Comparison between cement and fly ash geopolymer for stabilized marginal lateritic soil as road material
Abstract
The stabilisation of marginal lateritic soil using cement and fly ash (FA) geopolymer with a liquid alkaline activator was investigated. In this study, soil with satisfactory gradation and percentage of wear was selected. Only the soaked California Bearing Ratio (CBR) value must be enhanced to satisfy the requirement to form a suitable pavement subbase material. Field CBR tests were conducted for both geopolymer- and cement-stabilised soils used as pavement subbase materials. The soaked CBR of cement- and FA-geopolymer-stabilised marginal lateritic soil of various mixing percentages at 14 days satisfied the standard requirements specified by the government agencies in Thailand. Equations were established from field test data to predict the CBR at any testing time. The CBR development of cement-stabilised soil took more time than that of geopolymer-stabilised soil. The appropriate mixing percentages of cement and FA geopolymer with marginal lateritic soil were 3–5 and 4–8%, respectively. Microstructural analysis indicated that the stabilised soil exhibited a denser structure, which corresponded to the CBR increment. The findings of this study will enable the implementation of cement and FA geopolymer as successful stabilisers for pavement subbase materials.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Geopolymers are a viable alternative to conventional binders (cement) for soil stabilization.
“Geopolymers, or also known as alkali-activated binders, have recently emerged as a viable alternative to conventional binders (cement) for soil stabilization.”
From Potential of Soil Stabilization Using Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag (GGBFS) and Fly Ash via Geopolymerization Method: A Review (2022) · cites this paper as [52]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Abdila, S. R., Abdullah, M. M. A. B., Ahmad, R., Burduhos Nergis, D. D., Rahim, S. Z. A., Omar, M. F., Sandu, A. V., Vizureanu, P., & Syafwandi (2022) · Materials · doi:10.3390/ma15010375 · Cited by 140 · see citing works
- Authors
- Teerawattanasuk, C., & Voottipruex, P.
- Affiliations
- King Mongkut's University of Technology North Bangkok (TH)
- Corresponding author
- Voottipruex, Panich
- ORCID
- Voottipruex, Panich
- Venue
- International Journal of Pavement Engineering
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2018-01-11
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1264-1274
- ISSN
- 1029-8436 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-268X
- OpenAlex
- W2783569184
- Cited by
- 84
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 2.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Pavement Engineering (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- King Mongkut's University of Technology North Bangkok (KMUTNB-GOV-55-16)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Geotechnical and construction materials studies
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Concrete and Cement Materials Research
- Keywords
- geopolymer, fly ash, cement stabilization, lateritic soil, soil stabilization, pavement subbase, California bearing ratio, alkaline activator, CBR prediction, microstructure, road construction materials
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
