Cleaner Materials 6 (2022) 100151

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Cleaner Materials
journal homepage: www.journals.elsevier.com/cleaner-materials

A review on the effect of fly ash on the geotechnical properties and stability
of soil
Mohammed Faisal Noaman *, M.A. Khan , Kausar Ali , Amer Hassan
Department of Civil Engineering, Z. H. College of Engineering and Technology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh 202002, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Fly ash acquired from power stations causes removal challenges and environmental concerns. Disposal concerns
Fly ash can be solved by employing these waste materials as a raw source to improve soil stability. Stability of soil refers
Permeability to the improvement of soil behaviour due to the enhancement of the soil’s geotechnical properties. Water
Soil stability
content, strength, plasticity, and density are the most often adjusted properties. Extensive studies have focused
Additives
Mechanical properties
on the influence of fly ash on soil stability. Therefore, this investigation discussed some of these studies, drawing
a critical review to find out the effect of fly ash additive on soil characteristics. Also, this study focused on the
impact of fly ash (FA) mixed with clay soil. Generally, it can be said that fly ash improved the soil stability,
especially in terms of CBR values, the permeability of the soil and decreased the potential of volumetric soil
changes through a series of experimental tests. This is due to the size and shape of particles; in addition to the
treated period, volumetric dilation of the ground is reduced. Considering that the additives are not biodegrad­
able, the behavioural adjustment of the hardened soil does not disappear.

Introduction
Decrease in building construction sites is a major problem world­
wide, especially in the densely populated countries of eastern and
southeastern Asia (Brockerhoff and Nations, 1998; Faisal Noaman et al.,
2022; Ravallion et al., 2007). Because of the increase in the population,
the demand for electrical energy has increased. Subsequently, the coal-
burning electric power thermal station produces millions of tons of
waste materials, such as fly ash (FA) and ground granulated blast
furnace slag GGBFS (Hassan et al., 2020a, 2019a). The disposal and
recycling of these waste products has become a big concern for envi­
ronment and also consumes enormous budgets (Hassan et al., 2020a,
2020b). Researchers have conducted extensive studies to find a solution
to this problem (Hassan et al., 2020c, 2020b, 2019b). Some of these
researches focused on improving the soil capacity utilising fly ash, which
is produced as waste in thermal power stations (Ozdemir, 2016; Ram
and Masto, 2014; S et al., 2014). Table 1 shows the amount of FA pro­
duced annually and the percentage of FA recycled in various countries.
The efficiency of any construction concerned with the bearing ca­
pacity of the soil directs any research to develop a composite material
from the soil and other additives, such as FA or lime, to benefit from the
properties of materials available or produced through industrial activ­
ities (Firoozi et al., 2017; Kumar et al., 2007; Ram and Masto, 2014).
These materials may be used effectively for soil stabilisation. The sig­
nificant classifications of stabilisation are mechanical stabilisation, hy­
draulic stabilisation, and physical and chemical stabilisation. Most of the
literature on the use of waste materials for soil treatment has reported
that a composite material of soil and other materials like FA and lime can
enhance the soil’s mechanical properties (Grace et al., 2016; Lakhdar
et al., 2009).
Fly ash is the material produced mainly from the coal-burning in
thermal power stations for electricity generation. Fly ash contains many
chemical elements and minerals, such as aluminium, silicon, iron oxides,
and unoxidised carbon. The characteristics of FA depend on charcoal
types and methods used in the production of FA in the power plant
station (Hassan et al., 2019c). The stabilisation of clay soils with

Abbreviations: av, Coefficient of compressibility; BA, Bottom ash; BC, Black cotton soil; C, Cohesion index; Cc, Compression index; CBR, California bearing ratio;
Cv, Coefficient of consolidation; CH, Clay soil – High plastic; CL, Clay soil – low plastic; EDR, Efficient depth ratio; e0, Initial void ratio; FA, Fly ash; FSI, Free swelling
index; GT, Geo-textile; GF, Geo-fiber; GGBS, Ground granulated blast furnace slag; HCFA, High-calcium fly ash; LCFA, Low-calcium fly ash; MDUW, Maximum dry
unit weight; MDD, Maximum dry density; MD, Marble dust; mv, Coefficient of volume change; OMC, Optimum moisture content; OWC, Optimum water content; PI,
Plastic index; SBR, Strength benefit ratio; T, Time; UCS, Unconfined compressive strength; WC, Water content; ɣdry, Dry density; φ, Internal friction angle.
* Corresponding author at: Department of Civil Engineering, Z. H. College of Engineering and Technology, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh 202002, India.
E-mail addresses: Enmoh92@gmail.com (M.F. Noaman), ameralburay@gmail.com (A. Hassan).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clema.2022.100151
Received 5 December 2021; Received in revised form 11 September 2022; Accepted 14 September 2022
Available online 15 September 2022
2772-3976/© 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
M.F. Noaman et al.
Table 1
Data of FA utilisation and production (Ahmaruzzaman, 2010; Ghazali et al.,
2019; Ohenoja et al., 2020).
S. Country Ash Annual ash production (millions of tons/
No utilisation year)
% This section investigates the impact of the FA addition on the volu­
1 Netherland 100 2 metric changes of soil and determines the optimum method and opti­
2 Italy 100 2 mum percentage of FA for soil improvement. Several studies and
3 Denmark 100 2
4 France 85 3
5 Australia 85 10
6 Germany 85 40
7 Canada 75 6 Effect of FA on the secondary consolidation of clay soil
8 USA 65 75
9 UK 50 15
10 China 45 100
11 India 38 112
admixtures controls the ability to change the volume of soils and
improve strength (Seco et al., 2011; Yilmaz and Civelekoglu, 2009).
Moreover, the utilisation of FA can enhance the engineering properties
of soil (Kim and Prezzi, 2008; Phani Kumar and Sharma, 2004).
Further, using lime and cement for the soil treatment can result in
better improvement but at a high cost (Indiramma et al., 2020; Inkham
et al., 2019; Rasmussen et al., 2018; Renjith et al., 2021). Therefore,
using FA waste materials as additives in the soil is a more economical
alternative for many stabilisation applications than any other additives.
Moreover, incorporating cation into FA can exchange clays and reduce
the clay compression properties (Ouhadi et al., 2014). When the FA was
used in the soil improvement, the construction settlement decreased,
and the time required to reach the final settlement was also reduced
(Karim et al., 2020b; Karim et al., 2020c). It is possible to use FA in the
soil to develop shear strength, stability, and bearing capacity. Using FA
for soil improvement can decrease the plasticity and the free swelling
index (FSI) characteristics (Tastan et al., 2011). It also binds together
soil particles, increasing the CBR value. Using industrial by-products like
FA as a construction material additive in civil engineering prevents a
substantial environmental threat. Fly ash can be used with other mate­
rials as additives such as lime, gypsum, sand, bentonite, slag and geo­
polymer, where many studies have been conducted to evaluate the
influence on the stabilisation of weak soil. Gypsum used as an additive
mixed with soil reduced soil swelling and improves the stability by about
60 % with the shallow mixing technique and 25 % with the column
technique. The shallow mixing technique showed 47.9 %, 64.41 % and
40.12 % higher performances than the column technique for lime, fly
ash and gypsum, respectively (Toksöz Hozatlıoğlu and Yılmaz, 2021).
Fly ash supports the base course or sub-base (Karami et al., 2021;
Krishana and Pavan, 2019; Murmu et al., 2020; Saxena, 2018). The test
results of the effect of cement and fly ash as additives for the soil illus­
trate that the Atterberg limits, plasticity index, and free swell index
decrease with the addition of different proportions of fly ash and cement
and increase in CBR and unconfined compressive strength (UCS) (Rai
et al., 2021; Tavakol, 2019). Fly ash-geopolymer stabilized black cotton
soil containing 5–20 % FA and cured for at least 14 days at 25 ◦ C is
suitable for subgrade and pavement application through results of CBR
and unconfined compressive strength (UCS) (Murmu et al., 2020).
Pokharel and Siddiqua (2021) indicated in their study the ability of a
mixture of 10 % Ca-bentonite and 30 % Pulp fly ash to increase the
compressibility of organic soil regardless of curing technique. According
to microstructural and chemical analysis, the pozzolanic reaction
affected the organic soil’s mineralogical and morphological compo­
nents. Ca- bentonite and Pulp fly ash improved the strength and
compressibility of the organic soil.
This research presents a variety of studies on FA productivity in clay
soils. re-use alternatives of industrial waste need to be defined sepa­
rately from the expansive soil problem. The use of these wastes is a
practical way to promote sustainable improvement. Recent projects
2
Cleaner Materials 6 (2022) 100151
demonstrate that successful waste utilisation, such as industrial waste
and soil stabilisation, could lead to substantial cost savings.
Influence of fly ash on the volumetric change of clay soil
experiments were conducted to understand the behaviour of FA mixed
with soil; the following sections thoroughly discuss the same.
Saha and Pal (2012) studied the influence of FA on the performance
of clay soil compressibility used in successive layers (Soil - FA - Soil) and
(FA - Soil - FA), as shown in Fig. 1. Those specimens were compared with
plain soil specimens (Soil - Soil - Soil) and plain FA specimens (FA - FA -
FA). The study aimed to understand the effect of layer order of fly ash on
soil behaviour. The authors found that the plain soil specimens showed
higher compression index and secondary soil compression values than
plain FA specimens. In the case of (FA – Soil – FA) specimens, the sec­
ondary soil compression was close to the values of the plain FA speci­
mens. The time relationship between the end of primary consolidation
and the start of secondary consolidation was decreased in the case of
(Soil – FA - Soil) specimens compared to the other specimens.
Phanikumar and Sharma (2007) investigated the impact of FA on the
volume change of expansive clay soil. The results exhibited improve­
ment in the secondary consolidation of the expansive clay soil mixed
with a 20 % FA compared to untreated expansive clay soil. Moreover,
the primary consolidation and secondary consolidation occurred earlier
in the case of expansive clay soil treated with 20 % FA compared to
untreated expansive clay soil. In geotechnical applications, this means
that the consolidation settlement of structure resting on clay soil mixed
with FA under the foundations is not decreased; however, it could be
achieved in a short period, as indicated in Fig. 2. This finding is
confirmed by Pal and Ghosh (2014), according to the experimental tests
conducted on the montmorillonite clay was mixed with various per­
centages (10–50 % of the mixture of fly ash in soil. The results showed
that 71.60 % of consolidation took place within 30 s in all mixes.
Mir and Sridharan (2014) studied several percentages of low-calcium
fly ash (LCFA) and high-calcium fly ash (HCFA) mixed with black cotton
(BC) soil. The fly ash was incorporated into highly expansive soil clas­
sified as BC soil to determine the effect of FA on the volume change
behaviour of clay-FA blends. Compacted samples of clay-FA were cured
for 7 and 28 day and tested at adjusted pressure from 50 kPa to 800 kPa
for consolidation. The findings showed that the compressibility and
swelling potential of mixed soils are significantly reduced. The 20 % of
high calcium amount of the FA was the optimal amount when mixed
with the clay soil to develop a good compressibility performance of the
treated clay soil. Also, based on the experimental results, the authors
observed that 10 % of low calcium of FA is the optimum quantity needed
to minimize the free swell potential. Amiralian et al. (2012) investigated
the influence of FA additions on the swelling and compressibility be­
haviours of sand soil. Nine samples were prepared for the experimental
work, and the percentages of FA added into the soil were from 2.5 % to
20 %, with a 2.5 % increase in the FA percentage. The experimental
results indicated that the existence of FA mixed with soil could improve
the compressibility behaviour and swelling properties of soil. It was
found that the initial void ratio e0 of each mixture decreased with an
increase in the percentage of FA, as shown in Table 2. While the sand soil
stability at 17.5 % of FA was more effective than other fly ash contents.
Whilst Saha and Pal (2012) observed that the behaviour of compress­
ibility of pure clayey soil improved with the addition of 20 % and 30 %
of fly ash, respectively. The percentage of improvement beyond 30 % is
slight and does not represent the size of the increase in the proportion of
fly ash. It can also be considered that 20 % is more effective and
M.F. Noaman et al. Cleaner Materials 6 (2022) 100151

Fig. 1. Saha and Pal test models (Saha and Pal, 2012).

Fig. 3. Effect of FA on the coefficient of compressibility (Saha and Pal, 2012).

Fig. 2. Effect of FA on secondary consolidation (Phanikumar and

Sharma, 2007). Table 3
Values of av, Cc, mv and dial gauge reading (Saha and Pal, 2012).
Description of Log av Cc mv Dial gauge reading versus
Table 2 case p at log at log at log square root of time equal
Values of initial void ratio, compression index (Amiralian et al., 2012). p p p 20 sec

FA contents (%) Cc Cs e0
Soil 1 0.028 0.07 0.025 230
0 0.0498 0.0398 0.523
FA 1 0.005 0.03 0.006 154
2.5 0.0489 0.0212 0.490
Soil - FA – Soil 1 0.016 0.05 0.015 165
5.0 0.0398 0.0205 0.465
FA - Soil – FA 1 0.014 0.047 0.009 147
7.5 0.0365 0.0192 0.439
10 0.0357 0.0186 0.416
12.5 0.0340 0.0172 0.389
15 0.0282 0.0146 0.361
decreased when the applied pressure increased; however, mv was
17.5 0.0265 0.0119 0.340 directly relative to the sample height (thickness of sample) and the void
20 0.0265 0.0139 0.319 ratio e0. Furthermore, the experimental results showed that the coeffi­
cient of volume change (mv) decreased with the addition of the fly ash.
However, the experimental results were almost the same when the
economical. The effect of FA on the compressibility of clay soil and other
addition of fly ash was between 20 and 30 % of the soil, and there were
engineering properties might be attributed to the pozzolanic nature of
no changes in the value of mv, as shown in Fig. 4. Also, the presence of
the FA because of the existence of free lime amount. The 20 % of FA was
FA in the soil samples improves the compressive pressure and thus
the optimum value to improve the engineering properties because this
showed reduced compressibility. That might be attributed to the
amount of fly ash can fill perfectly the voids in the soil and therefore
cementation handcuffs developed due to the pozzolanic efficiency of the
enhance the soil properties. This finding was observed through the study
fly ash. These findings are close to the results observed by H. Karim
of the influence of the FA content on the compressibility parameters of
et al., 2020, coefficient of volume change decreased with the increase of
clay soil. Fig. 3 and Table 3 show the development of compressibility
fly ash content up to 15 %; then any increase in the fly ash content
parameters with the utilisation of four specimens (soil), (soil – fly ash –
resulted in the increment of the coefficient of volume change.
soil), (fly ash – soil – fly ash) and (fly ash).
Mir and Sridharan (2014) observed a reduction in the compression
Somnath Shil (2015) investigated the relationship between the vol­
index (Cc) when the amount of FA increased, which might be attributed
ume change coefficient (mv) and the applied pressure. The mv factor
to the production of cementation bonds. Also, it is shown that 20 % of

3
M.F. Noaman et al.
Fig. 4. Effect of FA percentage on the volume change coefficient (Somnath
Shil, 2015).
the class C fly ash was optimal for improving the compressibility char­
acteristics of clay soil up to 60 % for seven days curing. This percentage
is close to that percentage observed by Phanikumar and Sharma (2007),
reported that with a 20 % FA amount, the values of Cc for both expansive
and non-expansive clay were reduced by almost 50 % because the
chemically induced pre-consolidation effect increases the vertical
effective yield stress and lowers the compressibility properties. Some
cation exchange reactions occur when additives are added to soils,
replacing exchangeable sodium, magnesium, or other cations contained
in the soil clay with calcium cations. This is thought to result in soil with
a more flocculated fabric and less compressibility.
Effect of fly ash on the coefficient of consolidation Cv
Somnath Shil (2015) observed that the additive of FA to soil
increased the coefficient of consolidation (Cv). The reason behind that
might be that the permeability of FA is higher than soil. However, the
effect of the FA percentages on (Cv) is reduced when higher axial pres­
sure is applied, this interpretation is consistent with what Cheng et al.,
(2020) concluded in the study of the influence of nano-bentonite on soil
compressibility. The findings of Pal and Ghosh (2014) indicated that the
values of the coefficient of consolidation of the FA samples bear a
resemblance to that of non-plastic silty sand and non-plastic sandy silt.
The compression and the values of the coefficient of consolidation were
slight for all the FA samples. For FA-20 % montmorillonite clay mixed,
the consolidation occurred rapidly; therefore, deformation of the FA
sample would be completed within a short time. The consolidation co­
efficient of FA samples and FA-montmorillonite clay mixes could be
determined using the expression (Cv = k / mv ɣw) because the primary
consolidation of FA is taking place within a short time. However, the
other coefficient of consolidation of FA–montmorillonite clay mixed
with 30, 40, and 50 % montmorillonite clay should be determined from
the results instead of calculating the value of (Cv) from the previous
expression. As Taha et al., (2021) indicated in their study, which focused
on testing the influence of rice husk ash on the type of expansive soil to
decrease Cv value from 2.33 cm2/s to 1.30 cm2/s with addition of 16 %
of rice husk ash, due to the porosity and density of the rice husk ash were
lower than the natural soil.
Effect of fly ash on the settlement of soil
Saha and Pal (2012) investigated the influence of FA on the settle­
ment behaviour of clay soil throughout the laboratory oedometer tests.
In contrast, the settlement value of FA specimens was 0.19 mm. The
4
Cleaner Materials 6 (2022) 100151
results showed a decrease of 0.30 mm in the module (Soil-FA-Soil) and
0.26 mm in the module (FA-Soil-FA). These observations may be
attributed to the molecular structures formed in the samples, and then
minimise the soil settlement due to the use of FA in the upper and lower
layers or the central layer. Fig. 5 shows the relationship between applied
pressure logarithm (log p) and settlement for each case. However, Karim
et al. (2020a,b,c) indicated that the final consolidation settlement of
clay soil at optimum content is 20 % of fly ash, which results in a final
consolidation settlement of 0.638 mm, but beyond this percentage there
was a slight increase. Though Hasnat et al. (2020) indicated that the
lowest value of the settlement was 0.336 mm (saturated) and 0.183 mm
(unsaturated) for 25 % fly ash content. While Rajabi et al. (2021) studied
the influence of Nano‑Iron Oxide on consolidation parameters of clay
soil, the consolidation test results suggest that adding nano-iron oxide
up to an optimum content for the same stresses reduces the soil settle­
ment. Still, with the increase in additive percentage, at the same stress,
more settlement occurs. This behavior is attributed to the interconnec­
tion between a mixture of clay soil and nano-iron oxide.
Somnath Shil (2015) studied mixed soil specimens with various
percentages of FA (i.e., 20 %, 30 %) and compared the findings with
plain soil samples and plain FA samples. Fig. 6 shows settlement values
and log p, in which it can be noted that the maximum settlement for
plain soil samples is 0.45 mm and 0.17 mm for plain FA samples. While
adding 30 % of FA, the settlement was 0.27 mm and 0.28 mm for 20 % of
FA. The test results indicated that soil settlement might be decreased
with the fly ash additives (Behera et al., 2021). The influence of soil-
flyash-lime enzyme on the enhancement of bearing capacity of sub­
grade was investigated by Karami et al. (2021) employing 3-D numerical
modelling to evaluate the improvement in stability of subgrade soil in
terms of bearing capacity and thickness.
Mir and Sridharan (2014) studied two types of fly ash sources,
Neyveli FA and Badarpur FA. The findings showed that the addition of
FA into clay soils reduced the settlement due to the decrease of plastic
clay fines. The capacity of settlement decreased significantly as the
percentages of FA increased. Also, it was noted that a small percentage
around 10 % of HCFA, is more effective in reducing settlement prop­
erties than 40 % of LCFA, as shown in Fig. 7. Hassan et al. (2020) re­
ported the same findings after comparing the behaviour of plain soil and
mixed soil with fly ash.
Fig. 5. Settlement values for various samples with and without FA (Saha and
Pal, 2012).
M.F. Noaman et al. Cleaner Materials 6 (2022) 100151

Fig. 8. Free swelling test values for soils mixed with a high percentage of FA
(Prabakar et al., 2004).

Fig. 6. Influence of FA percentage on the settlement values (Somnath

Shil, 2015). that FA can improve engineering characteristics, such as cohesion, shear
strength, and thus improves bearing capacity and effectively controls
swelling behavior. Lin et al. (2013) studied microstructural changes that
occur for two types of expansive soils enhanced by FA class C, using
microscopic. The results showed that stabilisation of the soil mixed with
fly ash decreases the plastic index (PI), the clay amount percentage, the
swell pressure, and the water content of the soil and increases the UCS.
Nalbantoǧlu (2004) investigated the performance of Tuzala and
Degirmenlik soil samples collected from a depth of 1.5 m from the
earth’s surface. Experimental work was conducted in two phases, com­
pacted soil samples without mixing and soil samples with FA mixed in
various percentages. The results show that the Tuzla soil yields a
swelling rate of 6.5 %, while the untreated Degirmenlik soil yields 19.6
%. Fig. 9 shows that FA is efficient in decreasing the swell potential of
soil Degirmenlik soil samples. Addition of 15 % FA Increase the line
thickness, change colours to bright and contrast 17 reduces the swell
potential by 5 % whereas 25 % FA reduces the same by 3.7 %.
Furthermore, the findings showed that the swell potential of Degir­
menlik soil mixed with 25 % of the FA reduced to zero in case of 30-days
curing time, as can be seen in Fig. 9.
Brooks et al. (2011) reported that the FA and Limestone Dust
significantly affect soil stabilisation. One of the geotechnical charac­
teristics of the stabilisation soil is FSI. The results showed that the swell
Fig. 7. Settlement values according to the rectangular hyperbolic method (Mir
and Sridharan, 2014). potential of all additive soil mixtures was typically decreased. When the
FA amount was 15 %, the swell potential was reduced by about 25 % of
Effect of fly ash on swelling of soil

(Salim, 2021) through laboratory experiments the impact of the FA

content on the FSI, swell potential and swelling pressure, of expansive
soil. The influence of these admixtures was compared with those of
natural soils. The findings show that the swelling percent and swell
pressure increase with an increase in the bentonite percentage. The
swelling and swelling pressure decrease with increases in the fly ash
percentage. The optimum percentage of fly ash was 5 %, where the swell
and swell pressure decreased by a large ratio. Prabakar et al. (2004)
investigated three soil types with different FA percentages of 9 to 46 %
by dry soil weight. As shown in Fig. 8, the experimental results of
swelling for various fly ash ratios were random and unsteady, which
could be drawn in wave lines and might be attributed to a non-uniform
distribution of FA in soils during blending. Mixing 80 % FA with soil-C
results in the FSI values equal to zero. The FSI value of (soil-A) and (soil-
B) values are zero when soils are blended with 56.30 % and 66.66 % FA,
respectively. Another increase in FA volume in the soil leads to a further
decline in swelling. This is caused by the unexpansive properties of FA
and the size and shape of particle of FA, which lead to the conclusion
Fig. 9. Influence of FA on the swell potential [Nalbantoǧlu (2004)].

5
M.F. Noaman et al. Cleaner Materials 6 (2022) 100151

the un-treated samples, whereas when the FA amount increased to 25 %,

the swell ability was reduced by about 37.5 % of the control soil.
Zha et al. (2008) reported the stabilisation of expansive soil using FA
and FA-lime as an additive. The findings showed that incorporating FA
and lime-ash into the soil reduced the capacity of swelling and shrinkage
of soil. Also, the increase of FA and lime-ash in the sample reduces the
free swell, swelling capability, swelling pressures, and linear shrinkages.
Despite the increase in curing time, both FA and Lime-ash soils samples,
swelling capacity and inflation pressure are reduced, as shown in
Figs. 10 and 11. Phanikumar et al. (2021) examined the effect of fly ash
and sand on swelling behavior of expansive clay soil and concluded that
the free swelling index is reduced by 29 % and 50.32 % and swelling
potential by 80.4 % and 32.7 % with increase of fine sand content and fly
ash content from 0 to 25 % to expansive clay soil respectively. When the
content of fine sand in the mixture increased from 0 to 25 %, swelling
pressure decreased by 84.6 %, while fly ash content had no effect.
Buhler and Cerato (2007) studied the plasticity decrease in expansive
clay soil collected from Idabel, Oklahoma, using lime and fly ash. Four
soil specimens classified as (A-7–6), according to AASHTO, were used in Fig. 11. Effect of FA-lime additive at 7-day curing time on swelling pressure
this investigation to show shrinkage variation within the soil samples (Zha et al., 2008).
with the addition of lime and fly ash as shown in Figs. 12-15. In this
investigation, the reduction in plasticity was determined by the linear
shrinkage method. Where the addition of lime decreased the linear
shrinkage more than FA, with respect to the percentage increment. With
the addition of 5 % lime, linear shrinkage decreased from about 4 to 7 %,
but with the addition of 5 % class C fly ash, linear shrinkage decreased
from approximately 1 % to 2 %.
Murmu and Patel (2020) studied the efficiency of FA and rice husk
ash (RHA)-based Geopolymer (mixture of sodium silicate (SS) and so­
dium hydroxide (SH)) in stabilisation of black cotton soil. Results ob­
tained from the experiments indicate that the geo-polymerization
significantly makes black cotton soil less prone to swelling and
shrinkage.

Impact fly ash on compaction characteristics of soil

Phanikumar and Sharma (2007) investigated the impact of FA on the

volumetric change for two types of clay soils, expansive and non-
expansive soil. Various FA ratios have been used, such as (0, 5, 10, 15,
and 20) per cent by dry soil weight. The findings showed that the Fig. 12. Reduction in Shrinkage vs Additive percent (soil-I) (Buhler and
Cerato, 2007).
increment of FA content could reduce an OMC and increase the
maximum dry density. At 20 % of FA ratio, non-expansionary FA
average dry weight increased by approximately 7 %, and its OMC
decreased by about 15 %. Also, increasing the amount of FA decreases
the compact curve gradually. Fig. 16 shows typical Proctor compaction

Fig. 13. Reduction in Shrinkage due to Stabilizer Additive (Soil-II) (Buhler and
Cerato, 2007).

Fig. 10. Impact of FA-lime additive on FSI for 7-day curing time (Zha
et al., 2008).

6
M.F. Noaman et al. Cleaner Materials 6 (2022) 100151

Fig. 14. Reduction in Shrinkage vs Additive percent (soil-III) (Buhler and

Cerato, 2007).

Fig. 16. Effect of FA on the dry unit weight and water content (Phanikumar
and Sharma, 2007).

Table 4
Average density and moisture content of soils combined with FA (Prabakar et al.,
2004).
FA Soil-A Soil-B Soil-C

OMC ɣ dry OMC ɣ dry OMC ɣ dry

% g/cm3 % g/cm3 % g/cm3

0% 14.57 1.71 24.81 1.57 30.09 1.43

9% 15.80 1.58 24.80 1.52 29.50 1.38
20 % 17.98 1.57 25.20 1.41 29.50 1.35
28.5 % 20.40 1.44 25.76 1.39 30.05 1.31
35.5 % 22.30 1.39 28.30 1.34 31.90 1.24
41.5 % 25.20 1.36 29.80 1.30 33.30 1.25
46 % 27.20 1.34 30.20 1.29 234.26 1.21
100 % 44.24 0.94 – – – –
Fig. 15. Reduction in Shrinkage vs Additive percent (soil-IV) (Buhler and
Cerato, 2007).

curves showing the variability of the OMC and the average dry weight of
the clay at the various proportions of the FA. Same findings were ob­
tained by Andavan and Pagadala (2020a).
Prabakar et al. (2004) studied the behavioural dimension of soils
blended with FA to develop engineering characteristics and increase soil
bearing capacity. Three different soil types have been considered with
varying proportions of FA, ranging between 9 % and 46 % by soil
weight. The study aimed to determine the merits of FA as a soil additive.
The findings showed that the increase of WC reduces the dry density. For
any percentage of FA addition in soil, the dry density decreases. For soil
without FA, maximum dry density is recorded between 1.775 g/cm3 and
1.760 g/cm3; for 100 % of FA, the maximum dry density is the lowest.
Table 4 presents the average density and moisture content of soils mixed
with FA. Same results pointed out by Karim et al. (2020a,b,c) where fly
ash increases plastic and liquid limitations, according to tests. Fly ash
reduced specific gravity. Dry unit weight dropped due to less water.
Somnath Shil (2015) studied the improvement of soil stabilisation by
adding FA. The engineering properties are significant factors in Fig. 17. Dry unit weight is of the soil mixed with fly ash (Somnath Shil, 2015).
enhancing soil efficiency by optimising the values of dry density and
water amount of the soil. The experimental work showed that at 14 % of FA particles and increases the OMC. Santos et al. (2011) reported that
OMC, the soil had a maximum dry density of 18.5 kN/m3. With average the decrease in dry unit weight is due to the FA notion being light
moisture content of 25.4 %, FA has an average dry density of 11.76 kN/ compared to the soil. The average dry unit weight and OMC are highly
m3. As shown in Fig. 17, the increment of the FA percentage in the soil dependent on the FA quality.
decreases the maximum dry density due to the low specific gravity of the Şenol (2012) conducted an experimental study by testing soil

7
M.F. Noaman et al. Cleaner Materials 6 (2022) 100151

samples. The samples were prepared at three different proportions of

fiber amount (i.e., 0.5 %, 1 %, and 1.5 % of dry soil weight) plus two
different percentages of FA (i.e., 10 % and 15 % of dry soil weight).
Several tests have been performed in OMC and UCS laboratory tests, and
compaction and Atterberg limit tests have been carried out. The test
results showed that the increase of FA amount decreases the MDUW of
the mixture and increases the OMC. There is a further decrease in
MDUW and a surge in the OMC with the increment of FA. The reduced
dry density can be caused by the presence of FA with relatively low
specific gravity, as shown in Figs. 18-21.
Brooks et al. (2011) reported the effect of FA and limestone dust in
soils stabilised by a mixture of prepared soil samples with 15 % and 25 %
FA by dry weight. Fly ash significantly affected the properties of soil-I
more than soil-II, as shown in Table 5. Also, the familiar pattern noted
was that the soil MDD decreased with the increment of FA content,
although the OMC showed a reverse trend.
Zha et al. (2008) carried out a standard proctor compaction testing
on FA and lime ash treated soils to investigate the impact of additives on
compaction characterisation and provide compacted dry weight for UCS
Fig. 19. The variation of OWC Şenol (2012).
experiments. The impact of FA and lime ash on the OWC and the
maximum dry weight for soils is shown in Figs. 22 and 23, respectively.
The OWC and the maximum dry unit weight are reduced by increasing
the amount of FA and lime-ash.

Effect of fly ash on shear strength of soil

The dredged clay and black cotton soil could not be directly re-
utilised in geotechnical application for its extra-high-water content.
So, the dewatering is needed before further improvement. Thus, chem­
ical flocculants are used to improve the dewatering process for their
excellent flocculation (Xu et al., 2021; Yin et al., 2020). Liu et al. (2021)
examined how rapidly dredge sludge’s strength could be enhanced by
adding cement, fly ash, and slag. Tests show that as fly ash and slag
percentages increase, solidified sludge water content decreases and
shear strength increases. This creates a perfect curing agent. Prabakar
et al. (2004) carried out an experimental work of three types of soil
mixed with FA to improve soil stabilisation. The shear strength of soil
mixed with FA increased with the increase of the fly ash content, and
then improve the cohesiveness and internal friction angle. The effect of
fly ash content on the cohesiveness ratio and internal friction angle for
soil-A and B is more than soil-C is presented in Table 6.
Andavan and Pagadala (2020b) investigated that the engineering Fig. 20. The variation of MDUW Şenol (2012).
characteristics of soil have improved as a result of the addition of fly ash
to the soil. Increased density and compaction significantly increase the

Fig. 21. The variation of OMC Şenol (2012).

Fig. 18. The variation of MDUW Şenol (2012).

8
M.F. Noaman et al. Cleaner Materials 6 (2022) 100151

Table 5 Table 6
Influence of FA content on engineering properties for two types of soil (Brooks Influence of FA content on cohesion and internal friction angle for different
et al., 2011). types of soils (Prabakar et al., 2004).
Label Soil-I Soil-II Label FA Cohesion (Kg/m2) ϕ (degree)
No. %
FA content % FA content % Soil-A Soil-B Soil-C Soil-A Soil-B Soil-C

0 15 25 0 15 25 1 0 250 × 185 × 530 × 30◦ 15′ 25◦ 32′ 17◦ 10′

10-3 10-3 10-3
PI 14 12 10 20.7 17.3 14
2 9.0 250 × 208 × 523 × 31◦ 36′ 24◦ 13′ 20◦ 26′
OMC % 16 19 22 22 24 26
10-3 10-3 10-3
MDD (kN/m3) 14.4 13.9 13.2 15.6 14.6 14.1
3 20.0 270 × 300 × 475 × 33◦ 1′ 25◦ 12′ 21◦ 58′
Swell % 8 6 5 10 7 5.5
10-3 10-3 10-3
CBR 2.5 3.5 4 4 4.5 5
4 28.5 310 × 300 × 500 × 35◦ 56′ 28◦ 18′ 23◦ 15′
10-3 10-3 10-3
5 35.0 340 × 330 × 480 × 34◦ 12′ 29◦ 38′ 26◦ 17′
10-3 10-3 10-3
6 41.2 370 × 370 × 440 × 32◦ 6′ 29◦ 53′ 27◦ 22′
10-3 10-3 10-3
7 46.0 395 × 380 × 395 × 28◦ 38′ 30◦ 38′ 27◦ 56′
10-3 10-3 10-3
8 100.0 – 150 × – – 29◦ 21′ –
10-3

Fig. 22. Impact of FA -lime admixture on the OWC (Zha et al., 2008).

Fig. 24. Variation of Unconfined compressive strength with FA content

(Bose, 2012).

shear strength increase. In contrast, the additional amount of FA more

than the optimum value acts as unbounded silt particles, which has
neither appreciable friction nor cohesion, causing a decrease in strength.
Nath et al. (2017) explained the reason for the increase in the value

Fig. 23. Impact of FA-lime admixture on MDUW (Zha et al., 2008).

strength of lime fly ash stabilised soil after 7 and 28 days, however this
has a considerable impact on the optimum lime to fly ash content.
Increased lime additions to clay soils lead to reduced solids percentages
with the same compaction effort, most likely as a result of lime’s ability
to aggregate clay. The proportion of solids that has decreased and
strength are roughly inversely related.
Fig. 24 shows the effect of FA increment from 0 to 90 % for the tested
experimental samples conducted by Bose (2012). The UCS increased at
20 % of FA content, beyond this percentage results show a reduction of
UCS. The optimum FA amount for developing the shear strength of the
mixed soils under the presented condition is 20 %. The findings indi­
cated that the amount of FA up to optimum content can induce pozzo­
lanic behavior and cemented materials, which effectively contributes to
Fig. 25. Variation of UCS with ash amount (Nath et al., 2017).

9
M.F. Noaman et al. Cleaner Materials 6 (2022) 100151

of UCS, as shown in Fig. 25. The increase of the UCS value may be Table 8
attributed to the production of cementation gels (hydrate) during the Results of the investigation soil blended with FA (Sharma et al., 2012).
interactions of CaO of fly ash with Al2O3 and SiO2 of soil. Furthermore, Sample OMC (%) FSI (%) UCS (kPa) CBR (%)
the compressive strength of FA-treated soil improves as the curing
Soil + 0 % FA 17.82 85.71 24.73 2.06
period increases. Similar results were obtained by (Santos et al., 2011; Soil + 10 % FA 18.65 75.82 34.73 3.12
Simatupang et al., 2020). Soil + 15 % FA 19.42 70.11 38.83 3.76
Soil + 20 % FA 19.87 69.05 63.38 4.03
Effect of fly ash on the California bearing ratio (CBR) Soil + 25 % FA 20.46 71.25 45.11 4.28

Lime and FA effect on CBR of soil were studied by Athanasopoulou

(2014). As shown in Table 7, the results indicated to the maximum CBR
for S1 by 12 % of lime, and 8 % content for S2 soil due to pozzolanic
nature of fly ash. Fly ash can reduce soil swelling and increase the OMC
and CBR value, especially with high content of FA or lime. However,
Sharma et al. (2012) indicated that the optimum improvement of sta­
bilisation of clay soil was for the amount of 20 % of fly ash. For that
percentage, the CBR values of clay soil increased about 5.7 %. The use of
FA also has developed the geotechnical properties of the soil, as indi­
cated in Table 8.
Kumar and Harika (2021) studied the influence of fly ash on stabi­
lisation of expansive subgrade black cotton soil. CBR value for untreated
soil was about 2.189 %, while treated soil with fly ash CBR value was
2.33 % (10 % fly ash). The study proposes mixing up to 10 percent fly
ash with black cotton soil for foundation and pavement work. Whereas
Zimar et al. (2022) reported that the use about 15 % of class C fly ash
with 7 days of curing is recommended for optimum performance, and Fig. 26. Effect of fly ash on soil CBR values (Trivedi et al., 2013).
this agreed with the findings of Joshi et al. (2019). Same results obtained
by Brooks et al. (2011) as shown in Table 5. Trivedi et al. (2013) studied CBR after freeze–thaw (F-T). Generally, the increase of strength is more
the effect of different FA percentages mixed with the soil sample. The significant and faster in 10 % MD + 20 % FA mix specimens. After this
results exhibit that the addition of FA in the small of fractions affects the point, the development got slow, and the strength decreased for 15 %
soil considerably. With the addition of 20 % FA, CBR value increased MD + 30 % FA mix specimens forward. Dixit et al. (2020) indicated that
from 5.64 % to 20.53 %. It can be observed that soil containing 20 % FA the use of fly ash as additive to improve the soil stability with different
gave the best findings of soil stability compared to other percentages. percentages can increase the CBR value, and make it more suitable for
The reason for this improvement is the formation of cementing gels building road pavements. Similar results were obtained by Bose, (2012).
(hydrate) due to the reactions between CaO of FA with Al2O3 and SiO2 of Badiger et al. (2019) also studied the effect of FA on the CBR values on
soil. By several investigations conducted by prominent researchers in the unsoaked and soaked samples for different proportions of soil-FA
this field, the maximum value of CBR achieved by adding FA in different mixtures. They found no effect on optimum content of FA range in
types of soils is achieved between 15 and 20 % of FA, as indicated in both cases (unsoaked and soaked), which has been covered in related
Fig. 26. studies. Prasad and Kumar (2015) conducted a study on a soil classified
Edil et al. (2006) carried out an experimental study on soil–FA mixes as (SW) well-graded sands, gravelly sands, and little or no fines ac­
at varied FA contents 10–30 % to evaluate how the addition of FA can cording to the unified soil classification system (USCS). The findings
enhance the CBR value. CBR of mixture of soil-fly ash usually increase showed that the FA percentage from 0 % to 25 % decreased CBR values
with the increased of FA amount and decreased with increasing water for the unsoaked condition and soaked conditions. The results indicated
content. Where the CBR values increased about 4 % by adding 10 % FA no significant drop in CBR values with FA addition to gravel soil up to 5
to the fine-grained soil. Fauzi et al. (2010) performed CBR experiments %. The granular soil behaved as sandy silt soil with added FA and then
on the different FA and BA (bottom ash) amounts of 4, 8 and 12 % with hence occurred decreased CBR values.
the samples compacted at OMC. The FA and BA stabilisation developed
the CBR values significantly for the tested specimens. Whilst the findings Effect of fly ash on soil permeability
were semi similar when added marble dust (MD) to mixture of clay-fly
ash, where observed Zorluer and Gucek (2014) in their experimental Majumder and Saha (2016) studied the influence of fly ash on
study that the addition of MD and FA to clay soil increased the values of properties of soil which showed that added FA affects the inter-particle
void ratio, which increases permeability; hence, the microscopic char­
Table 7 acteristics of the soil mixes may contribute to the increase in perme­
CBR Values Variation with the amounts of Additive (Athanasopoulou, 2014). ability. Furthermore, silt particles are almost identical in size, resulting
in a more significant inter-particle vacuum, contributing to a consider­
Additive Additive Sample - (S1) Sample - (S2)
amount (%) ably larger inter-particle void. Lekha et al. (2015) reported that the
OMC CBRa OMC CBRa
ɣdry ɣdry
factors affecting the soil properties are many and not limited to the
(kg/ % (kg/ %
m3) m3) amount of FA added. However, the essential geotechnical characteristics
in terms of permeability increased for the treated soil with FA, as shown
FA 0 1.782 12.3 2.5 1.638 21.3 0.7
4 1.779 14.6 4.9 1.622 22.4 3.6
in Fig. 27. The curing period was also important in terms of soil stability.
8 1.750 15.3 14.1 1.550 23.6 11.0 Based on the test results of Islam et al. (2021), clay exhibits a larger
12 1.680 16.0 16.0 1.492 24.7 13.8 reduction in coefficient of permeability than sand does after being
16 1.592 17.2 24.8 1.456 26.5 14.6 treated with lime and fly ash. Over the course of a 14-day reaction
Lime 4 1.735 14.0 47.0 1.609 22.0 27.6
period, the permeability of the clayey soil treated with lime and fly ash
8 1.705 15.1 60.0 1.529 22.4 62.5
12 1.65 16.4 97.5 1.503 23.0 60.0 reduces by up to 58–92 % and 68–95 %, respectively. Similar test

10
M.F. Noaman et al.
Fig. 27. Coefficient of permeability values (Lekha et al., 2015).
conditions for sandy soil result in reductions of 30–84 % and 55–95 %
for lime and fly ash treated soil, respectively.
Debnath and Mittal (2019) found that the permeability coefficient
decreases along with the increase of FA and cement amounts. When the
added percentages were 9 % of cement and 15 % of FA, the minimum
permeability was 9.01 × 10-8 cm/sec. Also, 7 % of cement with 15 % of
FA added is suggested for extra cost down construction. The adding of
FA in different percentages, i.e., 0–16 % by dry weight of clayey soil
(CL), affects permeability characteristics according to study of Anupam
et al. (2012). The cured specimen’s permeability increased with
increasing curing time. The FA may be efficiently used in soil to improve
permeability and thus enhance drainage of sub-grade layers. Lu et al.
(2022) carried out a series of tests including permeability tests, per­
formed to investigate the mechanical and hydraulic behavior of four
different soil mixtures. The mixture are soil–cement, soil–cement-fly
ash, soil–cement-sisal fiber, soil–cement-fly ash-sisal fiber. The content
of additive in each mixture was 10 % by weight. The results exhibit the
addition of sisal fiber reduced the permeability of soil while the addition
of fly ash increased the permeability of soil of the cemented soil.
Influence of additives on the behavior of expansive soil
Salim (2021) investigated the effect of FA on engineering soil
properties by incorporating various percentages of FA. The experimental
work showed that the swelling, swelling pressure and specific gravity
and plasticity index decreased with the increment of the percentage of
FA. The optimum percentage of fly ash was 5 %, where the swell and
swell pressure decreased by a large amount. The results showed that the
addition of fly ash to expansive soils positively affects the soil’s
geotechnical properties. Khan et al. (2021) studied the stability and
engineering properties of expansive soil by adding up to 80 % FA by dry
soil weight. The optimum content of FA was in the range of 10 to 20 % in
terms of expansive soil stability but with the fly ash content above the
optimum content, the improvement began to fade. In same context
indicated by Mir and Sridharan (2019) in their study, it was found that
60 % of class F fly ash is the optimum content to develop the geotech­
nical properties of expansive soil, compared with 20 % of class C fly ash.
While Kumar et al. (2022) found that the addition of 20 % of fly ash class
C to the expansive soil reduce the swell potential to 0 % as compared
with untreated soil swell value of 10.5 %, it was observed that the
combination of 4 % lime and 20 % fly ash resulted in the volumetric
deformation of only 2.05 % even after the fifth wet–dry cycle. Besides,
the percentage of desiccation cracks has also reduced significantly from
29 to 0.5 %. Deepak et al. (2020) studied the influence of various types
of FA along with the incorporation of lime in the improvement of clay
soil stability. Their findings demonstrated that the Plasticity Index of
clay-FA mixes decreased with the increment of FA contents and
increased the workability. Moreover, the incorporation of lime and FA
helped obtain stiffer and stronger soil mixture by decreasing the inter-
11
Cleaner Materials 6 (2022) 100151
particle dimensions. The authors also reported that the FA class C was
more effective in terms of soil stability characteristics than the FA class
F; and that might be attributed to a better cementitious properties of FA
class C and its high calcium content. Same findings were obtained by
Turan et al. (2022). Moreover, Dias Miguel et al. (2021) and Mahedi
et al. (2020) found that lime, FA Class C, FA Class F blended to treatment
expansive soil decreased the volumetric swelling of the soils during the
stabilisation process. Also, it was indicated that the FA class C and FA-
cement blends reduced the volumetric swellings of sulfate-rich expan­
sive soils compared to those specimens which mixed with cement and
lime alone.
Influence of cement and lime additives on the behavior of
expansive soil
Paikiey and Rabbani (2017) investigated the influence of cement on
the soil stability characteristics for enhancing the geotechnical proper­
ties of soil such as compressive strength, compaction, and plasticity. The
authors reported that with a higher amount of cement incorporated to
the soil, moisture content increased, and dry density decreased. Also, the
compressive strength increased with the increment of adding cement to
the soil. These findings were confirmed by Abdalla and Salih (2020).
Miao et al. (2021) also observed that the cohesion of cement soil
increased with the increase of curing time. However, the effect on the
internal friction angle was negligible. The analysis of microstructure
characteristics using SEM and XRD tests confirmed that the availability
of calcium aluminate hydrate and calcium silicate are the reasons
behind the strength improvement according to the study of Etim et al.
(2021). Phan and Pham (2018) showed that the increment of cement
content has a significant impact on the tensile and compressive
strengths. However, no positive results of cement-lime-soil stabilisation
have been found in terms of increasing the strength and Young’s
modulus.
Future scope of the work
From the above literature review, it is obvious that different sources
of fly ash materials will give different characteristics of the fly ash and
will have a different effect on the synthesis of fly ash and soil. therefore,
more studies are needed considering different fly ash sourced in order to
figure out the influence of the same on the engineering properties of the
soil. Also, many studies have been reported on the behavior of soil mixed
with fly ash. However, examining bottom ash as an additive material
with the soil instead of fly ash is needed. Hence, such a study needs to be
well-investigated to refine and confirm the available information on this
matter before introducing this technology to the application of
geotechnical engineering.
The effect of plastic waste on soil stability can be studied, such as
rubber tire powder and plastic bottle cuts. They are polluting materials
and are not biodegradable in the short term.
Conclusions
The following remarks summarise the remarkable engineering
properties of additive fly ash waste materials and other additives with
soil and highlight its efficiency as a sustainable solution that can be used
in construction applications:
• Mixing the soil clay with the fly ash results in earlier secondary
consolidation than the untreated soil clay. In engineering applica­
tions, this means that the consolidation settlement under the con­
structions is not only decreased but is also achieved in a shorter
period.
• Through this survey, the author found that the soil stability was at
range (15 % to 25 %) for different types of soil. Whilst the percentage
M.F. Noaman et al.
of improvement beyond 30 % is slight and does not represent the size
of the increase in the proportion of fly ash.
• Treatment of the clay soil with FA waste materials improve the pa­
rameters of consolidation of soil. This improvement in compress­
ibility behavior of soil is attributed to the pozzolanic behavior of the
FA.
• Fly ash class C was more effective on the soil stability characteristics
than the fly ash class F due to the better cementitious properties of
class C fly ash because of the high calcium content in class C raw fly
ash material.
• Soil and fly ash mix in extremely compact soil often reduces the
cohesion factor and raises the angle of internal friction. The rise in
soil cohesion may be caused by the composition of the soil combined
with fly ash and its properties.
• The result of using rice husk showed significant improvement on
coefficient of consolidation Cv due to the porosity and density of the
rice husk ash were lower than the natural soil.
• Free swelling index decreased by 29 % and 50.32 % and swelling
potential by 80.4 % and 32.7 % with the increase of fine sand content
and fly ash content from 0 to 25 % to expansive clay soil respectively.
When the content of fine sand in the mixture increased from 0 to 25
%, swelling pressure decreased by 84.6 %, while fly ash content had
no effect.
• The CBR value is equivalent to 10 times the initial value with the
incorporation of FA at 16 % by weight, and the effect is not as good as
with free lime. The rise in CBR as a function of the amount of the FA
may be due to the pozzolanic behavior of the FA.
• Adding FA to soil affects the inter-particle void ratio, which increases
permeability. It was detected that the permeability coefficient de­
creases along with the increase of fly ash amount; also, there is a
direct relationship between the treated period and the increase in
permeability value.
• With a higher amount of cement incorporated to the soil, moisture
content increased, and dry density decreased. Also, the compressive
strength increased with the increment of adding cement to the soil.
• The finding showed that the engineering properties of cement-soil
specimens considerably improved after incorporating the cement.
Also, the cohesion of cement soil increased with the increase of
curing time. However, the effect on the internal friction angle was
negligible.
• The cement and lime additives positively affect the geotechnical
properties and stability of expansive soil.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Mohammed Faisal Noaman: Writing – original draft, Conceptual­
ization, Writing – review & editing, Data curation. M.A. Khan: Writing –
review & editing. Kausar Ali: Writing – review & editing. Amer Has­
san: Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
No data was used for the research described in the article.
Acknowledgements
Not applicable.
12
Cleaner Materials 6 (2022) 100151
Funding
The authors did not receive support from any organisation for the
submitted work.
Data Availability
Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were
generated or analyses during the current study.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Not applicable.
Consent to Participate
Not applicable.
Consent for Publication
In accordance with the copyright transfer or open access rules.
References
Abdalla, T.A., Salih, N.B., 2020. Hydrated Lime Effects on Geotechnical Properties of
Clayey Soil. J. Eng. 26. https://doi.org/10.31026/j.eng.2020.11.10.
Ahmaruzzaman, M., 2010. A review on the utilization of fly ash. Prog. Energy Combust.
Sci. 36 (3), 327–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2009.11.003.
Amiralian, S., Chegenizadeh, A., Nikraz, H., 2012. Laboratory Investigation on the Effect
of Lime on Compressibility of Soil. International Conferences on Civil and
Architectural applications (ICCAA’2012) 89–93.
Andavan, S., Pagadala, V.K., 2020a. A study on soil stabilization by addition of fly ash
and lime. Mater. Today:. Proc. 22, 1125–1129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
matpr.2019.11.323.
Andavan, S., Pagadala, V.K., 2020b. Experimental study on addition of lime and fly ash
for the soil stabilization. Mater. Today:. Proc. 22, 1065–1069. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.300.
Anupam, A.K., Kumar, P., Ransinchung, G.D.R.N., 2012. Permeability Study on Fly Ash
and Rice Husk Ash Admixes with Subgrade Soil for Pavement Construction 1.
Athanasopoulou, A., 2014. Addition of lime and fly ash to improve highway subgrade
soils. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 26, 773–775. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-
5533.0000856.
Badiger, M., Dhalayat, M.G., Dali, M., Sharanappagouda, H.R., Kalakappa, D., 2019. A
Study on CBR Value of Soil Using Admixture (Flyash) 7940–7947. doi:10.15680/
IJIRSET.2019.0807071.
Behera, S.K., Mishra, D.P., Singh, P., Mishra, K., Mandal, S.K., Ghosh, C.N., Kumar, R.,
Mandal, P.K., 2021. Utilization of mill tailings, fly ash and slag as mine paste backfill
material: Review and future perspective. Constr. Build. Mater. 309, 125120. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.125120.
Bose, B., 2012. Geo-engineering properties of expansive soil stabilized with fly ash.
Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering 17 J, 1339–1353.
Brockerhoff, M., Nations, U., 1998. World Urbanization Prospects: The 1996 Revision.
Popul. Dev. Rev. 24 (4), 883.
Brooks, R., Udoeyo, F.F., Takkalapelli, K.v., 2011. Geotechnical properties of problem
soils stabilized with fly ash and limestone dust in philadelphia. J. Mater. Civ. Eng.
23, 711–716. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000214.
Buhler, R.L., Cerato, A.B., 2007. Stabilization of Oklahoma expansive soils using lime and
Class C Fly ash. Geotechnical Special Publ. 1 https://doi.org/10.1061/40906(225)1.
Cheng, G., Zhu, H.-H., Wen, Y.-N., Shi, B., Gao, L., 2020. Experimental investigation of
consolidation properties of nano-bentonite mixed clayey soil. Sustainability
(Switzerland) 12 (2), 459.
Debnath, S., Mittal, A., 2019. Effect of Fly Ash on Permeability of Soil, in: Lecture Notes
in Civil Engineering. doi:10.1007/978-981-13-7017-5_11.
Deepak, M.S., Rohini, S., Harini, B.S., Ananthi, G.B.G., 2020. Influence of fly-ash on the
engineering characteristics of stabilised clay soil. Mater. Today:. Proc. 37,
2014–2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.07.497.
Dias Miguel, G., Scheuermann Filho, H.C., Festugato, L., Bellaver Corte, M., 2021.
Discussion of “Cement, Lime, and Fly Ashes in Stabilizing Expansive Soils:
Performance Evaluation and Comparison” by Masrur Mahedi, Bora Cetin, and David
J. White. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 33 https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)mt.1943-
5533.0003867.
Dixit, A., Nigam, M., Mishra, R., 2020. Effect of Fly Ash on Geotechnical Properties of
Soil. Int. J. Eng. Technol. Manage. Res. 3, 7–14. https://doi.org/10.29121/ijetmr.v3.
i5.2016.62.
Edil, T.B., Acosta, H.A., Benson, C.H., 2006. Stabilizing Soft Fine-Grained Soils with Fly
Ash. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 18, 283–294. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0899-1561
(2006)18:2(283).
M.F. Noaman et al.
Etim, R.K., Attah, I.C., Ekpo, D.U., Usanga, I.N., 2021. Evaluation on Stabilization Role of
Lime and Cement in Expansive Black Clay-Oyster Shell Ash Composite. Transp.
Infrastruct. Geotechnol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40515-021-00196-1.
Faisal Noaman, M., Khan, M.A., Ali, K., 2022. Effect of artificial and natural fibers on
behavior of soil. Mater. Today:. Proc. 64, 481–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
MATPR.2022.04.954.
Fauzi, A., Nazmi, W.M., Fauzi, U.J., 2010. Subgrades Stabilization of Kuantan Clay Using
Fly ash and Bottom ash By. Subgrades Stabilization of Kuantan Clay Using Fly ash
and Bottom ash 1–4.
Firoozi, A.A., Guney Olgun, C., Firoozi, A.A., Baghini, M.S., 2017. Fundamentals of soil
stabilization. Int. J. Geo-Eng. 8 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40703-017-0064-9.
Ghazali, N., Muthusamy, K., Wan Ahmad, S., 2019. Utilization of Fly Ash in
Construction. IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 601 (1), 012023. https://doi.org/
10.1088/1757-899X/601/1/012023.
Grace, M.A., Clifford, E., Healy, M.G., 2016. The potential for the use of waste products
from a variety of sectors in water treatment processes. J. Cleaner Prod. 137,
788–802. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.07.113.
Hasnat, A., Ahmed, S.T., Mustafa, T., Samiullah Chowdhury, M., Prince, S.M., 2020.
Improvement of bearing capacity of clay soil using fly ash. AIUB J. Sci. Eng. 19
https://doi.org/10.53799/ajse.v19i2.85.
Hassan, A., Arif, M., Shariq, M., 2019. Use of geopolymer concrete for a cleaner and
sustainable environment – A review of mechanical properties and microstructure.
J. Cleaner Prod. 223, 704–728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.051.
Hassan, A., Arif, M., Shariq, M., 2019b. Effect of curing condition on the mechanical
properties of fly ash-based geopolymer concrete. SN Appl. Sci. 1, 1694. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s42452-019-1774-8.
Hassan, A., Arif, M., Shariq, M., 2020a. A review of properties and behaviour of
reinforced geopolymer concrete structural elements- A clean technology option for
sustainable development. J. Cleaner Prod. 245, 118762 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2019.118762.
Hassan, A., Arif, M., Shariq, M., 2020b. Influence of Microstructure of Geopolymer
Concrete on Its Mechanical Properties—A Review. Lecture Notes Civ. Eng. 119–129.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7480-7_10.
Hassan, A., Arif, M., Shariq, M., 2020c. Mechanical Behaviour and Microstructural
Investigation of Geopolymer Concrete After Exposure to Elevated Temperatures.
Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 45, 3843–3861. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-019-04269-9.
Indiramma, P., Sudharani, C.h., Needhidasan, S., 2020. Utilization of fly ash and lime to
stabilize the expansive soil and to sustain pollution free environment – An
experimental study. Mater. Today:. Proc. 22, 694–700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
matpr.2019.09.147.
Inkham, R., Kijjanapanich, V., Huttagosol, P., Kijjanapanich, P., 2019. Low-cost alkaline
substances for the chemical stabilization of cadmium-contaminated soils. J. Environ.
Manage. 250, 109395.
Islam, M.S., Islam, T., Khatun, N., 2021. Permeability Alteration of Low Plastic Clay and
Poorly Graded Sand Using Lime and Fly Ash. Indian Geotech. J. 51 (5), 967–978.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-020-00493-5.
Joshi, A.R., Patel, S., Shahu, J.T., 2019. Utilization of class ‘C’ Fly ash in flexible
pavement system—a review, in: Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering. doi:10.1007/
978-981-13-6713-7_50.
Karami, H., Pooni, J., Robert, D., Costa, S., Li, J., Setunge, S., 2021. Use of secondary
additives in fly ash based soil stabilization for soft subgrades. Transp. Geotech. 29,
100585.
Karim, M.A., Sami Hassan, A., Kaplan, A., 2020c. Optimization of soil to fly-ash mix ratio
for enhanced engineering properties of clayey sand for subgrade use. Appl. Sci.
(Switzerland) 10 (20), 7038.
Karim, H., Samueel, Z., Jassem, A., 2020a. Influence of Fly Ash Addition on Behavior of
Soft Clayey Soil. Eng. Technol. J. 38. https://doi.org/10.30684/etj.v38i5a.426.
Karim, H.H., Samueel, Z.W., Jassem, A.H., 2020b. Behaviour of soft clayey soil improved
by fly ash and geogrid under cyclic loading. Civ. Eng. J. (Iran) 6. https://doi.org/
10.28991/cej-2020-03091466.
S, Karthik., Kumar.E, A., P, G., G, E., D, Gokul., S, Thangaraj., 2014. Soil Stabilization By
Using Fly Ash. IOSR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering 10, 20–26. https://
doi.org/10.9790/1684-1062026.
Khan, F., Das, B., Dewangan, N., 2021. Determination of geotechnical properties and
stability of expansive soil using fly ash. Walailak. J. Sci. Technol. 18. https://doi.
org/10.48048/wjst.2021.22783.
Kim, B., Prezzi, M., 2008. Evaluation of the mechanical properties of class-F fly ash.
Waste Manage. 28 (3), 649–659. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2007.04.006.
Krishana, P.B., Pavan, G.S., 2019. Soil Stabilization by Using Lime and Fly Ash. Int. J.
Trend Sci. Res. Dev. 3. https://doi.org/10.31142/ijtsrd26442.
Kumar, P.G., Harika, S., 2021. Stabilization of expansive subgrade soil by using fly ash.
Mater. Today:. Proc. 45, 6558–6562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.11.469.
Kumar, T.A., Thyagaraj, T., Robinson, R.G., 2022. Swell–shrink behaviour of fly ash-
stabilised expansive soils. In: Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers:
Ground Improvement. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgrim.21.00024.
Kumar, A., Walia, B.S., Bajaj, A., 2007. Influence of fly ash, lime, and polyester fibers on
compaction and strength properties of expansive soil. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 19 (3),
242–248.
Lakhdar, A., Rabhi, M., Ghnaya, T., Montemurro, F., Jedidi, N., Abdelly, C., 2009.
Effectiveness of compost use in salt-affected soil. J. Hazard. Mater. 171, 29–37.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.05.132.
Lekha, B.M., Sarang, G., Shankar, A.U.R., 2015. Effect of Electrolyte Lignin and Fly Ash
in Stabilizing Black Cotton Soil. Transp. Infrastruct. Geotechnol. 2, 87–101. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s40515-015-0020-0.
13
Cleaner Materials 6 (2022) 100151
Lin, B., Cerato, A.B., Andrew, S.M., Madden, M.E.E., 2013. Effect of fly ash on the
behavior of expansive soils: Microscopic analysis. Environ. Eng. Geosci. 19, 85–94.
https://doi.org/10.2113/gseegeosci.19.1.85.
Liu, F., Zhu, C., Yang, K., Ni, J., Hai, J., Gao, S., 2021. Effects of fly ash and slag content
on the solidification of river-dredged sludge. Mar. Georesour. Geotechnol. 39 (1),
65–73.
Lu, L., Liu, C., Qu, S., Zhang, M., 2022. Experimental study on the mechanical and
hydraulic behaviour of Fibre-Reinforced cemented soil with fly ash. Constr. Build.
Mater. 321, 126374.
Mahedi, M., Cetin, B., White, D.J., 2020. Cement, Lime, and Fly Ashes in Stabilizing
Expansive Soils: Performance Evaluation and Comparison. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 32
https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)mt.1943-5533.0003260.
Majumder, M., Saha, A.K., 2016. Artificial Neural Network 12, 13–16. doi:10.1007/978-
981-287-308-8_4.
Miao, Z., Wang, F., Zarei, C., Liu, Y., 2021. Experimental Investigation on Mechanical
Properties of Cemented Expansive Soil. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-79854-3_5.
Mir, B.A., Sridharan, A., 2014. Volume change behavior of clayey soil-fly ash mixtures.
Int. J. Geotech. Eng. 8, 72–83. https://doi.org/10.1179/1939787913Y.0000000004.
Mir, B.A., Sridharan, A., 2019. Mechanical behaviour of fly-ash-treated expansive soil.
Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. - Ground Improvement 172 (1), 12–24. https://doi.org/
10.1680/jgrim.16.00024.
Murmu, A.L., Dhole, N., Patel, A., 2020. Stabilisation of black cotton soil for subgrade
application using fly ash geopolymer. Road Mater. Pavement Des. 21 (3), 867–885.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14680629.2018.1530131.
Murmu, A.L., Patel, A., 2020. Studies on the Properties of Fly Ash-Rice Husk Ash-Based
Geopolymer for Use in Black Cotton Soils. Int. J. Geosynthetics Ground Eng. 6
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-020-00224-z.
Nalbantoǧlu, Z., 2004. Effectiveness of class C fly ash as an expansive soil stabilizer.
Constr. Build. Mater. 18, 377–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
conbuildmat.2004.03.011.
Nath, B.D., Molla, M.K.A., Sarkar, G., 2017. Study on Strength Behavior of Organic Soil
Stabilized with Fly Ash. Int. Scholarly Res. Notices 2017, 1–6. https://doi.org/
10.1155/2017/5786541.
Ohenoja, K., Rissanen, J., Kinnunen, P., Illikainen, M., 2020. Direct carbonation of peat-
wood fly ash for carbon capture and utilization in construction application. J. CO2
Util. 40, 101203.
Ouhadi, V.R., Yong, R.N., Amiri, M., Ouhadi, M.H., 2014. Pozzolanic consolidation of
stabilized soft clays. Appl. Clay Sci. 95, 111–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
clay.2014.03.020.
Ozdemir, M.A., 2016. Improvement in Bearing Capacity of a Soft Soil by Addition of Fly
Ash. Procedia Eng. 143, 498–505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.06.063.
Paikiey, A., Rabbani, A., 2017. Soil stabilisation using cement. Int. J. Civ. Eng. Technol. 8
https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-9062(77)90919-6.
Pal, S.K., Ghosh, A., 2014. Volume change behavior of fly ash-montmorillonite clay
mixtures. Int. J. Geomech. 14, 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-
5622.0000300.
Phan, V.-A., Pham, K.-A., 2018. Improvement in engineering properties of soft-soil using
cement and lime additives: A case study of southern Vietnam. IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth
Environ. Sci. 143, 012039.
Phani Kumar, B.R., Sharma, R.S., 2004. Effect of Fly Ash on Engineering Properties of
Expansive Soils. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 130 (7), 764–767. https://doi.org/
10.1061/(asce)1090-0241(2004)130:7(764).
Phanikumar, B.R., Dembla, S., Yatindra, A., 2021. Swelling Behaviour of an Expansive
Clay Blended With Fine Sand and Fly Ash. Geotech. Geol. Eng. 39 (1), 583–591.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-020-01480-6.
Phanikumar, B.R., Sharma, R.S., 2007. Volume change behavior of fly ash-stabilized
clays. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 19, 67–74. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561
(2007)19:1(67).
Pokharel, B., Siddiqua, S., 2021. Effect of calcium bentonite clay and fly ash on the
stabilization of organic soil from Alberta, Canada. Eng. Geol. 293, 106291.
Prabakar, J., Dendorkar, N., Morchhale, R.K., 2004. Influence of fly ash on strength
behavior of typical soils. Constr. Build. Mater. 18, 263–267. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2003.11.003.
Prasad, R., Kumar, D., 2015. CBR and Strength Aspects of Fly Ash-Granular Soil Mixtures
3, 943–953.
Rai, P., Qiu, W., Pei, H., Chen, J., Ai, X., Liu, Y., Ahmad, M., Wu, Y.-Z., 2021. Effect of Fly
Ash and Cement on the Engineering Characteristic of Stabilized Subgrade Soil: An
Experimental Study. Geofluids 2021, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/
1368194.
Rajabi, A.M., Ardakani, S.B., Abdollahi, A.H., 2021. The Effect of Nano-Iron Oxide on the
Strength and Consolidation Parameters of a Clay Soil: An Experimental Study.
Iranian J. Sci. Technol. – Trans. Civ. Eng. 45 (3), 1759–1768. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s40996-021-00640-9.
Ram, L.C., Masto, R.E., 2014. Fly ash for soil amelioration: A review on the influence of
ash blending with inorganic and organic amendments. Earth Sci. Rev. 128, 52–74.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2013.10.003.
Rasmussen, C., Heckman, K., Wieder, W.R., Keiluweit, M., Lawrence, C.R., Berhe, A.A.,
Blankinship, J.C., Crow, S.E., Druhan, J.L., Hicks Pries, C.E., Marin-Spiotta, E.,
Plante, A.F., Schädel, C., Schimel, J.P., Sierra, C.A., Thompson, A., Wagai, R., 2018.
Beyond clay: towards an improved set of variables for predicting soil organic matter
content. Biogeochemistry 137 (3), 297–306. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-018-
0424-3.
Ravallion, M., Chen, S., Sangraula, P., 2007. New Evidence on the Urbanization of Global
Poverty. Popul. Dev. Rev. 33, 667–701. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-
4457.2007.00193.x.
M.F. Noaman et al.
Renjith, R., Robert, D., Setunge, S., Costa, S., Mohajerani, A., 2021. Optimization of fly
ash based soil stabilization using secondary admixtures for sustainable road
construction. J. Cleaner Prod. 294, 126264.
Saha, S., Pal, S.K., 2012. Compressibility behavior of soil and fly ash used in successive
layers. Electron. J. Geotech. Eng. 17 T, 2659–2670.
Salim, N.M., 2021. Improvement of the Geotechnical Properties of Expansive Soils Using
Fly Ash. J. Southwest Jiaotong University 56. https://doi.org/10.35741/issn.0258-
2724.56.1.9.
Santos, F., Li, L., Li, Y., Amini, F., 2011. Geotechnical Properties of Fly Ash and Soil
Mixtures for Use in Highway Embankments, in: World of Coal Ash (WOCA)
Conference.
Saxena, A.S.N.K., 2018. A Comparative Study of Soil Stabilization Using Cement, Lime
and Fly Ash. Int. J. Sci. Res. (IJSR) 7.
Seco, A., Ramírez, F., Miqueleiz, L., García, B., 2011. Stabilization of expansive soils for
use in construction. Appl. Clay Sci. 51, 348–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
clay.2010.12.027.
Şenol, A., 2012. Effect of fly ash and polypropylene fibres content on the soft soils. Bull.
Eng. Geol. Environ. 71, 379–387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-011-0391-6.
Sharma, N.K., Swain, S.K., Sahoo, U.C., 2012. Stabilization of a Clayey Soil with Fly Ash
and Lime: A Micro Level Investigation. Geotech. Geol. Eng. 30, 1197–1205. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10706-012-9532-3.
Simatupang, M., Mangalla, L.K., Edwin, R.S., Putra, A.A., Azikin, M.T., Aswad, N.H.,
Mustika, W., 2020. The mechanical properties of fly-ash-stabilized sands.
Geosciences (Switzerland) 10 (4), 132.
Somnath Shil, S., 2015. Permeability and Volume Change Behaviour of Soil Stabilized
with Fly ash. Int. J. Eng. Res. Technol. (IJERT) 4, 840–846.
Taha, M.M.M., Feng, C.-P., Ahmed, S.H.S., 2021. Modification of mechanical properties
of expansive soil from north china by using rice husk ash. Materials 14 (11), 2789.
Tastan, E.O., Edil, T.B., Benson, C.H., Aydilek, A.H., 2011. Stabilization of Organic Soils
with Fly Ash. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 137, 819–833. https://doi.org/10.1061/
(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000502.
14
Cleaner Materials 6 (2022) 100151
Tavakol, M., 2019. Evaluation of Low-Quality Recycled Concrete Pavement Aggregates
for Subgrade Soil Stabilization. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
Toksöz Hozatlıoğlu, D., Yılmaz, I., 2021. Shallow mixing and column performances of
lime, fly ash and gypsum on the stabilization of swelling soils. Eng. Geol. 280,
105931.
Trivedi, J.S., Nair, S., Iyyunni, C., 2013. Optimum Utilization of Fly Ash for Stabilization
of Sub-Grade Soil using Genetic Algorithm. Procedia Eng. 51, 250–258. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.proeng.2013.01.034.
Turan, C., Javadi, A.A., Vinai, R., 2022. Effects of Class C and Class F Fly Ash on
Mechanical and Microstructural Behavior of Clay Soil—A Comparative Study.
Materials 15 (5), 1845.
Xu, G.-Z., Qiu, C.-C., Song, M.-M., Cao, Y.-P., Yin, J., 2021. Flocculant effects on fluidity
and strength behavior of cemented dredged clay with high water content. Mar.
Georesour. Geotechnol. 39 (8), 951–961. https://doi.org/10.1080/
1064119X.2020.1786198.
Yilmaz, I., Civelekoglu, B., 2009. Gypsum: An additive for stabilization of swelling clay
soils. Appl. Clay Sci. 44, 166–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2009.01.020.
Yin, J., Hu, M.-M., Xu, G.-Z., Han, W.-X., Miao, Y.-H., 2020. Effect of salinity on
rheological and strength properties of cement-stabilized clay minerals. Mar.
Georesour. Geotechnol. 38 (5), 611–620. https://doi.org/10.1080/
1064119X.2019.1608484.
Zha, F., Liu, S., Du, Y., Cui, K., 2008. Behavior of expansive soils stabilized with fly ash.
Nat. Hazards 47, 509–523. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-008-9236-4.
Zimar, Z., Robert, D., Zhou, A., Giustozzi, F., Setunge, S., Kodikara, J., 2022. Application
of coal fly ash in pavement subgrade stabilisation: A review. J. Environ. Manage.
312, 114926.
Zorluer, I., Gucek, S., 2014. The effects of marble dust and fly ash on clay soil. Sci. Eng.
Compos. Mater. 21, 59–67. https://doi.org/10.1515/secm-2012-0100.