| Literature DB >> 28788446 |
Daehyeon Kim1, Kyungho Park1, Dongwook Kim2.
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to understand the effect of ground conditions on microbial cementation in cohesionless soils. Since the method of microbial cementation is still at the experimental stage, for its practical use in the field, a number of laboratory experiments are required for the quantification of microbial cementation under various ground conditions, such as relative densities, relative compactions and particle size distributions. In this study, in order to evaluate the effectiveness of microbial cementation in treated sands and silts, an experiment was performed for different relative densities of silica sands, for different relative compactions of silts and for different particle size distributions of weathered soils sampled from the field. Scanning electron microscope (SEM), X-ray diffraction (XRD), energy dispersive X-ray (EDX) spectroscopy and mapping analyses were implemented for the quantification of the levels of microbial cementations for sand, silt and weathered soil specimens. Based on the test results, a considerable microbial cementation was estimated depending on the soil conditions; therefore, an implementation of this new type of bio-grouting on a weak foundation may be possible to increase the strength and stiffness of weak ground.Entities:
Keywords: CaCO3; EDX; SEM; XRD; cementation; ground condition; microbe
Year: 2013 PMID: 28788446 PMCID: PMC5453148 DOI: 10.3390/ma7010143
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Physical properties of the soils used in this study. USCS, Unified Soil Classification System.
| Soil Type (USCS Symbol) | Specific Gravity (Gs) | % Passing No. 200 Sieve | Maximum Dry Unit Weight (γdmax) | Optimum Moisture Content (O.M.C) | Liquidity Limit (LL) | Plasticity Index (PI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sand (SP) | 2.67 | 2.4% | 1.577 kN/m3 | 14.9% | N.P. | N.P. |
| Silt (ML) | 2.67 | 64.3% | 1.303 kN/m3 | 11.6% | 23.3% | N.P. |
N.P. indicates “non-plastic.”
Figure 1.Particle size distributions of sand and silt used in the study.
Figure 2.Soil particle size distributions of poorly-graded and well-graded weathered soils.
Specimen mixing ratios of sand, silt and weathered soil specimens. Dr, relative density; RC, relative compaction.
| Specimen (USGS symbol) | Soil (g) | Calcium chloride solution (mL) | Microbial solution (mL) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sand (SP) | 298.8 | 24 | 24 | |
| 307.6 | 24 | 24 | ||
| 316.9 | 24 | 24 | ||
|
| ||||
| Silt (ML) | RC 60% | 223.0 | 11 | 11 |
| RC 75% | 279.3 | 11 | 11 | |
| RC 90% | 297.4 | 11 | 11 | |
|
| ||||
| Weathered Soil (SP) | 261.4 | 24 | 24 | |
|
| ||||
| Weathered Soil (SW) | 279.3 | 24 | 24 | |
Figure 3.Compaction curves of sand and silt used in the study.
Figure 4.Results of SEM (the magnified image is 5,000 times larger than its original scale) of sand specimens with (a) Dr = 40%; (b) Dr = 60% and (c) Dr = 80%; silt specimens with (d) RC = 60%; (e) RC = 75% and (f) RC = 90%; and (g) well-graded, and (h) poorly-graded weathered soil specimens.
Figure 5.Energy dispersive X-ray (EDX) and mapping analysis (the magnified image is 5000 times larger than its original scale) results of specimens with (a) minimum Ca element observation (well-graded weathered soil specimen) and (b) maximum Ca element observation (poorly-graded weathered soil specimen).
Figure 6.Ca contents (by wt%) depending on the ground condition.