Cited by 332Concrete and Cement Materials ResearchGeotechnical Engineering and Soil StabilizationGeotechnical and construction materials studies

High calcium fly ash geopolymer stabilized lateritic soil and granulated blast furnace slag blends as a pavement base material

Phummiphan, Itthikorn, Horpibulsuk, Suksun, Rachan, Runglawan, Arulrajah, Arul, Shen, Shui-Long, Chindaprasirt, Prinya·2018·Journal of Hazardous Materials

Abstract

Granulated Blast Furnace Slag (GBFS) was used as a replacement material in marginal lateritic soil (LS) while class C Fly Ash (FA) was used as a precursor for the geopolymerization process to develop a low-carbon pavement base material at ambient temperature. Unconfined Compression Strength (UCS) tests were performed to investigate the strength development of geopolymer stabilized LS/GBFS blends. Scanning Electron Microscopy and X-ray Diffraction analysis were undertaken to examine the role of the various influencing factors on UCS development. The influencing factors studied included GBFS content, Na 2 SiO 3 :NaOH ratio (NS:NH) and curing time. The 7-day soaked UCS of FA geopolymer stabilized LS/GBFS blends at various NS:NH ratios tested was found to satisfy the specifications of the Thailand national road authorities. The GBFS replacement was found to be insignificant for the improvement of the UCS of FA geopolymer stabilized LS/GBFS blends at low NS:NH ratio of 50:50. Microstructural analysis indicated the coexistence of Calcium Silicate Hydrate (CSH) and Sodium Alumino Silicate Hydrate products in FA geopolymer stabilized LS/GBFS blends. This research enables GBFS, which is traditionally considered as a waste material, to be used as a replacement and partially reactive material in FA geopolymer pavement applications.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2017.07.067

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Phummiphan, I., Horpibulsuk, S., Rachan, R., Arulrajah, A., Shen, S.-L., & Chindaprasirt, P.
Affiliations
  • Suranaree University of Technology (TH)
  • Mahanakorn University of Technology (TH)
  • Swinburne University of Technology (AU)
  • Shanghai Jiao Tong University (CN)
  • Khon Kaen University (TH)
Corresponding author
Horpibulsuk, Suksun
Venue
Journal of Hazardous Materials
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-01
Volume
341
Pages
257-267
ISSN
0304-3894 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2740489562
Cited by
332
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 38 · 2025: 40 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 46 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 14
FWCI
20.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2021-06-15)
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Hazardous Materials (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Swinburne figshare (Swinburne University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Suranaree University of Technology (RTA5980005)
  • Department of Rural Roads
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Concrete and Cement Materials Research
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Geotechnical and construction materials studies
Keywords
fly ash geopolymer, granulated blast furnace slag, lateritic soil, pavement base materials, unconfined compressive strength, sodium silicate to sodium hydroxide ratio, curing time, calcium silicate hydrate, waste utilization, soil stabilization

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review