## 3 Materials and Methods
### Proposed Mix Designs and Laboratory Tests  
The dredged material (DM) was initially dried in an oven at 120 \({}^{\circ}\)C for 24 h and subsequently pulverized prior to stabilization. The particle distribution of DM, fly ash (FA), and hydrated lime (HL) was investigated using complete grain size analysis, including a hydrometer test following the ASTM D422 protocol [37]. Additives, as outlined in Table 2, were added to the DM based on the percentage of dry weight (wt.%) of DM. For all samples, the FA/HL ratio was fixed at 2.3, as suggested by [PERSON] [1], and modified for the current study. Eight mixes were prepared as detailed in Table 2, where the relative ratio of HL, FA, and PC are presented as well as the percent weight of cementitious material (HL, FA, PC) and DM. Note that \"pwd\" represents the powder content without considering the water content. The process of preparing stabilized dredged material begins with the determination of the optimum moisture content (OMC) for each mix through standard compaction tests conducted according to ASTM D698 [37]. The formulation of stabilized mixes involved a meticulous three-step procedure: initially, dry solids comprising dredged material (DM), hydrated lime (HL), fly ash (FA), and Portland cement (PC) were blended for one minute, ensuring uniform distribution of the components; subsequently, water corresponding to the OMC for each mix was incrementally added over a period of 30 s; this addition was followed by an additional minute of mixing to integrate the moisture uniformly throughout the mixture, thereby reaching the desired consistency crucial for the pressing process. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Chemical Analysis (wt.\%)** & **FA** & **HL** & **PC** \\ \hline CaO (\% as Ca(OH)2) & 14.5 & \textgreater{}85 & 62.88 \\ Silicon Dioxide (SiO2) & 52.24 & \textless{}0.1 & 20.61 \\ Aluminum Oxide (Al2O3) & 18.61 & 0.24 & 4.4 \\ Iron Oxide (Fe2O3) & 4.82 & 0.49 & 3.32 \\ Magnesium Oxide (MgO) & 3.85 & 0.22 & 2.20 \\ Sulfur Dioxide (SO3) & 0.78 & 0.87 & 2.7 \\ Sodium Oxide (Na2O) & 1.00 & - & 0.19 \\ Potassium Oxide (K2O) & 1.28 & - & 0.50 \\ Loss on ignition (LoI) & 0.35 & 24.00 & 1.29 \\ Specific Gravity & 2.50–2.80 & 2.20–2.40 & 3.15 \\ pH (at 25 \({}^{\circ}\)C) & 7–12 & 12.45 & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Chemical composition of additives. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Mix No. ** & **HL** & **FA** & **PC** & **\% Cementitious** & **\% DM** \\  & & & & **(pwd)** & **(pwd)** \\ \hline
1 & 0.0 & 0.0 & 0 & 0.0 & 100.0 \\
2 & 15.0 & 34.5 & 10 & 37.3 & 62.7 \\
3 & 25.0 & 57.5 & 10 & 48.1 & 52.0 \\
4 & 35.0 & 80.5 & 10 & 55.7 & 44.4 \\
5 & 15.0 & 34.5 & 15 & 39.2 &  
Once the mixing achieved a homogeneous state and the specified moisture content, the mixture was ready to be molded into bricks. An Auram Press 3000, a specifically designed piece of equipment from Aureka in Auroville, India, was employed to compress the prepared material into bricks with dimensions of 9.5\({}^{\prime\prime}\)\(\times\) 4.5\({}^{\prime\prime}\)\(\times\) 3.8\({}^{\prime\prime}\) (24.1 cm \(\times\) 11.4 cm \(\times\) 9.7 cm). This process utilized a compression ratio of approximately 1:1.8, applying 15 tons of force (1436 kPa). During the pressing phase, the molds were first filled to half their capacity with the wet mixture, after which PVC inserts were strategically placed along the x and y axes to aid in the formation of the bricks. After filling the molds to their full capacity, the press lid was securely closed, and the lever arm was engaged to apply the necessary force. Once the pressing was complete, the press lid released, unveiling the formed bricks which were then set aside for the curing process. For practitioners and researchers without access to this specific equipment, it is advisable to employ a press that can achieve a compression ratio between 1:1.6 and 1:1.8, ensuring optimal formation and structural properties of the bricks.