
UCS value compared with NA. The UCS values for 100%
RAP mixes without stabilization fall below the accept-
able limits. Other blended mixes with NA or other base
materials require lower cement contents than the 100%
RAP. The decrease in strength with RAP content is due to
the lowest specific gravity of RAP materials and slippery

13
 191   Page 8 of 22
Fig. 6  Variation of UCS with cement/CKD content for RAP bases a 0%RAP, b 50%RAP, c 100%RAP
surfaces of the asphalt coating. The increase in strength
with NA or base materials is due to good interlocking
nature [53]. Apart from RAP content, cement content, cur-
ing time, compaction effort influences the strength of the
treated base [39, 56]. So, these are the available options
to increase the strength of the RAP mixes, including an
increase in the amount of cement stabilizer or compac-
tion effort or NA or base material proportion in the mixes.
In case of scarcity of the base materials or conventional
aggregates, stabilization and compaction effort are the
only available alternatives.
Besides, the strength of RCA blended with other
aggregates like NA, RAP, and CB in various propor-
tions depends on the type of material replaced. Figure 9
shows the variation of UCS with RCA in which three dif-
ferent materials are used as a replacement. When RCA
is replaced with NA and stabilized with 5% cement, the
13
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191
UCS increases with an increase in the RCA content up
to 75% replacement and decreases at 100% RCA alone
[56]. Chakravarthi et al. [46] found that the strength is
maximum at 50:50 ratios of RCA and NA independent
of cement contents. Guo et al. [47] observed a decrease
in compressive strength with RCA content. The packing
density also influences the strength of the RCA mixes [58].
When RCA was replaced with RAP, the UCS significantly
improved with RCA content irrespective of the cement
content [54]. Xuan et al. [40] replaced CB with RCA at
different cement contents (0 to 5.5%) and observed an
increase in UCS with RCA content.
Faysal et al. [54] proposed a model for the strength of the
unbound and cement-treated RCA-RAP blended Bases as a
function of RAP content at seven days of curing period as
shown in Eqs. (1).
For cement-treated bases,
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191 Page 9 of 22  191
Fig. 7  Variation of UCS with cement content. *NA, **RAP, ‘a’
another source
fc7 (RAP) = fc7 (RCA) − 1.285(RAP%) (1)
For Unbound bases,
fc7 (RAP) = fc7 (RCA) − 0.098(RAP%) (2)
Experimental studies were carried out on the stabiliza-
tion of two recycled materials with different percentages of
replacements. The replacement is successful in achieving
the desired strength specified by local authorities. However,
the percentage of replacement is restricted depending on the
strength achieved. Some studies include RAP/RCA, RCA/
FRG, RCA/RMA, or a combination of all the recycled mate-
rials in some percentages. Arulrajah et al. [55] studied the
replacement of FRG with RCA at 3% of cement stabiliza-
tion and found encouraging results with acceptable strength.
Faysal et al. [54] replaced RAP/RCA and concluded that
100%RAP could not be used as it required higher cement
content than 6%, which is uneconomical. Xuan et al. [42]
confirmed that the RMA percentage and cement content
influence the strength of the mixture and concluded that the
masonry particles’ failure affects the strength rather than the
bonding interface. Similarly, industrial byproducts like steel
slag are investigated to use in the road bases, and maximum
strength is achieved at 50% replacement.
Variation of UCS with curing period
The curing period is one of the critical factors in the evalu-
ation of cement-treated bases. The authorities prefer suf-
ficient compressive strengths at lower curing periods (less
than 7 days) to allow traffic early. In general, cementitious
materials gradually attain strength with time. There is an
increase in strength with the curing period independent of
the type of material or cement used [43, 51, 57]. The increase
in strength is found to be logarithmic [59]. In RCA, there is
an increase in the UCS with the curing period independent
of stabilization. This is due to the self-cementing properties
of the RCA in which the size of less than 0.15 mm and 0.3 to
0.6 mm are significant for the self-cementing nature [60, 61].
Cement-treated recycled aggregates with the combination of
other marginal materials like RMA, ceramic material, FRG,
sand, brick also exhibited an increase in strength with the
curing period [40, 48, 61, 62]. The gain in strength continues
to increase for 28 days in all the recycled materials irrespec-
tive of the source.
Variation of UCS with fines content
The fines content in a mix plays an essential role in the
variation of the strength. Fines content is one of the causes
for shrinkage cracks when it is high in amounts, leading
to insufficient interlocking and loses load transfer capacity
when it is in low amounts [63]. Fines content in any blend
has some ranges to achieve maximum density and strength
as too many fines create a problem. The increase in the fines
reduces the void ratio and increases the density of the mix-
ture. Generally, material passing through a 0.075 mm sieve
is represented as fines. From a study by Behiry [56], the
RCA blends exhibited higher strengths with the increase in
fines. The UCS of RAP blended bases with NA increases
with fines content (0.3% to 2.7%), and maximum UCS is
observed at 2.7% [33]. So, there is an increase in the strength
of the recycled bases with fines irrespective of the material.
However, this statement is valid up to certain limits of fines
content. Lim and Zollinger [41] concluded that the mixes
show higher strength at 5% fines content than 10% fines
content. This phenomenon is observed in both RCA and NA.
The variation of the strength may depend on material and
gradation. The fines range adopted by many specifications
was less than 10% [29, 59, 64].
Flexural strength properties
of cement‑treated recycled bases
Flexural strength is simply resistance to bending, an essen-
tial parameter for the cement-treated bases as they expe-
rience bending during traffic movements. It can be deter-
mined using either one point or three-point bending test,
mostly four-point bending, by applying loading at a constant
rate. The dimensions of the specimens are 7 × 7 × 28 ­cm3 or
10 × 10 × 40 ­cm3 are considered according to the standards.
Table 4 presents the flexural strength of different recycled
13
 191   Page 10 of 22 Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191

7.5 7.5
0.0% Cement 0% CKD
7 7
0.5% Cement 5% CKD
6.5 6.5
1.0% Cement 10% CKD
6 6 15% CKD
1.5% Cement
5.5 2.0% Cement 5.5 20% CKD
5 5
4.5 4.5
UCS (MPa)

UCS (MPa)
4 4
3.5 3.5
3 3
2.5 2.5
2 2
1.5 1.5
1 1
0.5 0.5
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
% RAP % RAP
Modified and redrawn from Guthrie et al. [34]
Modified and redrawn from Taha et al. [43]
7.5
7.5
7 0% Cement 0% Cement
2% Cement 7
6.5 3% Cement
4% Cement 6.5
6 5% Cement
6% Cement 6 7% Cement
5.5 5.5
5 5
4.5
UCS (MPa)

4.5
UCS (MPa)

4 4
3.5 3.5
3 3
2.5 2.5
2 2
1.5 1.5
1 1
0.5 0.5
0 0
50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
% RAP % RAP
Modified and redrawn from Yuan et al. [33] Modified and redrawn from Taha et al. [28]

Fig. 8  Variation of UCS with RAP content

materials investigated by various researchers across the

4.0
world. The nomenclature RCA0 represents the percentage
Unconfined Compressive Strength (MPa)

3.5 of RCA is 0% in the mix, RAP0 represents the RAP percent-

age is 0% in the mix, and 90RCA/10FRG means the mix is a
3.0
combination of 90% of RCA and 10% of FRG.
2.5 From Table 4, the flexural strength of the recycled aggre-
gate mixes decreases with the increase in the recycled mate-
2.0
rial content [56, 65]. However, for mixes with steel slag,
1.5
Behiry et al. [56]
maximum flexural strength is observed at 50% replacement
Faysal et al. [54] [42]. Further, an increase in the flexural strength with the
1.0 Xuan et al. [40] curing period, cement content, and early strength of anti-
Linear Fit of Behiry et al. [56]
0.5 Linear Fit of Fayasal et al. [54] cracking additives is observed [47, 66]. The flexural strength
Linear Fit of Xuan et al. [40] ranges between 10 and 20% of the UCS [56, 65]. Fedrigo
0.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 et al. [67] conducted a study on the cement-treated RAP
% RCA and Laterite soil blends, revealing an increase in the flexural
strength and modulus with the cement content and RAP con-
Fig. 9  Variation of UCS with RCA content tent. This is due to the increase in the specific surface area

13
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191 Page 11 of 22  191

Table 4  Flexural strength of References Mix Cement Flexural Strength (MPa) Specifications

different recycled materials by content
different authors (%) 7 day 28 day

[56] NA 5.0 0.295 0.471 ASTM C-78

RCA25 5.0 0.281 0.452
RCA50 5.0 0.272 0.428
RCA75 5.0 0.265 0.41
[65] NA 6.0 3.39 – France Specifications NFP
RAP25 6.0 2.38 18-433 (French Specifica-
tion)
RAP50 6.0 2.14
RAP75 6.0 1.60
RAP 6.0 1.08
[55] RCA​ 1.23 Australia Standards AS2000
90RCA/10FRG 3.0 1.85
80RCA/20FRG 3.0 1.66
70RCA/30FRG 3.0 1.56
[68] NA 5.0 1.53 – AS2000
[66] 20%RAP/80%NA 2.0/4.0 – 0.26/0.87 NCHRP Report-789
50%RAP/50%NA 2.0/4.0 0.32/0.77
70%RAP/30%NA 2.0/4.0 0.21/0.80
[42] 30% Steel Slag 4.0 0.613
50% Steel Slag 4.0 1.063
70% Steel Slag 4.0 0.929

of the Laterite soils, which requires more cement contents
for bonding. López et al. [66] reported an increase in ductile
nature with the RAP content when RAP and crushed aggre-
gates combination is used. The results showed an improve-
ment in flexural strength and modulus with the cement
content. Khay et al. [65] observed a decline in the flexural
strength with the RAP content. Overall, the recycled materi-
als performed almost equal to natural aggregates in terms of
flexural strength.
Indirect Tensile Strength properties
of cement‑treated recycled bases
ITS is one of the essential properties of the cement-treated
bases in which the tensile strains produced due to the traf-
fic loads should be within limits to arrest the bottom-up
cracking. In general, the tensile strains developed at the
bottom of the cement-treated bases are critical, which
leads to bottom-up cracking. The test specimens of size
100 mm diameter and 63 mm height or 100 mm diameter
and 200 mm height or 150 mm height and 150 mm diam-
eter are used. The samples are tested for ITS under loading
on a diametric plane at different curing periods, different
cement contents, and varying recycled aggregate percent-
ages. Similar trends observed in the UCS are repeated in
the ITS results as per several research works. The ITS of
the cement stabilized recycled blends decrease with the
increase in recycled aggregate content and increases with
the curing period and cement content [33, 46, 51, 56, 65,
68]. The increase in strength is logarithmic [59]. Besides,
the compaction effort also influences the ITS of the base
[39]. A typical variation of ITS with cement content (CC)
and recycled aggregate content is presented in Fig. 10.
Moreover, it is found that maximum tensile strength is
at 50:50 ratios of RCA and NA [46]. This is due to better
interlocking or package density of the combined aggregate
blend. The ITS range is 18–20% of UCS for RAP and 32%
UCS for RCA [39, 46]. Some of the specification limits of
ITS for different countries are shown in Table 5. The ITS
limitations are recommended based on compaction type,
percentage of cement used. When the researchers’ results
are compared with the specifications, the ITS is satisfied
by all the combinations, except RAP-treated bases which
require more cement content.
The strength of cement-treated bases depend on several
factors. The most influential factors are Cement–water ratio,
dry density, masonry content, and time of curing. Based on
the experimental analysis, several models were proposed for
ITS, as shown in the below equations.
Xuan et al. [40],
{ [ ( ) ]}
0.2
1.6 1− 28t
)1.3
C
(
7 0.008M
fit = 0.0293 × ×D ×e ×e
W
(3)
ACI Model [40],

13
 191   Page 12 of 22 Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191

Fig. 10  Variation of ITS with Cement and recycled aggregate content

Table 5  Summary of ITS Country/Code ITS (MPa)

specifications for road bases at
7 days of curing period Italy [29] 0.32–0.60 (gyratory compaction) > 0.25 (proctor compaction)
South Africa [29] > 0.25 for Cement 1.5–3% > 0.20 for Cement 3–5%

(
C
)1.3
t where D is dry density, C is the cement content by mass of
fit = 0.0293 × × D7 × e0.008M × (4) the aggregate, W is the water content, M is RMA content,
W 6.5 + 0.7t
and t is the curing time.
Log Scale Model [40], Fedrigo et al. [39],
)1.3
C t ITS = 0.69 + 0.34CC − 0.06RC + 0.15CT + 0.16CE (6)
( { }
fc = 0.0293 × × D7 × e0.008M × 1 + 0.87 log
W 28
(5)

13
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191 Page 13 of 22  191
where CC is cement content, RC is RAP content, CT is cur-
ing time, CE is a compaction effort.
Modulus characteristics of cement‑treated
recycled bases
Modulus is the term used to define the stiffness of the mate-
rial. There are several types of moduli, depending on the
state of the application. Resilient Modulus (MR), Elastic
Modulus (E), shear modulus, and secant modulus are fre-
quently used to characterize the pavement material. The
most common modulus used to describe the pavement base
materials is the Resilient Modulus (MR). The other modu-
lus is elastic modulus which is the stress ratio to the strain
within the elastic limit. In the case of elastic modulus, the
loading and unloading curves follow the same path. The
elastic modulus is also used to characterize the materials
under a static loading rate and pavement analysis.
Similarly, the shear modulus is the ratio of the shear
stress to the shear strain. These shear strains are caused at
the interface of the two layers in the pavement. Furthermore,
the secant modulus is similar to the elastic modulus, where
the modulus is considered in the inelastic region. Several
moduli that are used in the pavement bases are discussed in
detail in the following sections.
Resilient Modulus (MR)
As discussed above, MR is used to characterize the pavement
materials. MR is the ratio of deviator stress to the recoverable
strain when the specimen is subjected to repeated loading.
Generally, the RLT test is preferred for unbound materi-
als rather than cement stabilized materials and performed
according to AASHTO T307 protocol. The RLT test can be
used to understand the material behavior under simulated
traffic loads [55]. MR is influenced by several parameters
apart from deviatoric stress and confining stress, including
moisture content and degree of compaction [55]. Several
experimental studies carried on treated and untreated recy-
cled materials are presented in the following sections.
Resilient modulus of untreated recycled bases
Some researchers found that the moisture content did not
impact MR, and some others declared that the MR increases
with the decrease in the moisture content than that of OMC
[23, 60, 69–71]. The dry density has a positive impact on MR
[72]. On the other hand, RCA aggregates show higher MR
than NA, and RCA is sensitive to the moisture content [22,
73]. RCA alone has a higher MR than RCA blends with other
materials [22, 60, 74]. One study compared three materials,
namely RAP, RCA, and CB, and observed that RAP has
higher MR than RCA and CB [44].
Resilient modulus of treated recycled bases
Cement-treated RCA blends show higher stiffness values
when compared with NA and increase with the increase in
RCA content up to 75% RCA [56]. MR of cement-treated
RCA-RAP blends decreases with RAP addition at constant
cement content [44], and there is a decrease in the MR while
replacing FRG with RCA. However, 90%RCA/10%FRG
and RCA show higher MR compared with other mixes [55].
Mohammadinia et al. [44] observed a decrease in the MR of
recycled materials with an increase in the cement content
from 2 to 4% due to reduced ductility nature. Further, the
MR of the cement-treated materials increases with the curing
period and is logarithmic [44, 59]. The MR of cement-treated
RAP blended materials is more compared with untreated;
there is an increasing trend of MR with the cement content
and a decrease in the MR with the addition of RAP into the
blends [28]. From past studies, it is clear that the increase
or decrease in the MR with the addition of the NA depends
purely on the type of material used for blending. If the base
material is superior to recycled aggregates, then there is a
decrease in the stiffness with the further addition of the recy-
cled aggregate. On the other hand, if recycled material is
superior to the base material, there is an increase in strength
with the further addition of the recycled material. Further,
there is an increase in stiffness with the confining pressure
and deviatoric stress in untreated and cement-treated base
materials. At higher cement contents, the base materials are
not influenced by the confining pressures [18]. So, the indi-
rect tensile fatigue tests are optional for the determination of
the MR of cement-treated materials. Some of the MR studies
on recycled materials are summarized in Table 6.
Influence of Elastic Modulus and secant
modulus on cement‑treated recycled bases
Several laboratory and field studies were conducted to deter-
mine the elastic modulus of the cement-treated recycled bases.
Some studies identified directly from the specimens; others
determined from the back-calculation using falling weight
deflectometer (FWD) and other instruments. Secant modulus
is generally used to define the material’s stiffness in the inelas-
tic region of the stress–strain diagram. The studies show that
the elastic modulus of the cement-treated recycled aggregates
or road base materials increases with the curing period and
cement content. Further, the cement content is the most gov-
erning factor for developing modulus of elasticity [17, 41, 54,
75]. However, the increase in stiffness is a problem in cement-
treated bases, which leads to early cracking as the material
13
 191   Page 14 of 22 Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191

Table 6  Effect of resilient modulus on cement-treated recycled bases

References Specification Conclusions

[51] AASHTO T307-99 The stiffness of the mixes increases with cement, curing time, and RAP content
[79] AASHTO T307-14 Cement-treated C&D materials act as bound materials and less dependent on the bulk stress. Improved
stiffness is observed with stabilization and also with curing period over unstabilized layer
[81] UNI EN 12697-25:2016 Cement-treated NA shows higher stiffness than treated RAP, and no significant difference is observed in
terms of performance between RAP and NA
[39] AASHTO T307-99 and A significant decrease in stiffness is found with RAP percentage and is influenced by compaction effort.
ASTM D 7369 The calculated stiffness using indirect Tensile Fatigue test is overestimated from the flexural beam and
triaxial tests, which are consistent with back-calculated values
[54] AASHTO T307-99 RCA material met the specifications at 4% cement content. At 6% of cement content, all the RAP and
RCA combinations satisfied the specifications
[55] Austroads AG:PT/T053 The combination of 90% RCA and 10% FRG has higher MR values, and there is a decline in MR and an
increase in permanent strains with the further addition of FRG
[44] AASHTO T307-99 There is an increase in MR with the deviatoric and confining stresses and curing period. RAP has higher
stiffness values, followed by RCA and CB
[56] Plate Load Testing There is a significant increase in MR values with RCA content up to 75% and then decreases at 100% RCA​
[92] AASHTO T307-99 Cement-treated quarry fines show higher stiffness than untreated QF and RAP materials at high confining
pressures and deviatoric stresses
[18] AASHTO T307-99 Cement-treated RAP bases show higher stiffness than untreated RAP bases, and cement-treated bases at
high cement contents are not influenced by the confining pressure

achieves brittle nature when too much cement is added. So,
a significant amount of cement should be added in the case
of cement-treated recycled bases. Further, there is a decrease
in the modulus with an increase in the RAP content [33, 54].
Cement-fiber-treated RAP exhibited higher modulus compared
with cement-treated RAP bases [49]. Miller et al. [75], Wil-
son, and Guthrie [76] observed a tremendous decrease in the
modulus values after micro-cracking or along the wheel paths.
It is noted that the modulus of elasticity varies from 5000 to
6500 MPa at 28 days for the Recycled concrete aggregate
bases at 3–4% [41, 55]. Considerable variation in modulus
values depends on the various factors, including fines con-
tent, cement, coarse and fine aggregate content, etc. Recycled
aggregates have a more elastic modulus than the mixes made
of coarse recycled aggregates [55]. Different studies proposed
models to estimate the elastic modulus and secant modulus
using parameters like density, compressive strength, and RAP
content in the mix, as shown in Eqs. (8)–(11).
Lim and Zollinger [41],
E(t) = 4.38 × w1.5 × fc (t)0.75
ACI Model [41],
E(t) = 33 × w1.5 × fc (t)0.5
where w(pcf) is the density of the mixture and fc (t)(psi) is the
compressive strength at a particular time or curing period.
Faysal et al. [54],
E25 = 9.06(UCS) + 2599 (10)
where E25 is the secant modulus at 25% of the ultimate
strength, and this model holds good for cement-treated RAP
RCA blends with UCS as a known parameter.
Faysal et al. [54],
E25 (RAP) = E25 (RCA) − 139.9(RAP% ) (11)
The secant modulus of RAP can be calculated if the secant
modulus of RCA is known when RAP and RCA are included
in the stabilized base. Units are in psi.
Effect of Shear Modulus on cement‑treated
recycled bases
Shear Modulus is one of the critical properties because
shear failure eventually leads to the rutting of the pave-
ment. Stabilization and thickness of the pavement should
(8)
be adequate to prevent shear failure under traffic loads
[76]. As the shear modulus is high, the chances of sliding/
shear off the surfaces over each other are less. The shear
(9) failure may occur internally or at the interfaces of two
layers. So, studies revealed an improvement in the shear
modulus with an increase in the cement content of RAP
bases [49].

13
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191 Page 15 of 22  191
Permanent deformation characteristics
of cement‑treated recycled bases
Permanent deformation occurs when the material undergoes
a plastic state or cannot regain its original position after sev-
eral repeated vehicle passes or standard load applications. The
load application in the laboratory tests depends on the actual
traffic. This permanent deformation is restricted to the pave-
ment to ensure safety. Permanent deformation takes place in
all the pavement layers or maybe in some layers. So, to provide
the benefits of recycled aggregates as base materials, several
laboratory and field studies were carried out. The untreated
recycled bases, blended RAP with base materials, show lower
permanent deformation than RAP bases alone. Lower plastic
strains were observed for untreated RCA bases compared with
the blending of other aggregates [22, 77]. The amount of per-
manent strain increases with the RAP content and decreases
with the cement content [51].
From the earlier research results of the blending of
RCA and NA, it is observed that blending may not help to
decrease the permanent deformation [22, 74]. It depends on
the type of material blended and the interlocking proper-
ties with the base material. Cement stabilization is consid-
ered to be one of the techniques which decrease permanent
deformation. Due to the increase in stiffness of the material
with stabilization, there will be a decrease in elastic and
plastic deformation. Further, minor plastic strains or defor-
mations were observed for cement-treated recycled bases
than untreated and conventional bases [56, 78, 79]. When
cement-treated recycled aggregates mixtures are used as
sub-base, the deformation reduced by half compared with
NA bases [80]. Cement-treated bases with other stabilizers
like emulsified asphalt have low rutting compared to indi-
vidual stabilizers [72].
Similarly, Arulrajah et al. [55] conducted an RLT test on
the combination of RCA and FRG with 3% cement content
and assessed permanent and resilient strains. The combina-
tion of FRG and RCA in the ratio of 10: 90 exhibits lower
permanent strains compared with others. Furthermore,
70RCA/30FRG exhibits higher permanent deformations
compared with others. The deformation increases with the
increase in FRG content in the mix. It is because of the
presence of fewer friction surfaces on FRG, which prevents
better bonding with stabilization. Romeo et al. [81] com-
pared permanent deformation of RAP with NA. From the
results, treated RAP has an increasing rate of permanent
deformation than NA.
Durability, hydraulic conductivity,
shrinkage, and thermal expansion
characteristics
Durability represents the long-lasting nature of any mate-
rial. It can be expressed in dielectric value using the
tube suction test (TST), wet-dry cycles, and freeze–thaw
cycles. The selection of each process depends on the cli-
matic conditions of the base at which it was used. With
the increase in wet and dry cycles, there is a loss of mate-
rial and strength. The wet condition represents the rainy
season, and the dry state means summer. One wet and dry
condition is generally represented as one year. Typically,
14 cycles that represent 14 years are considered for the
evaluation. In the case of cold regions, freeze–thaw cycles
are used instead of wet-dry cycles. Dielectric values are
indicators of the durability of the materials. Materials with
a dielectric value less than 10 are considered more durable
[17]. There is a decrease in the dielectric values with the
RAP and cement content in the mix [17].
On the other hand, Miller et al. [75] revealed that the
durability of the cement-treated RAP blends achieved at
6–8% of cement content. There are negligible volumetric
changes, and maximum retained strengths were observed
after 14 wet and dry cycles for the treated RAP bases [52].
Other industrial waste like electric arc furnace slag mixes
when treated with cement showed durability concerns
when used alone because of the internal oxidations and
loss of aggregates during wet and dry cycles. However,
when it is blended with NA performed well [29]. Bestgen
et al. [74] observed that there are concerns with the dura-
bility of untreated RCA bases, and some others proved that
RCA materials are durable in terms of the effluent pH and
the metal concentrations.
Fedrigo et al. [39] proved that the mixes without the
RAP content and higher cement contents (5%) are more
durable and recommended 30% RAP mix as an opti-
mum durable mix at all cement contents. These results
are affirmed using 12 wet and dry cycles. Similarly, other
recycled materials like steel slag achieved a minor loss at
50% replacement [42]. The cement stabilized Quarry by-
products bases are durable and well below the specified
limitations from the observed field and laboratory results
than that of the fly ash-treated bases [82].
Hydraulic conductivity represents the water movement
through the material. This property is essential to deal
with the bases. Because hydraulic conductivity leads to
erosion of fine material and weakens the base, the ingress
13
 191   Page 16 of 22
of water can be prevented by stabilizing with cement.
Several studies proved that the stabilized bases have low
hydraulic conductivity compared with untreated bases.
Hoyos et al. [83] observed a decrease in the hydraulic con-
ductivity with the increase in the cement dosage. Further,
no significant changes were observed in the hydraulic con-
ductivity with the inclusion of the fibers [83]. In untreated
RAP blends, the hydraulic conductivity decreases with the
decrease in the RAP quantity in the mix [84].
Shrinkage is the term that indicates the dimensional
changes in the cement-treated bases with time as a result
of hydration reaction. The initial cracks, mainly shrinkage
cracks, are formed after 3 days of construction of the base
and lost in 30 days [85]. This primarily occurs due to envi-
ronmental conditions like temperature and relative humidity
and is also influenced by the type of aggregates, cement con-
tent, degree of compaction, moisture content, and so on [86].
There are mainly two types of shrinkage cracks where cracks
occur during the drying process and temperature. There is
an increase in the dry shrinkage and temperature shrinkage
with an increase in cement content and curing period [39,
51, 87]. Xuan et al. [86] studied the shrinkage effects on the
cement-treated mix granulate composed of RCA and RMA
in different proportions. It is concluded that the cement con-
tent has a significant impact on the shrinkage and an increase
in RMA content in the mixture decreases the shrinkage. The
shrinkage values are lower at the high degree of compac-
tion and lower cement contents. Furthermore, fine recycled
aggregates exhibit lower shrinkage values than the speci-
mens made of coarse recycled aggregates [86, 87]. Similarly,
dry shrinkage reduced with increased RCA content and early
strength anti-cracking material utilization reduce the tem-
perature shrinkage strains [47].
The coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) is a constant
given to a particular material which indicates the rate of
expansion or contraction with the temperature. The higher
the coefficient indicates more expansion with the same tem-
perature relative to the low coefficient of thermal expansion
materials. A study conducted by Xuan et al. [86] on the
cement-treated recycled bases demonstrates an increase in
the CTE with the increase in cement content and degree of
compaction. This is due to the increase in the hydration reac-
tions and the decrease in the air voids with a higher degree of
compaction in the mixture. Further, CTE decreases slightly
with the increase in the moisture content and RMA content.
Disadvantages of recycled aggregates
Despite several advantages of the recycled materials over
conventional aggregates, there are few disadvantages. The
recycled materials usually do not satisfy the physical prop-
erties and will have lower MDD values. The incorporation
13
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191
of RAP into the cement-treated bases leads to decrease in
UCS, ITS, flexural strength, MR, permanent deformation
[17, 28, 33, 39, 44, 46, 51, 52, 57, 65]. This requires high
amounts of cement content for the treatment of RAP which
is not economical. Further, the recycled materials like CB,
RMA, RCA, and FRG influence the performance of the
bases and have improved mechanical properties in some
combinations. Lower and higher fines content is another
factor in the recycled materials that impacts the cement-
treated bases’ strength. Besides, aggregate gradation may not
meet the specifications all the time. This requires a proper
blended material to satisfy the suitable gradation and fines
requirement. While using the recycled aggregate material
combinations, optimization of recycled aggregate content is
necessary to achieve good mechanical properties. The same
is observed from the studies where 50% RCA–50% RAP and
10%FRG–90%RCA combination achieved better mechanical
properties [46, 55]. This might not be a problem for conven-
tional aggregates.
Field evaluation and fatigue characteristics
of cement‑treated recycled bases
Field evaluation of cement-treated recycled bases is essen-
tial than that of the laboratory investigation as field condi-
tions are the actual conditions in which the bases undergo
testing under realistic environmental, climatic, and vehicle
loads. Several studies evaluated the cement-treated bases
comprising natural aggregates and recycled aggregates using
International Roughness Index (IRI) and deflections over
the surface of sub-base and subgrade. It is observed that
the mean surface deflections of the cement-treated recycled
mixes with 3% of cement are lower than that of the NA, and
lower IRI values were observed compared with NA [80].
Beja et al. [79] performed field evaluation of stabilized and
unstabilized C&D wastes as a sub-base using FWD. The
results demonstrated a drastic reduction in the deflection
values and improved MR.
Fatigue tests are used to quantify the damage caused
inside the specimen due to the repeated loading, which sim-
ulates the vehicle loads. There are several types of fatigue
tests. Some of them are flexural beam fatigue, indirect ten-
sile fatigue, semi-circular bending fatigue, compression
fatigue, etc. Although there are relations between stiffness
and fatigue life of the materials, there are several factors
apart from the stiffness that will damage the specimens’
under vehicle loading. So, fatigue tests can be more rele-
vant to access the material resistance to wear under various
stress levels (10%–80%), frequencies (0.5–10 Hz), and tem-
peratures (− 5 °C to 60 °C). The failure of the base mate-
rial under fatigue can be accessed in different criteria. The
criteria include the number of cycles where the reduction in
 Table 7  Fatigue studies on different cement-treated materials
References Type of mix Curing Cement Resilient Modulus (MPa) Test, failure criteria Specifications Conclusions
period content
(days) (%)

[93] 60%RAP/40%VA 28 6.0 1162–4093 A four-point beam Fatigue test is used, Type of hydraulic binder or cement did
80%RAP/20%VA and failure criteria is cycles to reach not influence the fatigue characteristics.
half of the initial modulus Cement-treated RAP blends behave as
quasi-brittle and visco-elastic properties
[94] RCA​ 7.0 4.0 3027 (v) Pavement Model Tank (PMT) is used @ Stabilized RCA shows anisotropic
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions

2110 (h) 6 Hz frequency and a fixed number of behavior in MR, and vertical deforma-
cycles are considered tions are maximum at the top of the base
compared with the stabilized base and
subgrade interface
[95] NA 7.0 4.5 15,000 Four-point bending Fatigue test RIOH.2009 Curing periods significantly affect the
14 17,000 fatigue life of the cement-treated bases
(2021) 6:191

and are recommended to restrict the

28 16,400
traffic and construction equipment for
90 20,907 short-term curing
[38] 20%RAP, 50%RAP, 28 2.0 862–1714 777–3620 A four-point beam Fatigue test is used, Austroads 2008 Low fatigue life is observed for the
70%RAP with laterite 4.0 and the test is terminated after the mixtures with low cement contents. The
soils failure of the sample or after one mil- fatigue life increases with the increase
lion cycles in thickness of the wearing course and
base layer
[59] RCA​ 7 4/5 800/1100 Mechanical Testing is performed at a The fatigue life increases with the increase
28 1100/1400 10 Hz frequency. The test is termi- in the RCA dosage in the mix, and the
nated after ­106 cycles or failure of the stiffness increases with the curing period
60 1200/1550
specimen and cement content
90 1300/1560
[55] RCA​ 28 3.0 9601.05 Four-point beam Fatigue test is used. Austroads 2008 The fatigue life and modulus of the mix
90%RCA​ 3.0 22,600.22 Cycles to half the initial modulus is combination with 90% of RCA and 10%
80%RCA​ considered as failure criteria FRG is more
3.0 13,375.62
70%RCA​
3.0 14,577.31
[96] 30%RAP 90 3.0 Four-point beam Fatigue test There is a decrease in the fatigue life
50%RAP with the increase in the percentage of
70%RAP RAP. The type of asphalt binder slightly
impacts the fatigue life of the base
[66] 20%RAP 28 2.0 1963–2528 3867–6740 Four-point beam Fatigue test Austroads 2008 The fatigue failure of the cement-treated
50%RAP 4.0 materials is the same as that of the
70%RAP cement-treated conventional aggregates.
Fatigue life depends on the mixture
composition and thickness of the asphalt
wearing course
Page 17 of 22 
191

13
 191   Page 18 of 22 Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191

the initial modulus to half or complete collapse of the speci-

along with cement content. The recycled

Incorporation of early strength anti-crack-
men, or reaching 5% of the strain of the largest dimension

ing material improved the fatigue life

aggregate combinations show lower

of the specimen, or by calculating the slope of the fatigue
curve after crack initiation stage. Understanding the fail-
ure behavior of the recycled materials is necessary as they
have already been utilized in some of the structures before,
which leads to some deterioration. Several authors con-
fatigue life than NA ducted fatigue studies on recycled materials in various com-
binations. When cement-treated RCA/FRG combination is
Conclusions

subjected to fatigue test, the mixes with 90%RCA/10%FRG

exhibit better performance than the other blends [55]. Some
of the fatigue tests and their specific conclusions are sum-
marized and presented in Table 7.
Specifications

Summary and Conclusions

The detailed literature review shows several studies on

cement-treated and untreated recycled aggregate bases
and sub-base courses. The majority of the studies recom-
Four-point beam Fatigue test

mended that recycled aggregates be a viable alternative for

base material that is environmentally sustainable. Further
suggested stabilizing and blending the recycled aggregates
Resilient Modulus (MPa) Test, failure criteria

with base materials will obtain a sound base/sub-base for the

pavements. The following are the specific conclusions that
are drawn from the review.

• The UCS value of the recycled aggregate mixes depends

on the type of material, percentage of recycled aggregate,
curing period, compaction effort, and cement used in the
combination. Some recycled materials addition shows a
decline in the mechanical properties; others did not show
any trend in their addition, and others show improvement
in the properties up to some percentages of addition.
• Cement by-products like fly ash and cement kiln dust
can be replaced with cement by optimizing carefully to
Cement

achieve better mechanical properties.

content

• Higher cement contents are required to achieve the

(%)

3.5
4.5

acceptable UCS values for 100% RAP materials. The

addition of NA or base materials provides proper inter-
Curing
period
(days)

locking for recycled mixes. The inclusion of fibers has no

significant difference in the strength and other properties,
7

and further research is recommended in this area.

• Less quantity of recycled plastic (< 5%) and glass
(< 10%) materials preferred in the stabilized road bases.
Pre-treatment is required for industrial waste materials to
References Type of mix

75%RCA​
50%RCA​
25%RCA​

avoid leachate problems.

Table 7  (continued)

RCA​

• Higher water absorption is observed in RCA or RMA

NA

mixes, and RCA bases serve better when the moisture

content is less than OMC. The rate of gain in strength for
stabilized RCA is more than that of RAP and NA due to
[47]

self-cementing properties.

13
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191 Page 19 of 22  191
• The flexural strength of cement-treated bases increases
with the curing period and decreases with the inclusion
of recycled aggregate content. RCA alone shows higher
flexural strengths than that of mixing with other recycled
aggregates. The flexural strength ranges between 10 and
20% of the UCS.
• RCA bases have higher MR than other aggregates, and
the base exhibits anisotropic behavior. Further, at higher
cement dosages, an increase in the stiffness value is
observed. Some recycled materials addition improves
MR, and the other studies showed a decline. The secant
modulus, shear modulus, and dynamic modulus value
increase with cement dosage. The combination of cement
with asphalt emulsion is more resistant to rutting than
cement stabilization and other stabilizers and combina-
tions.
• The permanent deformation decreased with cement and
is influenced by the recycled aggregate type and content.
Cement stabilized bases show higher modulus indicating
high stiffness represents susceptibility to cracking.
• The fatigue life of cement-treated recycled bases influ-
enced by the recycled aggregate content, type of the recy-
cled aggregate, cement content, curing period, applied
stress levels, sometimes temperatures (if RAP is used).
Recommendations and Way forward
Considering the sustainability aspects of pavement engi-
neering, recycling is one of the most influencing techniques
which save material, energy, and the environment. A combi-
nation of recycling and stabilization makes the most promis-
ing results regarding the pavement’s long-term performance.
The following are some of the recommendations that are
drawn after critical observations from the earlier studies:
• Primary studies are limited to the strength and stiffness
characterization of the cement-treated bases. Further per-
formance assessment of CTBs using accelerated pave-
ment testing and fatigue analysis is required to under-
stand the real-time conditions of the bases at different
climatic conditions on a wide range of recycled aggre-
gates. Furthermore, research on the crack propagation
of the cement-treated recycled bases is needed to under-
stand the failure mechanism.
• Limited studies are observed in the recycled aggregates
with fiber combination. So, the inclusion of fibers in the
recycled bases and their effects on the energy absorption
capacity is to be studied. Optimizing the recycled mate-
rial, cement content, and base material to avoid strength,
durability, and shrinkage effects. Higher compaction lev-
els are necessary for the recycled materials to counteract
the durability issues.
• Analyzing the recycled aggregate’s base failure patterns
is necessary to understand interfacial aggregate or bond-
ing failure. The replacement and stabilization levels are
not always the same for each material. The material type
and source strongly influence the stabilization. So, con-
tinuous design and evaluation of the recycled materials
are preferred to optimize the differences.
• Exploring more recycled materials like wastes from
industries, glass manufacturing, plastics, electronics,
other solid wastes as pavement bases and sub-bases is
necessary for sustainable construction.
• Cement-treated recycled materials containing plastics
and asphalt substances should be studied for temperature
susceptibility. Some studies stated the binder influence of
the RAP on the strength, stiffness, and fatigue and others
vice versa. So, further research in this area on cement-
treated RAP materials is necessary.
Acknowledgements  We wish to place on record our heartfelt gratitude
and indebtedness to the Department of Science and Technology (DST),
Government of India, for sponsoring this prestigious research project
entitled “Performance Evaluation of Emulsified Bitumen Treated Bases
and Cement Treated Bases” carried out at the National Institute of
Technology Warangal, Telangana, India.
Declarations 
Conflict of interest  The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.
References
1. Chesner WH, Collins RJ, Mackay MH (1998) User guidelines for
waste and byproduct materials in pavement construction (Publica-
tion No. FHWA-RD-97-148). Federal Highway Administration,
US Department of Transportation, Washington, DC
2. Amaral LF, Girondi Delaqua GC, Nicolite M et al (2020) Eco-
friendly mortars with addition of ornamental stone waste—a
mathematical model approach for granulometric optimization. J
Clean Prod 248:119283. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2019.​
119283
3. Liveira PS, Antunes MLP, da Cruz NC et  al (2020) Use of
waste collected from wind turbine blade production as an eco-
friendly ingredient in mortars for civil construction. J Clean Prod
274:122948. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2020.​122948
4. de Azevedo ARG, Alexandre J, Xavier GDC, Pedroti LG (2018)
Recycling paper industry effluent sludge for use in mortars: a sus-
tainability perspective. J Clean Prod 192:335–346. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/​
10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2018.​05.​011
5. de Azevedo ARG, Marvila MT, Tayeh BA et al (2021) Techno-
logical performance of açaí natural fibre reinforced cement-based
mortars. J Build Eng 33:101675. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jobe.​
2020.​101675
6. de Azevedo ARG, Alexandre J, Marvila MT et al (2020) Tech-
nological and environmental comparative of the processing of
13
 191   Page 20 of 22
primary sludge waste from paper industry for mortar. J Clean Prod
249:119336. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2019.​119336
7. Cabrera M, Pérez P, Rosales J, Agrela F (2020) Feasible use of
cathode ray tube glass (CRT) and recycled aggregates as unbound
and cement-treated granular materials for road sub-bases. Materi-
als (Basel). https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​ma130​30748
8. Xuan D, Molenaar A, Houben L, Shui Z (2011) Estimation of
mechanical characteristics of cement treated demolition waste.
Transportation and Development Institute Congress, Chicago,
United States, pp 884–893
9. www.​mater​ialfl​ows.​net. Accessed 25 Oct 2020
10. The Freedonia Group (2012) World construction aggregates
11. Tam VWY (2008) On the effectiveness in implementing a waste-
management-plan method in construction. Waste Manag 28:1072–
1080. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​wasman.​2007.​04.​007
12. Central Pollution Control Board (2017) Guidelines on environ-
mental management of construction & demolition (C&D) wastes,
forests & climate change, Government of India, Ministry of
Environment
13. Jain S, Singhal S, Jain NK (2018) Construction and demolition
waste (C&DW) in India: generation rate and implications of
C&DW recycling. Int J Constr Manag 21:261–270. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1080/​15623​599.​2018.​15233​00
14. Murray Reid J, Hassan KE, Sirin O, Taha RA (2016) Demonstrat-
ing the worth of recycled aggregates—a case study from Qatar.
Geo-Chicago 2016:534–545
15. Chen J, Tinjum J, Edil T (2013) Leaching of alkaline substances
and heavy metals from recycled concrete aggregate used as
unbound base course. Transp Res Rec. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3141/​
2349-​10
16. Blankenagel BJ, Guthrie WS (2006) Laboratory characterization
of recycled concrete for use as pavement base material. Transp
Res Rec. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3141/​1952-​03
17. Guthrie W, Cooley D, Eggett D (2007) Effects of reclaimed
asphalt pavement on mechanical properties of base materials.
Transp Res Rec 2005:44–52. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3141/​2005-​06
18. Puppala AJ, Hoyos LR, Potturi AK (2011) Resilient moduli
response of moderately cement-treated reclaimed asphalt pave-
ment aggregates. J Mater Civ Eng 23:990–998. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1061/​(ASCE)​MT.​1943-​5533.​00002​68
19. Thakur SC, Han J, Chong WK, Parsons RL (2010) Laboratory
evaluation of physical and mechanical properties of recycled
asphalt pavement. In: Paving materials and pavement analysis,
pp 255–263
20. Dong Q, Huang B (2014) Laboratory evaluation on resilient
modulus and rate dependencies of RAP used as unbound base
material. J Mater Civ Eng 26:379–383. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1061/​
(ASCE)​mt.​1943-​5533.​00008​20
21. Arulrajah A, Piratheepan J, Disfani MM (2014) Reclaimed
asphalt pavement, and recycled concrete aggregate blends in
pavement subbases: laboratory and field evaluation. J Mater Civ
Eng 26:349–357. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1061/​(ASCE)​mt.​1943-​5533.​
00008​50
22. Haider I, Cetin B, Kaya Z et al (2014) Evaluation of the mechani-
cal performance of recycled concrete aggregates used in highway
base layers. 3686–3694. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1061/​97807​84413​272.​
357
23. Arulrajah A, Disfani MM, Horpibulsuk S et al (2014) Physical
properties and shear strength responses of recycled construction
and demolition materials in unbound pavement base/subbase
applications. Constr Build Mater 58:245–257. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1016/j.​conbu​ildmat.​2014.​02.​025
24. Disfani MM, Arulrajah A, Younus Ali MM, Bo MW (2011) Fine
recycled glass: a sustainable alternative to natural aggregates. Int
13
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191
J Geotech Eng 5:255–266. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3328/​IJGE.​2011.0​ 5.​
03.​255-​266
25. Arulrajah A, Piratheepan J, Disfani MM, Bo MW (2013) Geo-
technical and geoenvironmental properties of recycled construc-
tion and demolition materials in pavement subbase applications.
J Mater Civ Eng 25:1077–1088. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1061/​(ASCE)​
mt.​1943-​5533.​00006​52
26. Jofre C, Kraemer C (2008) Manual of soil stabilization with
cement or lime (Spanish). Spanish Institute of Cement and its
Applications (SICA), Madrid
27. Eren Ş, Filiz M (2009) Comparing the conventional soil stabi-
lization methods to the consolid system used as an alternative
admixture matter in Isparta Darıdere material. Constr Build Mater
23:2473–2480. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 016/j.c​ onbui​ ldmat.2​ 009.0​ 1.0​ 02
28. Taha R, Al-Harthy A, Al-Shamsi K, Al-Zubeidi M (2002) Cement
stabilization of reclaimed asphalt pavement aggregate for road
bases and subbases. J Mater Civ Eng 14:239–245. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1061/​(ASCE)​0899-​1561(2002)​14:​3(239)
29. Autelitano F, Giuliani F (2016) Electric arc furnace slags in
cement-treated materials for road construction: mechanical and
durability properties. Constr Build Mater 113:280–289. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​conbu​ildmat.​2016.​03.​054
30. You L, Yue Y, Yan K, Zhou Y (2020) Characteristics of cement-
stabilized macadam containing surface-treated recycled aggre-
gates. Road Mater Pavement Des 1–15
31. Yaowarat T, Horpibulsuk S, Arulrajah A et al (2020) Cement sta-
bilization of recycled concrete aggregate modified with polyvinyl
alcohol. Int J Pavement Eng. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​10298​436.​
2020.​17463​11
32. Arulrajah A, Perera S, Wong YC et al (2020) Stiffness and flexural
strength evaluation of cement stabilized PET blends with demoli-
tion wastes. Constr Build Mater 239:117819. https://d​ oi.​org/​10.​
1016/j.​conbu​ildmat.​2019.​117819
33. Yuan D, Nazarian S, Hoyos LR, Puppala AJ (2011) Evaluation
and mix design of cement-treated base materials with high con-
tent of reclaimed asphalt pavement. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res
Board 2212:110–119. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3141/​2212-​12
34. Guthrie WS, Brown AV, Eggett DL (2007) Cement stabilization of
aggregate base material blended with reclaimed asphalt pavement.
Transp Res Rec 2026:47–53. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3141/​2026-​06
35. Ji X, Jiang Y, Liu Y (2016) Evaluation of the mechanical behav-
iors of cement-stabilized cold recycled mixtures produced by ver-
tical vibration compaction method. Mater Struct Constr 49:2257–
2270. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1617/​s11527-​015-​0647-x
36. Ma T, Wang H, Zhao Y, Huang X (2015) Laboratory investigation
on the residual strength of reclaimed asphalt mixture for cold mix
recycling. Int J Pavement Res Technol 8:17–22. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.​
6135/​ijprt.​org.​tw/​2015.​8(1).​17
37. Kasu SR, Manupati K, Muppireddy AR (2020) Investiga-
tions on design and durability characteristics of cement-treated
reclaimed asphalt for base and subbase layers. Constr Build Mater
252:119102. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​conbu​ildmat.​2020.​119102
38. Fedrigo W, Núñez WP, Fernandes DP et al (2019) Effects of RAP
residual asphalt binder type, content, and aging on the mechanical
behavior of cold recycled cement-treated mixtures. Road Mater
Pavement Des. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​14680​629.​2019.​16891​56
39. Fedrigo W, Núñez WP, Castañeda López MA et al (2018) A study
on the resilient modulus of cement-treated mixtures of RAP and
aggregates using indirect tensile, triaxial and flexural tests. Constr
Build Mater 171:161–169. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​conbu​ildmat.​
2018.​03.​119
40. Xuan D, Molenaar AAA, Houben LJM (2012) Compressive and
indirect tensile strengths of cement-treated mix granulates with
recycled masonry and concrete aggregates. J Mater Civ Eng
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191 Page 21 of 22  191
24:577–585. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 061/(​ ASCE)m
​ t.1​ 943-5​ 533.0​ 0004​
01
41. Lim S, Zollinger DG (2003) Estimation of the compressive
strength and modulus of elasticity of cement-treated aggregate
base materials. Transp Res Rec. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3141/​1837-​04
42. Liu J, Yu B, Wang Q (2020) Application of steel slag in cement-
treated aggregate base course. J Clean Prod 269:121733. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2020.​121733
43. Taha R (2003) Evaluation of cement kiln dust-stabilized reclaimed
asphalt pavement aggregate systems in road bases. Transp Res Rec
1819(1):11–17
44. Mohammadinia A, Arulrajah A, Sanjayan J et al (2015) Labo-
ratory evaluation of the use of cement-treated construction and
demolition materials in pavement base and subbase applications.
J Mater Civ Eng 27:04014186. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1061/​(ASCE)​
mt.​1943-​5533.​00011​48
45. Leite FDC (2007) Mechanical behavior of aggregate recycling of
solid waste from construction in layers of base and sub-base of
floors. https://​doi.​org/​10.​11606/D.​3.​2007.​tde-​09012​008-​162141
46. Chakravarthi S, Boyina A, Singh AK, Shankar S (2019) Evalu-
ation of cement-treated asphalt pavement and recycled concrete
pavement bases. Int J Pavement Res Technol 12:581–588. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s42947-​019-​0069-1
47. Guo Y, Yao C, Shen A et al (2020) Feasibility of rapid-regener-
ation utilization in situ for waste cement-stabilized macadam. J
Clean Prod 263:121452. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2020.​
121452
48. Marvila MT, Azevedo ARG, Monteiro SN (2020) Verification
of the application potential of the mathematical models of lyse,
abrams, and molinari in mortars based on cement and lime. J
Mater Res Technol 9:7327–7334. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jmrt.​
2020.​04.​077
49. Hoyos LR, Puppala AJ, Ordonez CA (2011) Characterization of
cement-fiber-treated reclaimed asphalt pavement aggregates: pre-
liminary investigation. J Mater Civ Eng 23:977–989. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1061/​(ASCE)​MT.​1943-​5533.​00002​67
50. Zhang Y, Liu X, Xu Y et al (2019) Preparation and characteriza-
tion of cement-treated road base material utilizing electrolytic
manganese residue. J Clean Prod 232:980–992. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2019.​05.​352
51. Arshad M (2020) Laboratory investigations on the mechani-
cal properties of cement-treated RAP-natural aggregate blends
used in base/subbase layers of pavements. Constr Build Mater
254:119234. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​conbu​ildmat.​2020.​119234
52. Puppala AJ, Pedarla A, Chittoori B et al (2017) Long-term dura-
bility studies on chemically treated reclaimed asphalt material as
base layer for pavements. 2500. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3141/​2657-​01
53. Suebsuk J, Horpibulsuk S, Suksan A et al (2019) Strength predic-
tion of cement-stabilized reclaimed asphalt pavement and lateritic
soil blends. Int J Pavement Eng 20:332–338. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1080/​10298​436.​2017.​12932​65
54. Faysal M, Mahedi M, Aramoon A, Thian B, Hossain MS, Khan
MA, Khan MS (2016) Determination of the structural coefficient
of different combinations of cement-treated/untreated recycled
base materials. Geotech Struct Eng Congr 2016:1198–1208
55. Arulrajah A, Disfani MM, Haghighi H et al (2015) Modulus of
rupture evaluation of cement stabilized recycled glass/recycled
concrete aggregate blends. Constr Build Mater 84:146–155.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​conbu​ildmat.​2015.​03.​048
56. Behiry AEAEM (2013) Utilization of cement treated recycled
concrete aggregates as base or subbase layer in Egypt. Ain Shams
Eng J 4:661–673. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​asej.​2013.​02.​005
57. Arisha AM, Gabr AR, El-Badawy SM, Shwally SA (2018)
Performance evaluation of construction and demolition waste
materials for pavement construction in Egypt. J Mater Civ Eng
30:04017270. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1061/​(ASCE)​mt.​1943-​5533.​
00021​27
58. Yehia S, Helal K, Abusharkh A et al (2015) Strength and durabil-
ity evaluation of recycled aggregate concrete. Int J Concr Struct
Mater 9:219–239. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s40069-​015-​0100-0
59. Hou Y, Ji X, Su X (2019) Mechanical properties and strength
criteria of cement-stabilized recycled concrete aggregate. Int J
Pavement Eng 20:339–348. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​10298​436.​
2017.​12932​66
60. Gabr AR, Cameron DA (2012) Properties of recycled concrete
aggregate for unbound pavement construction. J Mater Civ Eng
24:754–764. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 061/(​ ASCE)m
​ t.1​ 943-5​ 533.0​ 0004​
47
61. Poon CS, Qiao XC, Chan D (2006) The cause and influence of
self-cementing properties of fine recycled concrete aggregates on
the properties of unbound sub-base. Waste Manag 26:1166–1172.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​wasman.​2005.​12.​013
62. Del Rey I, Ayuso J, Barbudo A et al (2016) Feasibility study of
cement-treated 0–8 mm recycled aggregates from construction
and demolition waste as road base layer. Road Mater Pavement
Des 17:678–692. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​14680​629.​2015.​11082​
21
63. Adaska WS, Luhr DR, Conference R (2004) Control of reflective
cracking in cement stabilized pavements. In: 5th International
RILEM conference, Limoges, France, May. Prevention, vol 2, pp
1–8
64. Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (2013) Specifications
for road and bridgeworks, fifth revision, Ministry of Road Trans-
port and Highways, New Delhi, India
65. El S, Khay E, Ph D et  al (2015) Laboratory investigation of
cement-treated reclaimed asphalt pavement material. J Mater
Civ Eng 27:1–7. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1061/​(ASCE)​MT.​1943-​5533.​
00011​58
66. Castañeda López MA, Fedrigo W, Kleinert TR et al (2018) Flex-
ural fatigue evaluation of cement-treated mixtures of reclaimed
asphalt pavement and crushed aggregates. Constr Build Mater
158:320–325. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​conbu​ildmat.​2017.​10.​003
67. Fedrigo W, Núñez WP, Schreinert GG et  al (2019) Flexural
strength, stiffness, and fatigue of cement-treated mixtures of
reclaimed asphalt pavement and lateritic soil. Road Mater Pave-
ment Des 22(5):1004–1022
68. Jitsangiam P, Nusit K, Likitlersuang S, Kodikara J (2021) Using
damage evaluation to assess the fatigue behavior of cement-treated
base material from laboratory and full-scale performance tests.
Transp Geotech 26:100440. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​trgeo.​2020.​
100440
69. Alam TB, Abdelrahman M, Schram SA (2010) Laboratory char-
acterization of recycled asphalt pavement as a base layer. Int J
Pavement Eng 11:123–131. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​10298​43090​
27313​62
70. Attia M, Abdelrahman M (2010) Modeling the effect of moisture
on resilient modulus of untreated reclaimed asphalt pavement.
Transp Res Rec 2:30–40. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3141/​2167-​04
71. Kim W, Labuz JF, Dai S (2007) Resilient modulus of base course
containing recycled asphalt pavement. Transp Res Rec. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​3141/​2005-​04
72. Mallick R, Teto M, Kandhal P et al (2002) Laboratory study of
full-depth reclamation mixes. Transp Res Rec 1813:103–110.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​3141/​1813-​13
73. Arulrajah A, Piratheepan J, Ali MMY, Bo MW (2012) Geotech-
nical properties of recycled concrete aggregate in pavement sub-
base applications. Geotech Test J 35:1–9. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1520/​
GTJ10​3402
74. Bestgen JO, Hatipoglu M, Cetin B, Aydilek AH (2016) Mechani-
cal and environmental suitability of recycled concrete aggregate
13
 191   Page 22 of 22
as a highway base material. J Mater Civ Eng 28:04016067. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1061/​(ASCE)​mt.​1943-​5533.​00015​64
75. Miller HJ, Guthrie WS, Kestler M, Carbo C (2006) Cement treat-
ment of frost-susceptible New England base materials blended
with reclaimed asphalt pavement. In: Current practices in cold
regions engineering, pp 1–11
76. Wilson BT, Guthrie WS (2011) Strength and deformation charac-
teristics of cement-treated reclaimed pavement with a chip seal.
Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 2212:100–109. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​3141/​2212-​11
77. Bennert T, Papp J, Maher A, Gucunski N (2000) Utilization of
construction and demolition debris under traffic-type loading in
base and subbase applications. Transp Res Rec 2:33–39. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​3141/​1714-​05
78. Soares R, Haichert R, Podborochynski D, Berthelot C (2013)
Modeling in situ performance of cement-stabilized granular base
layers of urban roads. Transp Res Rec. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3141/​
2363-​10
79. Beja IA, Motta R, Bernucci LB (2020) Application of recycled
aggregates from construction and demolition waste with Portland
cement and hydrated lime as pavement subbase in Brazil. Constr
Build Mater 258:119520. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​conbu​ildmat.​
2020.​119520
80. Agrela F, Barbudo A, Ramírez A, Ayuso J, Carvajal MD, Jiménez
JR (2012) Construction of road sections using mixed recycled
aggregates treated with cement in Malaga, Spain. Resour Conserv
Recycl 58:98–106
81. Romeo E, Orazi M, Orazi US et al (2019) Evaluation of “long-
term behavior under traffic” of cement-treated mixture with RAP.
Constr Build Mater 208:421–426. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 016/j.c​ onbu​
ildmat.​2019.​03.​045
82. Qamhia IIA, Tutumluer E, Ozer H et al (2020) Durability aspects
of chemically stabilized quarry by-product applications in pave-
ment base and subbase. Transp Res Rec 2674:339–350. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1177/​03611​98120​919113
83. Hoyos LR, Ordoñez CA, Puppala AJ, Hossain MS (2008) Engi-
neering characterization of cement-fiber treated RAP aggregates.
In: GeoCongress 2008: characterization, monitoring, and mod-
eling of GeoSystems, pp 613–621
84. MacGregor JAC, Highter WH, DeGroot DJ (1999) Structural
numbers for reclaimed asphalt pavement base and subbase course
mixes. Transp Res Rec. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3141/​1687-​03
13
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions (2021) 6:191
85. Gao J, Jin P, Sheng Y, An P (2020) A case study on crack propaga-
tion law of cement stabilized macadam base. Int J Pavement Eng
21:516–523. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​10298​436.​2018.​14921​35
86. Xuan DX, Molenaar AAA, Houben LJM (2016) Deforma-
tion behavior of cement treated demolition waste with recy-
cled masonry and concrete subjected to drying and temperature
change. Cem Concr Compos 68:27–34. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​
cemco​ncomp.​2016.​02.​005
87. Wang J, Wen H, Muhunthan B (2020) Development of test meth-
ods to characterize the shrinkage properties of cementitious sta-
bilized materials. Transp Geotech 25:100405. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1016/j.​trgeo.​2020.​100405
88. TIFAC (2001) Utilization of waste from construction industry,
technology, information, forecasting, and assessment council,
New Delhi India
89. CCANZ, Cement Stabilisation (2008) Cement & Concrete Asso-
ciation of New Zealand, IB89
90. https://​www.​cement.​org/​docs/​defau​lt-​source/​th-​paving-​pdfs/​ctb-​
cement-​treat​edpup​pala-​base/​cement-​treat​ed-​base-​pca-​logo.​pdf?​
sfvrsn=2. Accessed 17 Oct 2019
91. Spanish General Technical Specifications for Road Construction
(PG3) (2004) Ministry of Development, Government of Spain
92. Puppala AJ, Saride S, Williammee R (2012) Sustainable reuse of
limestone quarry fines and RAP in pavement base/subbase layers.
J Mater Civ Eng 24:418–429. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 061/(​ ASCE)M
​ T.​
1943-​5533.​00004​04
93. Melese E, Baaj H, Tighe S (2020) Fatigue behavior of reclaimed
pavement materials treated with cementitious binders. Constr
Build Mater 249:118565. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​conbu​ildmat.​
2020.​118565
94. Mohammadinia A, Arulrajah A, Disfani MM, Darmawan S (2019)
Small-strain behavior of cement-stabilized recycled concrete
aggregate in pavement base layers. J Mater Civ Eng 31:04019044.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1061/​(ASCE)​mt.​1943-​5533.​00026​71
95. Lv S, Xia C, Liu H et al (2019) Strength and fatigue performance
for cement-treated aggregate base materials. Int J Pavement Eng.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​10298​436.​2019.​16348​08
96. de Paiva CEL, de Oliveira PCA, de Franco PC (2017) The influ-
ence of milling asphalt rates from wearing surface to the flexural
strength applied to a recycled layer with Portland cement. Constr
Build Mater 154:1294–1300. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​conbu​ild-
mat.​2017.​07.​014