## 5 Conclusions  
Dredged material (DM) from disposal land adjacent to Sabine Lake in Texas, USA, was stabilized using a ternary combination of hydrated lime (HL), fly ash (FA), and Portland cement (PC) and was then used to fabricate compressed blocks, which were subsequently subjected to various tests.  
Upon stabilization with various mixes, the unconfined compressive strength (UCS) values dramatically increased from 283 kPa to values ranging from 4059 kPa to 9381 kPa for the HL/FA/PC ratios 15/34.5/10 and 15/34.5/20, respectively. In addition, DM stabilization led to noticeable increases in both OMC and maximum dry density \(\gamma_{\text{d(max)}}\)  
Figure 10: SEM images of the highest dosage (35/84.5/20) at different scales: (**A**) 1000x highlighting the enveloping of small particles; (**B**) 1000x highlighting the continuous smooth texture; (**C**) 2000x, and (**D**) 3000x. The white arrows highlight the presence of excess fly ash material.  
Figure 9: Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) image 1000x magnification of (**A**) fly ash and (**B**) hydrated lime. The yellow arrows indicate the presence of voids.  
All tested mixtures surpassed the minimum strength requirements for bricks as stipulated by both the International Building Code (IBC) and the New Mexico Code, which mandate an average strength greater than 300 psi (2068 kPa) and individual strengths above 250 psi (1724 kPa). Major strength improvement occurred over the first week, with 78 to 85% of the 28-day compressive strength (CS) achieved in just 7 days. Erosion tests were also performed by submerging the bricks in water for 4 h. Following submersion, the bricks' CS experienced a significant decline, retaining between 41% to 63% of their initial 28-day strength.  
Our results show that DM, when stabilized using a mixture of HL, FA, and PC, could be reused as unfired bricks for some applications. However, we found that optimizing the relative amount of stabilizing material is critical to maximizing the strength properties of DM based bricks.  
Conceptualization, T.T.M.N., M.J. and P.B.; methodology, T.T.M.N., M.J., C.-W.Y. and P.B.; software, T.T.M.N., S.R., P.B. and A.S.K.; validation, T.T.M.N., S.R. and A.S.K.; formal analysis, S.R. and A.S.K.; investigation, T.T.M.N., R.J., B.B., D.F., F.A., J.D. and X.L.; resources, T.T.M.N., M.J. and P.B.; data curation, T.T.M.N.; writing--original draft preparation, S.R.; writing--review and editing, A.S.K., T.T.M.N., M.J. and P.B.; visualization, S.R. and A.S.K.; supervision, T.T.M.N., M.J. and P.B.; project administration, T.T.M.N., M.J. and P.B.; funding acquisition, T.T.M.N., M.J. and P.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.  
This research was partially supported by grants from the Welch Foundation (V-0004) and from the Center for Resiliency, Beaumont, Texas (2024).  
Not applicable.  
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author/s.  
The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.