3.8 Article

Hydraulic conductivity and undrained shear strength of clay-construction and demolition solid waste materials mixtures

期刊

SOILS AND ROCKS
卷 44, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

BRAZILIAN ASSOC SOIL MECH & GEOTECH ENGN, PORTUGUESE GEOTECH SOC
DOI: 10.28927/SR.2021.062221

关键词

Clay; Construction and demolition material; Undrained shear strength; Hydraulic conductivity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that adding different construction and demolition materials to clay reduces soil plasticity, decreases undrained shear strength, and increases hydraulic conductivity.
The study aims to investigate the effects of three different construction and demolition materials (CDMs), including crushed waste asphalt (CWA), crushed waste bricks (CWB), and crushed waste concrete (CWC), on some geotechnical properties of low plastic clayey soil, particularly, the undrained shear strength (S-u) and the hydraulic conductivity (k). A set of experimental tests were performed on clayey soil and on clayey soil-CDM mixtures at mixing ratios of 5%, 10%, 15%, and 20% by dry weight. The results show that the soil plasticity decreases as the CDMs increase. Quantitatively, it is found a maximum of 12%, 6%, and 6% decrease in the liquid limits (LL) and a maximum of 9%, 4%, and 6% decrease in the plasticity limit (PI) of the mixtures with 20% of CWA, CWB, and CWC, respectively. The results of the S-u estimated empirically from the fall cone tests show that the S-u decreases as the CDMs increase. The S-u reduces by approximately 10% and 2% u of the mixtures with 20% CWA and CWB, respectively. But the S-u is not affected by the CWC additive for water content lower than approximately 35%. The k value increases as the CDMs increase. The results show that the reported k value increases by 75%, 79%, and 247% of the mixtures with 20% of CWA, CWB, and CWC, respectively. Additionally, the k values obtained from the consolidation test confirm the findings of the effect of the CDMs on the coefficient of hydraulic conductivity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据