Investigation of geotechnical properties and bearing capacity performance of blast furnace slag

Develioğlu, İnci; Pulat, Hasan Fırat

doi:10.5505/pajes.2017.82574

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 2 publications

(2 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The cohesive soil and BFS mix lower the liquid and plasticity limits [ 65 ]. The internal friction angle of BFS is 39°–43°, and specific gravity is between 2.29 up to 3.35 [ 63 , 66 , 67 ]. The CBR tests on BFS have shown that the bearing capacity is dependent on soil arrangement and inter-particle forces like matric suction and dilatancy).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Compacted Anthropogenic Materials as Backfill for Buried Pipes

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Buried pipe design requires knowledge about the fill to design the backfill structure. The interaction between the backfill envelope and the pipe impacts the structural performance of the buried pipe. The backfill material and compaction level respond to the backfill’s overall strength and, therefore, for pipe-soil interaction. The strength of backfill material is described in terms of modulus of soil reaction E’ and constrained modulus Eode. As the E’ is an empirical parameter, the Eode can be measured in the laboratory by performing the oedometer tests. In this study, we have performed extensive oedometric tests on five types of anthropogenic materials (AM). Three of them are construction and demolition materials (C–D materials) namely, recycled concrete aggregate (RCA), crushed brick (CB), and recycled asphalt pavement (RAP). Two of them are industrial solid wastes (ISW) namely, fly ash and bottom slag mix (FA + BS) and blast furnace slag (BFS). The results of the tests revealed that AM behaves differently from natural aggregates (NA). In general, the Eode value for AM is lower than for NA with the same gradation. Despite that, some of AM may be used as NA substitute directly (RCA or BFS), some with special treatment like CB and some with extra compaction efforts like RAP or FA + BS.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The CBR tests on BFS have shown that the bearing capacity is dependent on soil arrangement and inter-particle forces like matric suction and dilatancy). The BFS CBR bearing capacity is between 65% to 160% for standard and modified Proctor compaction technique [ 67 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%