ZEMİNLERDE TEK FAZLI GEOPOLİMERİZASYON UYGULAMASI VE GEOPOLİMERİZASYONUN SERBEST BASINÇ MUKAVEMETİ ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİSİ

Abstract

Bu çalışmada likit aktivatörler ile yapılan tek fazlı geopolimerizasyon sonucu kil, killi kum, kum
zeminlerde gözlenen mukavemet değişimleri incelenmiştir. Örnek grupları deney planına uygun olarak 7
günden 90 güne değişen sürelerde küre tabi tutulmuştur. Geopolimerizasyon metodunun, aktivatör
içeriğinin ve oranlarının, kür sürelerinin ve donma-çözünme çevrimlerinin serbest basınç mukavemeti
üzerindeki etkisi belirlenmiştir. Farklı likit aktivatör içeriklerinin başarısının, zeminin türü ve
geopolimerizasyon metodundan önemli ölçüde etkilendiği bulunmuştur. Kum ve killi kum örneklerinde
optimum su içeriği kadar likit aktivatör kullanılması iyileştirme sağlarken, kil zemin örneklerinde
optimum su içeriğinin yaklaşık iki katı kadar likit aktivatör kullanılması mukavemeti artırmaktadır.
Mukavemet ayrıca kür süresinin uzaması ile artmaktadır. İşlem görmeyen kil zeminin mukavemeti 315
kPa iken 90 gün sonunda aynı zemin örnekleri 1114 kPa mukavemete ulaşmıştır. Donma-çözünme
çevrimleri uygulanan zeminlerde ise belirgin bir mukavemet azalımı görülmüştür. En fazla mukavemet
kaybı yine kil zeminlerde gözlemlenmiş ve 3 çevrim sonunda mukavemet %55 kadar azalmıştır.

Keywords

• Kil
• Killi kum
• Kum
• Aktivatör
• Serbest basınç mukavemeti

A Single Phase Geopolimerization Application In Soils And The Effect Of Geopolimerization On The Unconfined Compressive Strength

Abstract

In this study, single phase geopolymerization with liquid activators were applied to clay,
clayey sand and sand soils and unconfined compressive strength developments due to this process was
investigated. The samples were subjected to curing times varying between 7 and 90 days of curing in
accordance with the experimental programme. The effects of geopolimerization metod, activator content
and rate, curing time and of freeze-thaw cycles on the unconfined compressive strength of the soils were
determined. It has been found that the success of different liquid activator contents is significantly affected
by the type of soil and geopolymerization method. It was sufficient to treat sand and clayey sand samples
with liquid activator amounts that are equal to the optimum water contents of the soils, while the use of
liquid activator approximately twice the optimum water content in clay soil samples was necessary to
increase the strength. The increase in the curing times also increased the strength of the samples. While
the untreated clay samples had an unconfined compressive strength of 315 kPa, after 90 days of curing,
1114 kPa strength was observed. The application of freeze-thaw cycles decreased the strength of the soils.
Major loss of strength was observed in clay soils with a decrease of %55 strength.

Keywords

• Clay
• Clayey sand
• Sand
• Activator
• Unconfined compressive strength

References

1. Abdullah, M.S., Ahmad F., Mustafa Al Bakri, A.M., 2015, “Geopolymer Application in Soil: A Short Review”, Applied Mechanics and Materials, Vol. 754-755, pp. 378-381.
2. Adhikari, S., Khattak, M.J., Adhikari, B., 2018, “Mechanical Characteristics of Soil RAP-Geopolymer Mixtures for Road Base and Subbase Layers”, International Journal of Pavement Engineering.
3. Alshaaer, M., 2013, “Two-Phase Geopolymerization of Kaolinite-Based Geopolymer”. Applied Clay Science, Vol. 86, pp. 162-168.
4. Andersland, O.B., Ladanyi, B., 2003, Frozen Ground Engineering, John Wiley and Sons Ltd., ASCE.
5. ASTM D560, 2016, Standard Test Methods for Freezing and Thawing Compacted Soil-Cement Mixtures, pp.6.
6. ASTM D698, 2012, Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Standard Effort (12 400 ft-lbf/ft3 (600 kN-m/m3)), pp. 13.
7. ASTM D2166, 2016, Standard Test Method for Unconfined Compressive Strength of Cohesive Soil, pp. 7. ASTM D2487, 2017, Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System), pp. 11.
8. Ayyappan, A., Palanikumar, S., Kumar, D., Vinoth, M., 2017, “Influence of Geopolymers in The Stabilization of Clay Soil”, International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Engineering Research, Vol. 5, pp 108-120.

9. Binal, A., Kasapoğlu, K.E., Gökçeoğlu, C., 1997. “The surficial physical deterioration behaviour of Neogene volcanosedimentary rocks of Eskişehir-Yazılıkaya”. In: Marinos, Koukis, Tsiambaos, Stournaras (Eds.), Proceedings of Engineering Geology and the Environment, A.A. Balkema Publishers, The Netherlands, pp. 3065–3069.
10. Bing-hui M., Zhu, H., Xue-min, C., Yan, H., Si-yu, G., 2014, “Effect of Curing Temperature on Geopolymerization of Metakaolin-Based Geopolymers”, Applied Clay Science, Vol. 99, pp. 144- 148.
11. Eskişar, T., Altun, S., Kalıpcılar,İ., 2015, “Assessment of strength development and free-ze–thaw performance of cement treated clays at different water contents”, Cold Reg.Sci. Technol., 111, pp. 50–59.
12. FHWA (Federal Highway Administration), 2006, “Geotechnical Aspects of Pavements Reference Manual”,U.S. Department of Transportation Publication No. FHWA NHI-05-037, May 2006, NHI Course No. 132040.
13. Ghadir, P., Ranjbar N., 2018, “Clayey Soil Stabilization Using Geopolymer and Portland Cement”, Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 188, pp. 361-371.
14. Heah, C.Y., Kamarudin, H., Mustafa Al Bakri, A.M., Binhussain, M., Lugman, M., Nizar, I.K., Ruzaidi, C.M., Liew, Y.M., 2011, “Effect of Curing Profile on Kaolin-based Geopolymers”, Physics Procedia, Vol. 22, pp. 305 – 311.
15. Heah, C.Y., Kamarudin, H., Mustafa Al Bakri, A.M., Binhussain, M., Lugman, M., Nizar, I.K., Ruzaidi, C.M., Liew, Y.M., 2012, “Study on Solids – to-Liquid and Alkaline Activator Ratios on Kaolin – Based Geopolmers”, Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 35, pp. 912-922.
16. Holtz, R.D., Kovacs, W.D., 1981, An Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 07632, New Jersey.
17. Konrad, J.M., Samson, M., 2000, “Hydraulic Conductivity of Kaolinite–Silt Mixtures Subjected to Closed- System Freezing and Thaw Consolidation”, Can. Geotech. J., Vol. 37, pp. 857–869.
18. Kravchenko, E., Liu, J.K., Niu, W.W., Zhang, S.J., 2018. “Performance of clay soil reinforced with fibers subjected to freeze-thaw cycles”, Cold Reg. Sci. Technol. 153, pp.18–24.
19. Moayedi, H., Huat, B.K., Moayedi, F., Asadi, A., Parsaie, A., 2011, “Effect of Sodium Silicate on Unconfined Compressive Strength of Soft Clay”, EJGE, Vol. 16, pp. 289-295.
20. Morsy, M.S., Alsayed, S.H., Al-Salloun, Y., Almusallam, T., 2014, “Effect of Sodium Silicate to Sodium Hydroxide Ratios on Strength and Microstructure of Fly Ash Geopolymer Binder”, Arabian Journal For Science and Engineering, Vol. 39, pp. 4333–4339.
21. Palanisamy, P., Suresh Kumar, P., 2018, “Effect of Molarity in Geopolymer Earth Brick Reinforced with Fibrous Coir Wastes Using Sandy Soil and Quarry Dust As Fine Aggregate. (Case study)”, Case Studies in Construction Materials, Vol. 8, pp. 347-358.
22. Phetchuay, C., Horpibulsuk, S., Arulrajah, A., Suksiripattanapong, C., Udomchai, A., 2016, “Strength Development in Soft Marine Clay Stabilized by Fly Ash and Calcium Carbide Residue Based Geopolymer”, Applied Clay Science, Vol. 127–128, pp. 134–142.
23. Rovnanik, P., 2010, “Effect of Curing Temperature on The Development of Hard Structure of Metakaolinbased Geopolymer”, Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 24, pp. 1176–1183.
24. Somna, K., Jaturapitakkul, C., Kajitvichyanukul, P., Chindaprasir, P., 2011, “NaOH-activated Ground Fly Ash Geopolymer Cured at Ambient Temperature”, Fuel, Vol. 90, pp. 2118–2124.
25. Swain, K., 2015, Stabilization of Soil Using Geopolymer and Biopolymer, National Institute of Technology, Rourkela.
26. Uddin, M.N., Saraswathy, V., 2018, “ A Comparative Study on Clay and Red Soil Based Geopolymer Mortar”, Civil Engineering and Architecture, Vol. 6, pp. 34-39.
27. Wong, L., Haug, M., 1991, “ Cyclical Closed-System Freeze-Thaw Permeability Testing of Soil Liner and Cover Materials”, Can. Geotech. J., Vol. 28, pp. 784-793.
28. Zhang, M., Guo, H., El-Korchi, T., Zhang, G., Tao, M., 2013, “Experimental Feasibility Study of Geopolymer As The Next-Generation Soil Stabilizer”, Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 47, pp. 1468–1478.