INNOVATIVE STEPS FOR EFFECTIVE UTILIZATION OF FLY ASH

Satyajit Patel1, Amruta Joshi2, Hrishikesh Shahane2

1
Associate Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, S. V. National Institute of Technology, Surat, Gujarat 395007, India
E-mail: satya24may@gmail.com; spatel@amd.svnit.ac.in
2
Doctoral student, Dept. of Civil Engineering, S. V. National Institute of Technology, Surat, Gujarat-395007, India.
Email: joshiamruta89@gmail.com, shahane.hrishi@gmail.com

ABSTRACT

The scarcity of natural materials for the construction of road pavements demands innovation in the field of
materials used for construction. In India, huge amount of fly ash is being produced in thermal power plants
which creats the problem for it’s safe disposal. Fly ash possesses pozzolanic properties hence it’s utilization
along with lime for road material appears to be one of the most efficient solutions for dealing with the critical
problem of fly ash disposal. Presently fly ash is being used to stabilize the problematic soils for its use as a
subgrade material which dos not result into significant economic benefit to power plants. In this study, Class F
fly ash + 5% lime (FAL) mix was chosen as optimum mix through laboratory investigations which satisfied the
minimum strength criteria stipulated by the Indian Road Congress (IRC) for a material to be used in subbase
layer of flexible pavement. To evaluate the field performance of the FAL mix, three different test sections of
flexible pavement with FAL mix in subbase layer were constructed as a part of State Highway (GJ SH-06) and
their performance was compared with that of conventional pavement section. Based on the structural evaluation
of the test sections using Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD), it was found that FAL mix exhibited better
service life ratio with significant cost savings (upto Rs. 12.25 lacs per km per lane) as compared to that of
conventional Granular Subbase material. Secondly, this study presents the simple four steps process for the
production of angular shaped high strength fly ash aggregate. The toughness, hardness and soundness value of
the aggregates made with this invented process are quite satisfactory as per the requirements of MORTH (2013)
for road aggregates and IS:9142-Part 2 (2018) for fly ash aggregates. This invention is expected to change the
scenario of fly ash utilization in the entire nation. It is estimated that the cost-saving of about 10% can be
obtained by replacing the natural stone aggregates with these fly ash aggregates without compromising the
quality of construction. Hence this study proposes the above two innovative methods for utilization of fly ash in
civil engineering constructions which not only provides strong material but also gives a very good economic
returns to the thermal power plants and road construction agencies.
Keywords- Fly ash aggregates, road pavement, Falling Weight Deflectometer, Fly ash-lime mix

PRIOR ART

The Indian coal is generating an excessive quantity of fly ash at thermal power stations in the order of 30 - 45%
of the weight of coal and as per the central electricity authority survey 2017-18, the utilization of this ash is
about 67% (CEA, 2018). With an aim to attain 100% fly ash utilization in a phased manner, the government has
also issued various notifications for fly ash utilization to thermal power stations. Researchers have been
developing various technologies in view of the complete utilization of fly ash produced. On the other hand, a
large quantity of natural aggregate is being used for the construction of roads, buildings, and mega-structures
that affect the environment. Construction of 1km long and 7m wide (two lane) road requires about 8500 tons of
stone aggregates. Production of 1 cubic meter of concrete requires about 1.7 tons of stone aggregates. As per
12th five year plan of India the demand of stone aggregates from civil engineering infrastructures shall range
between 2-10.3 billion tonnes by the year 2027. Some efforts have been made in order to find out an alternative
for natural coarse aggregates. Considering the scarcity of good quality natural construction material, it is
essential to replace the conventional materials in pavement construction with materials that are beneficial with
respect to the environment as well as the economy.
Tanyu et al. (2003) evaluated the structural condition of flexible pavement constructed with bottom ash and
foundry slag in the subbase layer. The California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of dredged material stabilized using fly
ash is comparable to the CBR of compacted silty sand or sand and places the material in a category of fair to
good for pavement subgrade applications (Yu et al. 2017). Incorporation of fly ash to weak soils improves
strength and stiffness quickly. Also no deterioration in subgrade strength with respect to age is observed for fly
ash-treated subgrades (Parsons and Kneebone 2005). For soft fine-grained subgrade soils treated with fly ash,
increase in fly ash content causes gain in CBR value of soil–fly ash mixture. (Edil et al. 2006; Tastan et al.
2011). Horpibulsuk et al. (2013) have studied strength development in silty-clay stabilized with fly ash and
calcium carbide residue. Kim et al. (2005) have investigated the geotechnical properties of fly ash and bottom
ash mixtures for using in highway embankment constructions. Xie et al. (2001) have studied the hardening
mechanism of alkali-activated Class F fly ash. Santos et al. (2011) evaluated the geotechnical properties of fly
ash-soil mixtures for use in road embankment construction. It has been concluded that fly ash can beneficially
be used in road construction.
Previously, many studies have suggested the use of fly ash at the subgrade layer of pavement which is beneficial
for improving the performance of problematic soils. However, no studies are available on the bulk utilization of
fly ash in the subbase layer of flexible pavement. The construction cost of subgrade and subbase layer of
flexible pavements is approximately Rs. 300/m3 and Rs. 1300/m3, respectively. Therefore, incorporation of fly
ash at the subbase layer of pavement will give the prospective option to conventional subbase material as well as
higher economic returns to the power sector and road construction agencies.
Buschmann et al. (1983) prepared shaped articles with fly ash such as pellets, bricks, tiles, blocks, etc. Styron
(1986) offers a process for the development of lightweight aggregates using fly ash, surfactant foam, accelerator
and additives by agglomeration process of forming of pelletized aggregate which sintered at 980oC. Walker’s
(1988) manufactured lightweight aggregate by pelletizing or granulating pulverized fuel ash or siliceous
material with a binder. Various researchers also disclose a process of making synthetic aggregate (Nayak 2001;
G.B. Singh 2003; Alqahtani 2014). Improvement in the mechanical properties of cold bonded aggregate by
accelerated curing method has been described through ten percent fine value (TPFV), crushing strength, and
CBR tests in the literature (Baykal et al. 2000; Manikandan et al. 2008; Narattha et al. 2018). The curing method
is the main and governing factor for the impact value and water absorption value of the pelletized aggregates.
Heat cured aggregates showed better Impact value than the ambient and solution curing aggregate at all ages
(Shivaprasad et al. 2018). Gomathi et al. (2015) reported positive strength gain properties in the case of fly ash
aggregate concrete specimens exposed to either accelerated steam or hot water curing. In the sintering process,
high energy is required; however, it results in high strength aggregates. Cold bonding offers an energy-efficient
eco-friendly alternative to sintering, but the strength of aggregates greatly depends on the ability of fly ash to
react with calcium hydroxide at room temperature to form a water-resistant bonding material, and pozzolanic
reactivity of fly ash used (Geetha and Ramamurthy, 2010).
Numerous processes of production of fly ash aggregates have been developed in the past and some of these were
commercialized. Most of these processes are based on the creation of a ceramic matrix (sintering process)
(Saraber et al., 2012). The drawbacks of the above methods consist of using more energy and complicated
process to make the aggregates from the mixture of fly ash and various additives. These processes are also very
costly and time-consuming resulting in non-use of these aggregates on a large scale in civil engineering
applications. It is also found that the pelletization process manufactures round-shaped aggregates that have
negligible interlocking properties leading to lower load-bearing capacity [Fig.4(a)].

Research Significance

In the first part, this study showcases the early field performance of test sections constructed with fly ash-lime
mix in the subbase layer of flexible pavement. These studies comprise of the structural evaluation of 4 different
test sections using FWD and compare the field performance, service life and cost-efficacy of fly ash-lime mix as
a subbase material of flexible pavement with that of the conventional Granular Subbase (GSB).
Secondly, in this study efforts are made for production of angular shaped high strength fly ash aggreagtes with
accelerated curing process to overcome the demerits of sintered fly ash aggregates. The physical properties of
these fly ash aggregates developed by the author are compared with that of sintered aggregates and natural
aggregates in this paper.

MATERIALS AND MIX PROPORTIONS

Fly ash generated from the use of bituminous coal was collected from Reliance Industries Limited, Surat,
Gujarat, India. On the basis of SiO2, Al2O3 and Fe2O3 content, this fly ash was categorized as ‘class F’ as per
ASTM C618 (2018). The CaO content of this fly ash was 9%. Commercially available hydrated lime having
CaO content of 63% was used as an additive throughout the study.
Based on the various strength parameters, such as unconfined compressive strength (UCS) and California
Bearing Ratio (CBR) carried out on different trial mixtures of fly ash and lime, fly ash + 5% lime (FAL) mix
was chosen as the optimum mix in accordance with the guidelines of Indian Road Congress (IRC) for subbase
layer of flexible pavement. This optimum mix was adopted for use in subbase layer for construction of the three
test sections as a part of State Highway.
For production of high strength fly ash aggregates various laboratory test parameters such as impact value,
hardness and soundness of aggregates prepared from different trial mixtures of fly ash and lime were
investigated. Based on these test results fly ash + 4% lime mix was chosen as the optimum mix to produce fly
ash aggregates which meets the strength and durability criteria stipulated by the MORTH (2013).

EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM

Utilization of fly ash for construction of road subbase

Unconfined compression strength test on trial fly ash-lime mixes was carried out in accordance with IS:2720-
Part 10 (1991). California Bearing Ratio test was carried out as per IS:2720-Part 16 (2011). The specimens were
cured for 7 days, followed by 4 days’ soaking in water, as stipulated in IRC 51 (1992). This was followed by an
evaluation of the field performance of test sections (3.5 m wide and 50 m long) constructed with a fly ash-lime
mix in the subbase layer of flexible pavement.
During construction, field CBR and lightweight deflectometer (LWD) tests performed on subbase layers during
the construction phase for ensuring quality control. LWD is a compact, portable device that is used to determine
the stiffness characteristics of each layer in field. In this test, the in-situ composite modulus of unbound layer
below testing plate is obtained. Determination of the field CBR was carried out according to IS:2720-Part
31(1990).
After construction, FWD tests were conducted for overall structural evaluation of pavement in accordancve with
IRC 115 (2014). FWD testing is a nondestructive approach to perform the structural evaluation of entire
pavement crust; subsequently aiding in computing the remaining service life of existing pavement which is the
most cruicial part in pavement rehabilitation and management system. Due to the aforementioned features,
FWD testing has leverage over other nondestructive testing methods. The FWD (Model: Dynatest8002,
Denmark) used in this study has loading plates of 300 mm and 450 mm diameter, load cell (range: 7 – 150 kN)
and seven deflection sensors (velocity transducer) with a maximum range of 2,000 microns. A transient load is
applied to the pavement surface and surface deflections are measured by the deflection sensors. FWD test data
comprises of the peak deflection (D0) which indicates the overall pavement performance, corresponding to multi
level impulse loads. Stiffness moduli of the individual layers of pavement are computed from the deflection
basin using back-calculation software ELMOD 6 (Dynatest, Denmark).
Four test sections (3.5 m wide and 50 m long) were constructed as part of the widening of Olpad- Sahol State
Highway (GJ SH-6) in Surat District, Gujarat, India. For all pavement sections, a standard design for
conventional flexible pavement was prepared as per IRC 37 (2012) for 4% CBR and design traffic of 75 million
standard axles (MSA). The performance of three different thicknesses (200, 300, and 400 mm) of the optimum
FAL subbase layers were compared with a conventional GSB layer (330 mm thickness). The test sections with
conventional granular material and fly ash-lime mix in subbase are shown in Fig.1. The dry mixing of fly ash-
lime in the field during construction, constructed test sections and field testing by FWD after construction are
shown in Fig 2.

Fig. 1 Test section in the field (a) with conventional GSB; (b) with FAL mix in subbase layer

(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 2 (a) Test sections; (b) Dry mixing; (c) Field testing by FWD
Production of angular shaped fly ash aggregates
Detailed stepwise process for the production of angular shaped fly ash aggregate is explained below and the
flow sheet is shown in Fig.3.
1. Homogeneous mixing of dry fly ash with a 4% Lime was done. The water corresponding to OMC
determined as per IS:2720-Part 8 (2015) was then added and mixed thoroughly. The mixing process was
continued until a homogeneous mix was obtained. Depending on the type of fly ash proper mix design
should be carried out.

Fig. 3 A four-step process for the production of angular shaped fly ash aggregates (Patel and Shahane
2019)
2. The next step consists of the preparation of the rectangular prism having a density equal to the maximum
dry density of the mix determined as per IS:2720-Part 8 (2015) and size of 20cm x 10cm x 8cm by means
of hydraulic static press compaction of the said mixture.
3. Curing of a said rectangular prism was done by two steps initially; the crude article is kept in hot air with a
temperature of 50oC for 6±1 hrs. Then the article is kept in a hot water bath at a temperature of 65 to 75 oC
for 24hrs.
4. The next step of the present method is the crushing of the cured rectangular prism and then sieving through
the standard size screens to obtain the different sizes of coarse aggregates (Fig. 4b).
 (a) (b)
Fig. 4 (a) Sintered fly ash aggregates (from literature); (b) Angular shaped fly ash aggregates developed by the
author
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Utilization of fly ash for construction of road subbase

The UCS value of FA+5% lime and Fly ash+7% lime mix was found to be 2.93 MPa and 3.53 MPa
respectively. As per IRC SP 20 (2002), the minimum laboratory UCS of the fly ash–lime mixture after 28 days
curing should be 1.5 MPa for use in the subbase layer of flexible pavement. Even though both mixes satisfy the
IRC criteria, fly ash + 5% lime (FAL) was chosen as the optimum economical mixture. The California bearing
ratio for the FAL mix was found to be 22% and 57% at 0 days curing and 7 days curing respectively. As per
MORTH (2013) specifications, a minimum CBR of 30% is essential for a material to be used as subbase
material in flexible pavement.
From LWD test on field during construction, the composite modulus of GSB layer was found to be 55MPa
whereas for FAL mix subbase having 200mm, 300 mm and 400 mm thickness the composite moduli were found
to be 169 MPa, 187 MPa and 206 MPa, respectively. It is found that the in-situ composite moduli of subbase
layers with FAL mix are significantly higher than that of conventional GSB. An increase in the thickness of
subbase layers from 200 mm to 400 mm showed considerable improvement in the in-situ composite modulus.
The field CBR value for conventional granular subbase and FAL mix subbase was found to be 32% and 85%,
respectively.
The service life ratio (SLR) of pavements with FAL mix in subbase layers compared to conventional control
section based on fatigue and rutting criteria is given by Equation 1 and respectively as per IRC: 37 – 2012:

Eq. 1

Eq. 2

Where εt1 and εt2 = maximum horizontal tensile strains; developed at the bottom of a dense bituminous mix; ε V1
and εV2 = maximum vertical compressive strain developed at the top of subgrade for the control section and
section with FAL at subbase layer respectively. The strain values were taken from the FEM plots of back-
calculation output from ELMOD 6. It can be seen from the Table 1, the test section with a 400mm thick FAL
mix subbase layer has highest SLR of 1.56.
 Table 1: Field test results of trial sections with fly ash-lime mix in the sub-base layer (replacement of GSB)

GSB Fly ash + 5% Lime Mix

Parameters Load
330mm 200mm 300mm 400mm
40kN 0.781 0.434 0.384 0.334
Peak deflection on top of pavement D0 (mm) 55kN 0.932 0.892 0.742 0.705
70kN 1.149 1.026 0.907 0.868
Field CBR (unsoaked) - 32% 85% (3 day curing)

Stiffness modulus – FWD test - 108 MPa 376 MPa (28 day curing)
Rutting 1.00 1.11 2.17 3.45
Service life ratio
Fatigue 1.00 1.44 1.51 1.56
Cost for 4m wide subbase layer per km in lacs
17.53 5.28 7.93 10.56
(Rs.)
Cost-saving per km per lane in lacs (Rs.) -- 12.25 9.61 6.97

The peak deflection (D0) obtained in the field from FWD testing after construction gives a substantial indication
of the overall structural performance of road pavement. From the table, test sections with FAL subbase layer
show appreciably lower D0 when compared with that of conventional GSB. For a standard impulse load of 40
kN, a section with a 400 mm thick FAL subbase layer exhibited lowest D0, which is 57% less than that of the
conventional test section with the GSB layer. The stiffness moduli for conventional granular subbase and FAL
mix subbase were found to be 108 MPa and 376 MPa, respectively.
Apart from this, the construction cost estimate was prepared based on the current schedule of rates of the Public
Works Department (PWD) in the state of Gujarat, India. The estimated construction cost of 4m wide subbase
layer for conventional GSB and different thicknesses of FAL subbase is shown in Table 1. When conventional
GSB is replaced with proposed mix, cost savings per km per lane for 200mm, 300mm and 400mm thick FAL
mix subbase are Rs. 12.25 lacs, 9.61 lacs and 6.97 lacs, respectively.

Production of angular shaped fly ash aggregates

As explained previously, the production of fly ash aggregates was carried out in laboratory. The various tests
were carried out on these aggregates; Table 2 presents the physical properties of aggregates made with the said
process. Specific Gravity of aggregates was found as 2.1. Whereas bulk density was recorded as 980 kg/m 3, this
is much lower than that of natural aggregate bulk density. On the other hand, as compared to natural aggregates
water absorption was found to be much higher as 12%, however, it is well within the prescribed limit of IS
9142: Part-2 (2018) for fly ash aggregates.
If the water absorption of the aggregates determined as per IS: 2386-Part 3 (2002) is greater than 2%, the
aggregates shall be tested for Wet Aggregate Impact Value (AIV) as per the IS:5640 (1998), therefore wet
impact value as toughness is reported in the table. This value found as 23%, which is quite satisfactory as
compared to natural aggregates and also fulfill the specifications of the MORTH (2013) for road aggregates and
requirement of IS:9142 (2018) as structural concrete aggregates.
Los Angeles Abrasion Value was found as 35%. However, these values also fulfill the requirement of MORTH
(2013) for road aggregate and IS:9142 (2018) for structural concrete aggregates. As the water absorption value
of the coarse aggregate was reported greater than 2%, the soundness test shall be carried out on the aggregate as
per IS:2386-Part 5 (2002). The study shows very conservative results of soundness value as 9.5% in MgSO4
after 5 Cycles. Table 2 shows the comparison of properties of proposed fly ash aggregates with sintered
aggregates and natural aggregates along with MORTH (2013) and IS:9142 Part-2 (2018) standard
specifications.
Table 2 Typical physical properties of an aggregate made in this study
Fly Ash
Sintered Fly MORTH- IS 9142 (Part
Aggregates Natural
Parameters Ash 2013 2) 2018
proposed by the Aggregates*
Aggregates* Requirements Requirements#
author
Specific Gravity 2.1 2.9 -- --

Bulk Density (kg/m3) 980 650-1050 1350 -- ≤ 950

Water absorption 12% 15-30 0.5-2% -- ≤ 18%

Toughness-
23% 15-55 12-20% ≤ 30% ≤ 40%
Wet Impact value
Hardness- Los Angeles
35% 29 10-18 ≤ 40% ≤ 40%
Abrasion Value
Soundness in MgSO4
9.5% -- 1-5 ≤ 18% ≤ 18%
(5Cycles)
Production Process Simple Tedious -- -- --
Temperature Required
70-80oC 900-1200oC -- -- --
for Hardening
Cubical (Better
Rounded
interlocking and
Shaped of Aggregates (Inferior -- -- --
load-bearing
interlocking)
capacity)
Production Cost Rs. 600-700/ton Rs. 1700/ton
Rs. 900/m3 -- --
(Aprox.) Rs. 650-750/m3 Rs. 1870/m3
* From Literature
# IS 9142 (Part 2) 2018- Artificial Lightweight Aggregate for Concrete-Specification Part-2 Sintered Fly Ash
Coarse Aggregate

CONCLUSIONS

1. During construction using LWD, composite modulus of FAL mix was found to be 56%, 60% and 64%
greater for 200 mm, 300 mm and 400 mm thick FAL subbase, respectively, than that of GSB. After
construction using FWD, the stiffness modulus of FAL mix was found to be 3.5 times higher than that
of GSB.
2. The test sections with a 400 mm thick FAL subbase layer showed the highest SLR of 1.56.
Replacement of conventional GSB material with FAL mix resulted in the significant cost savings upto
Rs. 12.25 lacs per km per lane.
3. On the basis of field performance of constructed test test sections, it was found that FAL can
effectively replace conventional GSB. The incorporation of FAL mix in the subbase layer of pavement
not only provides good quality material but also gives higher economic returns to the power sector and
road construction agencies.
4. The present study recommends a simple and cost-effective four-step process for the production of
angular shaped high strength fly ash aggregates. The proposed fly ash aggregates are 16% cheaper than
natural aggregates and 60% cheaper than sintered fly ash aggregates.
 5. Proposed angular shaped fly ash aggregates are sufficiently tough, strong, hard, durable and provide
effective interlocking which fulfills the specifications MORTH (2013) for road aggregate and
requirement of IS:9142 (2018) for structural concrete aggregates.
6. Fly ash and hot water from cooling towers is available free of cost at thermal power plants. Therefore,
the hot water curing method is proposed as a commercially feasible method for the production of
angular shaped fly ash aggregate.

REFERENCES

1. Alqahtani, F. K., Khan, M. I., & Ghataora, G. (2014). “Synthetic aggregate for use in concrete.” U.S.
Patent No. 8921463 B1, USPTO, USA.
2. Sarabèr, A., Overhof, R., Green, T., & Pels, J. (2012). Artificial lightweight aggregates as utilization for
future ashes–A case study. Waste management, 32(1), 144-152.
3. ASTM. (2017). “Standard Specification for coal fly ash and raw or calcined natural pozzolan for use as a
mineral admixture in concrete.” ASTM C618, West Conshohocken, PA.
4. Bansdhar Nayak (2001) “A process for manufacture of cold bonded aggregate pellet from fly ash of
thermal power plant for constructional use.” Indian Patent No. 216945, Patent and Trademark Office, New
Delhi, India.
5. Buschmann et al. (1983). “Shaped cementitious products.” U.S. Patent No. 4377414, USPTO, USA.
6. CEA (2018) “Report on fly ash generation at coal/lignite based thermal power station and its utilization in
the country for the year 2017-18” Central electricity authority, New Delhi, Ministry of Power, Government
of India.
7. Narattha, C., & Chaipanich, A. (2018). Phase characterizations, physical properties and strength of
environment-friendly cold-bonded fly ash lightweight aggregates. Journal of cleaner production, 171,
1094-1100.
8. Edil, T. B., Acosta, H. A., & Benson, C. H. (2006). Stabilizing soft fine-grained soils with fly ash. Journal
of materials in civil engineering, 18(2), 283-294.
9. Baykal, G., & Döven, A. G. (2000). Utilization of fly ash by pelletization process; theory, application areas
and research results. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 30(1), 59-77.
10. Gur Baksh Singh (2003). “An apparatus and a process for production of synthetic lightweight aggregate.”
Indian Patent No. 228364, Patent and Trademark Office, New Delhi, India.
11. Horpibulsuk, S., Phetchuay, C., Chinkulkijniwat, A., & Cholaphatsorn, A. (2013). Strength development in
silty clay stabilized with calcium carbide residue and fly ash. Soils and Foundations, 53(4), 477-486.
12. Indian Standard (1983). Methods of Test for Soils: Determination of Water Content–Dry Density Relation
Using Heavy Compaction. IS 2720 (Part 8). New Delhi
13. Indian Standard (1987). Methods of Tests for Soil: Laboratory Determination of California Bearing Ratio.
IS 2720 (Part 16). New Delhi
14. Indian Standard (2018). Artificial Lightweight Aggregate for Concrete-Specification. Sintered Fly Ash
Coarse Aggregate. IS 9142 (Part 2). New Delhi.
15. Indian Standard (1991). Methods of Test for Soils: Determination of Unconfined Compressive Strength. IS
2720 (Part 10). New Delhi
16. Indian Standard (1998). Methods of Test for Determining Aggregate Impact Value of Soft Coarse
Aggregates. IS 5640. New Delhi
17. Indian Standard (2006). Methods of Test for Soils: Field Determination of California Bearing Ratio. IS
2720 (Part 31). New Delhi
18. Indian Standard (2003). Method of Tests for Aggregates for Concrete: Specific Gravity, Density, Voids,
Absorption and Bulking. IS 2386 (Part 3). New Delhi
19. Indian Standard (2002). Method of Tests for Aggregates for Concrete: Soundness. IS 2386 (Part 5). New
Delhi
20. Indian Road Congress (2012). “Guidelines for the design of flexible pavements.” IRC 37, New Delhi.
21. Indian Road Congress (2014). “Guidelines for Structural Evaluation and Strengthening of Flexible Road
Pavements using Falling Weight Deflectometer Technique.” IRC 115. New Delhi.
22. Indian Road Congress (2002). “Rural road manual.” IRC SP 20. New Delhi, India,
23. Shivaprasad, K. N., & Das, B. B. (2018). Determination of optimized geopolymerization factors on the
properties of pelletized fly ash aggregates. Construction and Building Materials, 163, 428-437.
24. Kim, B., Prezzi, M., & Salgado, R. (2005). Geotechnical properties of fly and bottom ash mixtures for use
in highway embankments. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 131(7), 914-924.
25. MORTH. (2013). Specification for Road and Bridge works. Indian Road Congress, New Delhi, 2013.
26. Gomathi, P., & Sivakumar, A. (2015). Accelerated curing effects on the mechanical performance of cold
bonded and sintered fly ash aggregate concrete. Construction and building Materials, 77, 276-287.
27. Parsons, R. L., & Kneebone, E. (2005). Field performance of fly ash stabilised subgrades. Proceedings of
the Institution of Civil Engineers-Ground Improvement, 9(1), 33-38.
28. Manikandan, R., & Ramamurthy, K. (2008). Effect of curing method on characteristics of cold bonded fly
ash aggregates. Cement and concrete composites, 30(9), 848-853.
29. Geetha, S., & Ramamurthy, K. (2010). Environmental friendly technology of cold-bonded bottom ash
aggregate manufacture through chemical activation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(15), 1563-1569.
30. Santos, F., Li, L., Li, Y., & Amini, F. (2011, May). Geotechnical properties of fly ash and soil mixtures for
use in highway embankments. In Proc. of the World of Coal Ash (WOCA) Conference, Denver, USA (pp.
125-136).
31. Satyajit Patel, and Hrishikesh Shahane (2019). “Method for producing angular shaped fly ash aggregate.”
Indian Patent No. 201921002003, Patent and Trademark Office, New Delhi, India.
32. Styron, (1986). “Light-weight aggregate.” U.S. Patent No. 4624711, USPTO, USA.
33. Tanyu, B. F., Kim, W. H., Edil, T. B., & Benson, C. H. (2003). Comparison of laboratory resilient modulus
with back-calculated elastic moduli from large-scale model experiments and FWD tests on granular
materials. In Resilient modulus testing for pavement components. ASTM International.
34. Tastan, E. O., Edil, T. B., Benson, C. H., & Aydilek, A. H. (2011). Stabilization of organic soils with fly
ash. Journal of geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 137(9), 819-833.
35. Walker, (1988). “Process for manufacturing a lightweight aggregate.” U.S. Patent No. 4770831, USPTO,
USA.
36. Xie, Z., & Xi, Y. (2001). Hardening mechanisms of an alkaline-activated class F fly ash. Cement and
Concrete Research, 31(9), 1245-1249.
37. Yu H, Yin J, Soleimanbeigi A, Likos WJ (2017) Effects of curing time and fly ash content on properties of
stabilized dredged material. J Mater Civ Eng, ASCE, 29(10):04017199 Yu, H., Yin, J., Soleimanbeigi, A.,
& Likos, W. J. (2017). Effects of curing time and fly ash content on properties of stabilized dredged
material. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 29(10), 04017199.