Kanako Toda1, Ryosuke Kikuchi1, Tsubasa Otake1, Satoshi Nishimura2, Yuzoh Akashi3, Michihiro Aimoto4, Takeshi Kokado5, Tsutomu Sato1. 1. Division of Sustainable Resources Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Hokkaido University, N13W8, Kita-ku, Sapporo, Hokkaido 060-8628, Japan. 2. Division of Field Engineering for the Environment, Faculty of Engineering, Hokkaido University, N13W8, Kita-ku, Sapporo, Hokkaido 060-8628, Japan. 3. Nippon Steel Corporation, Marunouchi 2-6-1, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-8071, Japan. 4. Advanced Technology Research Laboratories, Nippon Steel Corporation, 20-1 Shintomi, Futtsu-shi, Chiba 293-8511, Japan. 5. Nippon Steel Eco-Tech Corporation, Kyobashi 1-18-1, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 104-0031, Japan.
Abstract
Dredged soils have been used as construction materials by alkaline activation with steel slag (steel slag-dredged soil mixtures) at harbors. Such mixtures develop strength chiefly by calcium silicate hydrate (C-S-H) formation by the pozzolanic reaction. However, the strength of such mixtures is unpredictable, and in some cases, mixtures have been too soft for the intended engineering application. An identification of strength development indicators would accelerate evaluation processes for strength development to facilitate and promote the utilization of such materials. This paper focuses on the relationship between the characteristics of soil organic matters in dredged soils and the strength development of the mixtures by a comparison of eight dredged soils collected from eight different Japanese harbors. The characteristics of the soil organic matters were identified to determine as indicators of mixtures with weak strength development, i.e., enriched sulfur content in extracted soil organic matter (humic acid) fraction, and the N/C ratio of humic acid similar to land humic acid standards. Increases in the validated fraction of dredged soils and steel slag by replacing fractions disadvantageous to construction resources would contribute to reduce waste production, which would lower the environmental impact of the use, aiming to achieve sustainable utilization of such materials.
Dredged soils have been used as construction materials by alkaline activation with steel slag (steel slag-dredged soil mixtures) at harbors. Such mixtures develop strength chiefly by calcium silicate hydrate (C-S-H) formation by the pozzolanic reaction. However, the strength of such mixtures is unpredictable, and in some cases, mixtures have been too soft for the intended engineering application. An identification of strength development indicators would accelerate evaluation processes for strength development to facilitate and promote the utilization of such materials. This paper focuses on the relationship between the characteristics of soil organic matters in dredged soils and the strength development of the mixtures by a comparison of eight dredged soils collected from eight different Japanese harbors. The characteristics of the soil organic matters were identified to determine as indicators of mixtures with weak strength development, i.e., enrichedsulfurcontent in extracted soil organic matter (humic acid) fraction, and the N/C ratio of humic acid similar to landhumic acid standards. Increases in the validated fraction of dredged soils andsteel slag by replacing fractions disadvantageous to construction resources wouldcontribute to reduce waste production, which would lower the environmental impact of the use, aiming to achieve sustainable utilization of such materials.
The excavation of soil sediments in water ways for shipping safety produces significant volumes of dredged soils (e.g., [1,2,3]). In Japan, 16 million tons of marine soils were dredged in 2013 and used landfill (59%), made beach reclamation and sandcovers (25%), or disposed in the ocean (5%) along with other minor options for use anddisposal [4]. However, limitations on landfill sites and the environmental impact of its creation, which consumes land and other primary resources for site construction such as cement and aggregate, has highlighted the necessity of dredged soil utilization improvements.The concretion of dredged soils by mixing alkaline activators [5,6,7,8,9] makes them useful as construction materials and offers the potential to promote their utilization. Furthermore, parts of the dredged soils have also been mixed with industrial waste such as fly ash, lime production waste, andsteel slag. Steel slag is a by-product in the iron-making process, and it has the ability to develop the strength with dredged soils by mixing andcuring at room temperature [10,11,12]. It is a kind of alkaline activator of dredged soils. Steel slag-dredged soil mixtures are utilized in engineering works close to the seashore because of the ease of material transport and application.However, some steel slag-dredged soil mixtures exhibit weak strength in their construction. In addition, the final strength of the mixtures is unpredictable before mixing, which detracts from usefulness in the utilization of the mixtures. Currently, the utilization of mixtures require numerous strength tests with trial and error before the application. Unpredictable strength development especially results from the components of dredged soils where their effect on hardening is not fully elucidated. Such soils are composed of fine minerals, clay minerals, inorganic amorphous phases, and soil organic matters. The strength development of steel slag-dredged soil mixtures is presumably attributed to the extent of calcium silicate hydrate (C-S-H) phase formation by the pozzolanic reaction [10,13]. Pozzolanic reaction refers to the formation of C-S-H from portlandite (Ca(OH)2) and siliceous materials in moist conditions, where C-S-H is known to act as a major binder in calcium-basedcementitious materials [14]. Therefore, a total clarification of key components that affect the pozzolanic reaction, the strength development of the steel slag-dredged soil mixtures, may overcome the problem as it would make evaluation processes faster for the strength development of mixtures that should facilitate their utilization.In order to evaluate the factors affecting the strength development of steel slag-dredged soil mixtures, previous studies investigated four dredged soils obtained from different Japanese harbors and their mixtures with two steel slags [13]. These studies showed that the inorganic amorphous silicacontent of dredged soils, comprising diatom frustules and volcanic glasses, is a key factor affecting the extent of silica supply to form C-S-H. Furthermore, as discussed in Kiso et al. [10], portlanditecontent in steel slag is confirmed as another key factor, which is a major supplier of dissolvedcalcium and achieves alkaline conditions, which enables the dissolution of silicate phases and the precipitation of C-S-H.However, some mixtures made with the dredged soils andsteel slag with sufficient amorphous silica andportlandite showed no strength development in unconfinedcompressive strength tests. This potentially indicated the existence of other factors that affect the strength development of these mixtures. Some organic matter including humic acid, an extractable fraction of soil organic matters, are known to inhibit the strength development of cementitious materials [15,16]. Toda et al. [13] have shown that the strength of the mixtures was not determined by the bulk content of humic acids. Furthermore, that quantification of humic acids may not indicate the effect of soil organic matters on the strength of the mixtures. Since soil organic matter has an indefinite macromolecular structure with variety in elemental compositions and functional groups [17,18,19,20], specificcomponents in the soil organic matters could affect the strength of the mixtures that was not quantified by the evaluation of bulk humic acidcontent. In addition, in the previous studies, the effects of specificcomponents of soil organic matters on the strength development of the mixtures are not comprehensively understood.The objective of this study is to determine whether particulars such as the elemental composition of humic acid in dredged soils can be used as a parameter that indicates dredged soils that form soft mixtures after mixing with a steel slag, in addition to known factors that work as indicators such as amorphous silica andportlanditecontent in dredged soils andsteel slag, respectively. In addition, the results of this study could underpin whether soil organic matters in dredged soils does or does not affect the strength development of the mixtures. Tests of unconfinedcompressive strength of the mixtures made with eight dredged soils collected from eight different Japanese harbors and a steel slag are carried out with characterization of the humic acids of the dredged soils to compare the characteristics of hard and soft mixtures. The characterization of mineralogical phase compositions and solution compositions of the mixtures are carried out to address the possibility of how soil organic matters may affect the strength development of the mixtures.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Materials
2.1.1. Dredged Soils
Eight dredged soil samples from different Japanese harbors were studied. Four dredged soil samples named soils A, B, C, andD also employed in Toda et al. [13] were used for further study of their soil organic matters. Four other dredged soil samples named soils E, F, G, and H were newly collected from different Japanese harbors for this study. The characterization of soils A, B, C, andD and analyses of their mixtures with steel slag were carried out in Toda et al. [13]. The results of characterization of soils A, B, C, andD and analyses of their mixtures was also reported in Toda et al. [13]. The characterization of soils E, F, G, and H and subsequent formation of mixtures followed the methodology of Toda et al. [13] to compare the characteristics of eight soil organic matters and strength development of the eight mixtures.The physical properties of the dredged soils are summarized in Table 1. The soil particle density, liquid limit, and the content of fine particles were obtained following Japanese Industrial Standards A 1202, A 1205, and A 1204, respectively. The accuracy of soil particle density and liquid limit measurements were all in the range of ±0.01 g/cm3 and ±0.1%. The content of fine particles was obtained using sufficient amounts of sample, and the data accuracy typically is in the range of ±5%. All dredged soils were clay and silt rich, with common soil particle densities of soils (2.55 to 2.75 g/cm3) except soil G, which was slightly less dense than the other soils likely caused by soil organic matters [21].
Table 1
Physical properties of dredged soils.
Samples
Soil Particle Density (g/cm3)
Liquid Limit
Content of Fine Particle (<0.075 mm) (%)
Soil A (1)
2.777
73.4
83.2
Soil B (1)
2.737
89.8
99.3
Soil C (1)
2.709
44.1
91.1
Soil D (1)
2.707
66.2
58.6
Soil E
2.721
80.0
75.5
Soil F
2.655
54.5
86.3
Soil G
2.544
96.1
99.3
Soil H
2.629
66.1
63.5
(1) From Toda et al. [13].
Liquid limits of the dredged soils A, B, C, andD were 73.4, 89.8, 44.1, and 66.2% [13], respectively. Liquid limits of the dredged soil E, F, G, and H were 80.0, 54.5, 96.1, and 66.1%, respectively, which the liquid limit was used to adjust the watercontent of the dredged soils prior to mixing with steel slag.The characterization of soils E, F, G, and H followed the methodology described in Toda et al. [13]. The bulk mineralogy andclay mineralogy of the dredged soils were characterized with powdered samples pulverized to finer than 53 μm in diameter and oriented samples of particles below 2 µm in diameter prepared by elutriation by X-ray diffraction analysis (XRD; RINT2100, Rigaku, Tokyo, Japan). Inorganic amorphous silicacontents were quantified by selective dissolution methods, where diatom frustules were dissolved by heating 50 mg of dried soil per 40 mL of 2M Na2CO3 at 85 °C for 5 h [22] and volcanic glass were dissolved by heating 50 mg of dried soil per 50 mL of 0.5 M NaOH at 100 °C for 2.5 min [23]. Dissolution experiments were repeated three times to calculate the average and standard errors of the results. Subsequently, the silicaconcentration of supernatants was measured by inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES; ICPE-9000, Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan) to quantify inorganic amorphous silicacontents in the dredged soils. The bulk andclay mineralogy of soils E, F, G, and H (Figure 1) were virtually identical, and they were also very similar to soils A, B, C, andD [13] (Figure 2), containing quartz, cristobalite, albite, pyrite, kaolinite, illite, chlorite, andsmectite. The total inorganic amorphous silicacontents of soils E, F, G, and H, which were calculated as the sum of quantifieddiatom frustules and volcanic glass, were 79.6 ± 4.2, 64.3 ± 1.7, 90.0 ± 2.2, and 75.3 ± 3.1 mg/g respectively, while the inorganic amorphous silicacontent of soils A, B, C, andD reported in Toda et al. [13] were 78.2 ± 5.9, 71.4 ± 2.8, 44.4 ± 3.4, and 38.2 ± 1.5 mg/g, respectively.
Figure 1
X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns of (a) powdered dredged soil to detect bulk mineralogical phases and (b) oriented particles of dredged soils to detect clay mineralogical phases. Names of dredged soil samples are labeled on the upper right of each XRD pattern.
Figure 2
XRD patterns of (a) powdered dredged soil to detect bulk mineralogical phases and (b) oriented particles of dredged soils to detect clay mineralogical phases. Names of dredged soil samples are labeled on the upper right of each XRD pattern. From Toda et al. [13].
2.1.2. Steel Slag
Steel slag 1, employed in Toda et al. [13], was used to form the steel slag-dredged soil mixtures in this study. Its mineralogical composition was confirmed to be similar to those of ordinary steel slag, containing larnite, brownmillerite, RO phase, calcite, andportlandite with other oxide phases, based on the XRD analysis (Multiflex Diffractometer, Rigaku, Tokyo, Japan) of powdered samples pulverized to finer than 53 μm in diameter [13] (Figure 3).
Figure 3
XRD pattern of powdered steel slag 1 showing mineralogical phases. From Toda et al. [13].
2.2. Methods
A schematicdiagram of the experimental methodology is shown in Figure 4. The framed words are the samples, and below the frames are the measurements conducted for each state of samples. Procedures for sample preparations are described between the connecting lines of the frames. Numbers in brackets refer to subsections of methods that describe each methodology.
Figure 4
Diagram of experimental procedures.
2.2.1. Preparation of Steel Slag-Dredged Soil Mixtures
The steel slag-dredged soil mixture specimens were prepared with steel slag 1 and soils E, F, G, and H by the methoddescribed in Toda et al. [13]. The mixtures of steel slag 1 and soils E, F, G, and H were termed mixtures 1E, 1F, 1G, and1H, respectively. They were prepared by mixing steel slag into dredged soil in the volume ratio 3:7. Air-driedsteel slag was used to make the mixtures. The watercontent of the dredged soils was conditioned to 1.5 times the liquid limit using artificial sea water to equalize the physical properties before mixing. The mixing was performed by an electronic mixer for 5 min; then, the mixture was packed into cylindrical plastic molds, of height of 100 mm anddiameter of 50 mm, andcovered with plastic film. Then, it was cured to conduct the subsequent tests of unconfinedcompressive strength. The mixtures were cured in a sealed plasticcontainer in saturated humidity at 25 °C for the duration of the tests to eliminate reduction in the watercontent.
2.2.2. Unconfined Compressive Strength Tests
The unconfinedcompressive strength (qu) was measured for mixtures 1E, 1F, 1G, and1Hcured for 3, 7, 14, and 28 days after demolding from the cylindrical plastic molds. The unconfinedcompressive strength tests were performed in triplicate for each condition and the average values and standard errors were calculated. The qu values of mixtures made with steel slag 1 and soils A, B, C, andD were cured for 3, 7, 14, and 28 days were from Toda et al. [13]; these mixtures were termed 1A, 1B, 1C and1D, respectively.
2.2.3. Mineralogical Phases Assemblage
The XRD analysis (Multiflex Diffractometer, Rigaku, Tokyo, Japan) of mixtures 1E, 1F, 1G, and1H for 1, 3, 7, and 28 days of curing were carried out with powdered samples. About 5 g of freeze-dried mixture was used for preparing powdered sample to reduce the effect of heterogeneity in the mixtures on the evaluation of the mineralogical compositions. Samples were pulverized to the grain size below 53 μm. The XRD patterns of mixtures 1A, 1B, 1C, and1D for 0, 3, 7, and 28 days of curing were from Toda et al. [13]. The peak assignment was selectively carried out for phases that play a role in the pozzolanic reaction.
2.2.4. Chemistry of the Pore Water Solutions
The pH of the pore water in mixtures 1E, 1F, 1G, and1Hcured from 1 to 28 days were measureddirectly from the mixtures using a pH meter employing a pH probe (1053B, Hanna Instruments, Woonsocket, RI, USA) with an electrode for semi-solids and soils. The pH measurements were performed three times, and average values and standard errors were calculated. The calcium andsilicaconcentrations of the pore waters of the 1E, 1F, 1G, and1H mixtures cured from 1 to 28 days and mixtures 1A, 1B, 1C, and1Dcured from 1 to 7 days were measured with pore waters collected by compressing one entire cylinder of the mixture specimens prepared by the plastic mold used for the unconfinedcompressive strength tests. One pore water sample was prepared for each condition, due to limitations in the amount of mixture sample. The collected pore waters were filtered by 0.2 μm membrane filters; then, calcium andsilicaconcentrations were measured using inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES; ICPE-9000, Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan). The pH data of mixtures 1A, 1B, 1C, and1D andcalciumconcentration data of mixtures 1A, 1B, 1C, and1D from the 3-day cured samples were measured in Toda et al. [13] by the same method, which is shown in this study.
2.2.5. Quantification of Soil Organic Matter and Humic Acids in the Dredged Soils
The total organic carbon (TOC) content in the dredged soils A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H were measured in a TOC analyzer (TOC-L, Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan) with 0.4 to 0.5 g of freeze-dried soils. The TOCcontent was calculated by subtracting the total inorganic carbon (TIC) content from the total carbon (TC) content. The measurements of TIC andTC were conducted twice, and average values and standard errors were calculated.The humic acids of soils E, F, G, and H were extracted from the dredged soils to quantify the humic acidcontent following the methodology in Fukushima et al. [24,25], which was the same to the humic acid extraction from soils A, B, C, andD in Toda et al. [13]. The humic acid extraction was not repeated, assuming the dredged soils to contain humic acid homogenously from the result of TOC measurement repetition. A schematicdiagram of the humic acid extraction and purification method is shown on Figure 5. A 10 g of freeze-drieddredged soil and 100 mL of aqueous alkaline solution (1.0 M NaOH and 0.1 M Na4P2O7 mixed in volume ratio 1:1) were mixed and shaken under an N2 atmosphere for 24 h to solubilize soil organic matter. The condition of the extraction procedure is known to affect the recovery ratio of humic acids, and it must be kept the same between each soil samples to make comparisons of their humic acidcontent. Solubilized soil organic matter was collected after centrifugation of the mixture at 10,000 rpm for 15 min, and the supernatant was filtered using an A5 filter. Then, the filtrate was acidified to pH 1 by concentratedHCl (approximately 1 mL), which was stirred for 24 h. Then, the resulting precipitate was collected by centrifugation at 10,000 rpm for 15 min and filtration with a 0.20 μm filter. The precipitate was the soil organic matter that classifies to humic acid. Then, the purification of humic acid was carried out to remove coexistent inorganic phases. The re-dissolution of humic acid in 100 mL of aqueous 0.1 M NaOH was followed by the addition of concentratedHCl (1 mL) and HF (3 mL) to re-precipitate the humic acid. The slurry was stirred for 24 h and then centrifuged at 10,000 rpm for 15 min to collect the precipitate. Subsequently, the precipitate was dialyzed to remove coexisting ions such as Na. The precipitate was transferred to a dialysis tube (SpectraPore, nominal molecular weight cut-off of 1 kDa) anddialyzed against water for two weeks. The dialyzed slurry was freeze-dried in order to obtain a powder sample, which was weighed to quantify the humic acidcontent in the dredged soils. The weighing accuracy of the precision balance was ±0.0001 g, which gave the error range of ±0.001% in the calculation of humic acidcontent in the dredged soils.
Figure 5
Diagram of humic acid extraction and purification procedures from the dredged soils.
The difference in TOC andhumic acidcontent of common land soils anddredged soil samples coulddepict the characteristics of dredged soil samples. Hence, the TOC andhumic acidcontent of standard land soils of the Japan Humic Substance Society (JHSS), Inogashira (Andosols) andDando (Brown Forest Soils) soils, which are the two soil types that cover 61% of Japanese land [26], were used for the comparison of the soil organic matter contents [27].
2.2.6. Elemental Compositions of Humic Acids
Analyses of C, H, N, and S contents of purifiedhumic acid powder of soils A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H were carried out at the Center for Instrumental Analysis at Hokkaido University. Prior to the analyses, the powderedhumic acids were dehydrated under reduced pressure for at least 24 h. The C, H, andNcontents were measured by an elemental analyzer (CE440, Exeter Analyzer, Warwickshire, UK). About 2 mg of sample was used for the measurement andWO3 was added as a combustion aid for the C, H, andN analysis. The maximum permissive error of measurement of C, H, andNcontents was ±0.3%. The S contents were measured by an ion chromatography (Dionex ICS-1600, Thermo Fischer Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). About 2 mg of sample was used for a measurement. The maximum permissive error of measurement of S content was ±0.3%. The content of oxygen was calculated by subtracting the sum of the quantified percentage of C, H, N, and S from 100%. The elemental compositions of JHSS standards [28], Dando, and Inogashira humic acids were referred in the results to make a comparison between humic acids of common land soils anddredged soil samples.
3. Results
3.1. Characterization of the Mixtures
3.1.1. Unconfined Compressive Strength
The average qu values of the mixtures is shown in Figure 6. Error bars are omitted, as they typically fell within the range of the plot size, and they do not affect the interpretation on coordinates of the plots on the figure. Mixtures 1D and1Hdid not develop sufficient strength to undergo unconfinedcompressive strength tests and the plots are not presented in Figure 6. The qu value of mixture 1G was low throughout the 28 days of the curing period (18 to 28 kPa). Mixtures 1D, 1H, and 1F were classified as soft mixtures, which did not qualify for use as construction works with lower strength than the target strength of 250 kPa at 28 days of curing, calculated from required strength of 100 kPa with safety factor [29]. Mixtures 1A, 1B, 1C, 1E, and 1F with qu values above 250 kPa at 28 days of curing were classified as hard mixtures, making them acceptable for use in construction work. Mixtures 1A, 1B, 1C, 1E, and 1F developed strength (increases in qu value) during the curing period; mixture 1A showed the highest strength at 28 days of curing, followed by mixtures 1B, 1E, 1F, and 1C.
Figure 6
Unconfined compressive strength (qu) values of mixtures 1A, 1B, 1C, 1E, 1F, and 1G with curing time (data for mixtures 1A, 1B, and 1C are from Toda et al. [13]).
3.1.2. Mineralogical Phase Assemblages
The XRD patterns of mixtures 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E, 1F, 1G, and1H are shown in Figure 7. The XRD patterns of mixtures 1A, 1B, 1C, and1D are from Toda et al. [13]. The consumption of portlandite was the major change in the mineralogical phase assemblage in some mixtures as a function of curing time. Mixture 1E showed the consumption of portlandite after 7 days of curing with disappearance of the peak intensity corresponding to portlandite (Figure 7e). This tendency of the portlandite peak disappearance in mixtures exhibiting a qu value above 600 kPa at 28 days of curing were also observed in mixtures 1A and 1B (Figure 7a,b). In mixtures 1F, 1G, and1H, the portlandite still remained after 28 days of curing (Figure 7f,g,h) as did mixtures 1C and1D (Figure 7c,d). Amorphous silica andC-S-H were not detected with XRD, due to their amorphous and poorly crystalline characteristics [14,30].
Figure 7
XRD patterns of (a) mixtures 1A, (b) 1B, (c) 1C, (d) 1D, (e) 1E, (f) 1F, (g) 1G, and (h) 1H cured for 1, 3, 7, and 28 days. XRD patterns (a–d) are from Toda et al. [13]. Black dot (●): Portlandite (Ca(OH)2).
3.1.3. Solution Chemistry of Pore Water
Figure 8 shows the solution chemistry of the pore watercollected from the mixtures. Standard errors of pH, Ca, and Si measurements were mostly smaller than the size of the plots in the figures. In addition to data collected in this study, pH data of mixtures 1A, 1B, 1C, and1D andcalciumconcentration data of mixtures 1A, 1B, 1C, and1D at 3 days of curing time are cited from Toda et al. [13] and plotted in Figure 8a,b, respectively. The pH of pore water of mixtures 1E and 1F decreased from the order of 12 to lower pH values throughout the 28 days of curing, which was similar to mixtures 1A and 1B (Figure 8a). Mixtures 1G and1H maintained pH around 12, which was similarly observed in mixtures 1C and1D. The calciumconcentration of mixtures 1D and1H were around 30 mmol/L at least until 7 days of curing (Figure 8b). The calciumconcentration of the pore water of mixtures 1A, 1B, 1E, 1F, and 1G gradually decreased from over 15 to below 10 mmol/L with curing time. Calciumconcentrations of pore water of mixture 1C between 1 and 7 days of curing were maintained at around 5 mmol/L. Silicaconcentrations of pore waters of all mixtures were between 0.07 and 0.38 mmol/L during 28 days of curing (Figure 8c).
Figure 8
(a) pH of pore waters of mixtures 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E, 1F, 1G, and 1H at 1 to 28 days of curing, (b) calcium concentrations, and (c) silica concentrations of the pore waters of mixtures 1A, 1B, 1C, and 1D of 1 to 7 days of curing and of mixtures 1E, 1F, 1G, and 1H of 1 to 28 days of curing are plotted as a function of curing time. Standard errors of the measurements are plotted on the figures.
3.2. Characterization of Soil Organic Matter in Dredged Soils
The TOC andhumic acidcontent of the dredged soils andJHSS standard soils are shown in Table 2 with elemental compositions of the corresponding humic acids. The TOCcontents of the dredged soil samples were lower than Inogashira andDando soils. The humic acidcontents in the dredged soils were lower than those in the JHSS standards, except for soil G. The TOC andhumic acidcontents of soils A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H varied from 0.60 ± 0.01% to 3.86 ± 0.01% and 0.09% to 0.93%, respectively. Soil G had higher TOC andhumic acidcontent than that of the other dredged soils, as could be expected from it having the lightest soil particle density among the dredged soils (Table 1).
Table 2
Total organic carbon (TOC), humic acid content and humic acid elemental compositions of soils A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H. The values of Inogashira and Dando soils, Japan Humic Substance Society (JHSS) standards, are also listed for comparison.
Samples
TOC
Humic Acid Content
Humic Acid Elemental Composition (wt.%) (1)
(wt. %)
(wt. %)
C
H
N
S
O (3)
Soil A
0.60 ± 0.01
0.09 (2)
45.55
3.61
2.39
3.14
45.31
Soil B
1.20 ± 0.01
0.20 (2)
47.26
4.22
2.73
2.72
43.07
Soil C
1.97 ± 0.01
0.14 (2)
52.03
4.46
2.53
2.20
38.78
Soil D
1.21 ± 0.10
0.30 (2)
41.12
3.57
3.25
7.23
44.83
Soil E
0.68 ± 0.01
0.16
43.33
3.15
2.13
1.14
50.25
Soil F
1.46 ± 0.04
0.24
46.17
3.92
2.86
0.99
46.06
Soil G
3.86 ± 0.01
0.93
51.76
4.12
3.93
1.62
38.57
Soil H
1.50 ± 0.08
0.24
47.88
4.70
3.92
7.04
36.46
Inogashira (4)
16.7
5.10
54.83
4.27
4.01
0.26
36.63
Dando (4)
6.19
0.69
53.04
5.25
4.49
0.29
36.93
(1) Maximum permissive error of elemental analysis was ±0.3%. (2) From Toda et al. [13]. (3) Calculated by subtraction from 100%. (4) TOC and humic acid content from Kuwatsuka et al. [27] and elemental composition from Watanabe et al. [28].
Humic acids in the dredged soils were mostly nitrogen-poor andsulfur-rich in comparison with the humic acids of JHSS standards. Inogashira humic acidcontained 4.01% of nitrogen and 0.26% of sulfur, while Dando humic acidcontained 4.49% of nitrogen and 0.29% of sulfur. Among humic acids of dredged soils, humic acids of soils D and H, with 7.23% and 7.04% of sulfur, respectively, contained much more sulfur than the other humic acids. Humic acids of soils D, G, and H were not as poor in nitrogencontent as other humic acids of dredged soils in comparison with JHSS standards; they contained 3.25%, 3.93%, and 3.92% of nitrogen, respectively.
4. Discussion
4.1. Indicators for Strength Development of the Steel Slag-Dredged Soil Mixtures
Inorganic amorphous silicacontent in the dredged soils andportlanditecontent in steel slag have been pointed out as important factors for the strength development of steel slag-dredged soil mixtures [13]. Amorphous silica supplies dissolvedsilica andportlandite supplies dissolvedcalcium and establish alkaline condition for C-S-H formation via the pozzolanic reaction. The amorphous silicacontent of dredged soils was linearly correlated to qu values of the mixtures, i.e., at 28 days of curing, except in soils G and H (Figure 9a). Soils G and H were two of the dredged soils classified as resulting in soft mixtures, with remaining portlandite after curing (Figure 7g,h), regardless of the similar content of amorphous silica to the soils, which formed hard mixtures (Figure 9a) with portlanditeconsumption (soils A, B, and E) (Figure 7a,b,e). This suggests that soils G and H contain components that may inhibit the pozzolanic reaction.
Figure 9
Relationship of (a) amorphous silica, (b) sulfur in the humic acid fraction, (c) TOC and (d) humic acid content per gram of dried dredged soil with qu values of each steel slag-dredged soil mixtures at 28 days of curing. The qu values for mixtures 1D and 1H are plotted as 0 kPa in order to include their plots in the diagram; they did not undergo unconfined compressive strength tests. The amorphous silica content of soils A, B, C, and D and the qu values of mixtures 1A, 1B, 1C, and 1D are cited from Toda et al. [13]. Error bars of figure (a,c) show standard errors of data collected from repeated experiments and error bars of figure (b,d) show accuracy of the measurements.
The sulfurcontent in the humic acid fraction distinguished soils G and H, and also soil D from soils A, B, C, E, and F (Figure 9b). Soils G, H, andDcontained over 0.151 mg of sulfur per gram of soil in the humic acid fraction (Figure 9b), whereas soils A, B, C, E, and F containedsulfur below 0.05 mg/g. Therefore, the sulfur in humic acid fraction could suggest the occurrence of inhibition in the pozzolanic reaction and the subsequent strength development of the mixtures. Inhibition in the pozzolanic reaction of mixtures 1G and1H was suggested to result from the effect of soil organic matters because soils G and H were rich in sulfur in the humic acid fraction and had sufficient dissolvedsilica supply similar to soils that formed hard mixtures: soil A, B, and E. Furthermore, inhibition in the pozzolanic reaction of the mixture 1D may result from the effect of soil organic matters, together with the limitation of dissolvedsilica supply because soil D was rich in sulfur in the humic acid fraction but had minimal amorphous silicacontent among the studieddredged soil samples.In addition, as expected from Toda et al. [13], the TOC (Figure 9c) or humic acidcontent (Figure 9d) showed no relationship with qu values of the mixtures, which emphasized the importance of interpreting the content of specificcomponents of soil organic matters for the indication of dredged soils, which form soft mixtures.
4.2. Characteristics of Humic Acids that Inhibit Strength Development of the Mixtures
From the results in Figure 9b, it is clear that the inhibition of the strength development of the 1G, 1H, and1D mixtures were indicated by the content of sulfur-bearing components in the humic acids. These may be directly attributed to the inhibition in the pozzolanic reaction of the mixtures, as well as there may be unquantifiedcomponents in the soil organic matters that correlate positively to the sulfur-bearing components and may contribute to the inhibition of the pozzolanic reaction.Intrinsiccharacteristics of humic acids of the soils G, H, andD were further investigated with a comparison of their elemental ratios, which have been used to evaluate the average properties, sources, and alterations of humic acids [19,31,32].The S/C of humic acids in all of the studieddredged soils was higher than that of the JHSS standards (Figure 10a). This may result from differences in the following: (1) the inclusions of sulfur-bearing organiccompounds; (2) degree of abiotic reaction of reducedsulfur with organic matter [33], which increases the preservation of sulfur in sedimentary soils [34]; and/or (3) the redox state of the sedimentary soils [31] where reducing conditions are favorable to conserve sulfur in the sediments. Factors affected S/C of humic acids of dredged soils is not conclusive, though it could be further discussed with analysis of sulfur redox states of humic acids, which may indicate the redox condition of sedimentary soils. In addition, if sulfur-bearing components play a role in the inhibition of the pozzolanic reaction, their redox state would be critical for a full understanding of the inhibition mechanism of the pozzolanic reaction. The speciation of sulfur in humic acids of sedimentary soils is commonly assumed to be disulfides, thiols, sulfonates, or ester-bondedsulfates [34,35]; however, these various chemical properties would act differently on the pozzolanic reaction.
Figure 10
(a) S/C versus H/C atomic ratios and (b) N/C versus H/C atomic ratios of humic acids extracted from the dredged soils (A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H), Dando humic acid and Inogashira humic acid.
Furthermore, Figure 10a shows that the S/C ratio of humic acid of soils D and H were almost twice as large as the S/C ratio of humic acids of other dredged soils andJHSS standards. The sulfurcontent in the humic acid fraction of dredged soils could indicate the inhibition of a pozzolanic reaction of the mixtures made with soils D and H (Figure 9b), because their humic acids had a high S/C ratio. The inhibition of pozzolanic reaction of the mixture made with soil G, whose humic acid had a similar S/C ratio to the humic acids of dredged soils that formed hard mixtures, was also indicated by the sulfurcontent in the humic acid fraction of dredged soils (Figure 9b) because the content of humic acid in soil G was high. Characteristics of humic acids are suggested to vary between dredged soils that form soft mixtures. The input of organic matters to the sedimentary soils andsulfur enrichment in the soil organic matter structure shape the sulfurcontent in the humic acid fraction of dredged soils as an indicator of dredged soils that form soft mixtures.The nitrogencontent in the humic acid fraction of the dredged soils did not clearly indicate dredged soils that form soft mixtures as sulfurdid; hence, nitrogen-bearing functional groups are not likely a candidate of soil organic matters that inhibit the pozzolanic reaction. However, the N/C versus H/C plot suggested that the N/C ratio of the humic acidcould be a characteristic of the dredged soils that form soft mixtures (Figure 10b). The humic acids of soils D, G, and H plot between the two JHSS standards of N/C of 0.062 to 0.073. The higher N/C of soil organic matter has been suggested to result from the sedimentation of marine organic matter rich in amides, and/or as a result of low aeration, which couldconserve the compositions of the sedimented organic matter [19]. Stuermer et al. [31] supported the former factor when they observed that algal sources, rather than highland plant sources, causedN/C enrichment.The causes of sulfur andnitrogen enrichment of humic acids in dredged soils are not determineddue to several possible causes of the enrichment. Despite the requirement of further investigations to clarify specificcomponents in soil organic matters that may contribute to the inhibition of the pozzolanic reaction, the discussion here highlights that: (1) the content of such organiccomponents in dredged soils is suggested to be affected by the input of organic matters to sedimentary soils and the sedimentary environment; (2) the N/C of humic acids also indicate the dredged soils that form soft mixtures as the sulfurcontent in the humic acid fraction of dredged soils does. Overall, these newly discovered indicators of dredged soils that form soft mixtures when mixed with a steel slag, together with quantification of their inorganic amorphous silicacontent, would enhance the utilization of dredged soils by accelerating the evaluation processes of their strength development.
4.3. Effects of Soil Organic Matters on Pozzolanic Reaction
The factors that affect the pozzolanic reaction are calcium andsilica sources, or other coexisting components such as soil organic matters that inhibit the reaction, as emphasized by mixtures 1D, 1G, and1H. Soil organic matters in soils D, G, and H could interact with the pozzolanic reaction by pH buffers to the weak alkaline region [15]; the formation of calcium-organic matter complexation [36], and mineral surface coverage [37,38,39]. Such reactions wouldcause the solution chemistry to be undersaturated vis-a-vis C-S-H, which disables its precipitation, decreases calcium supply to C-S-H formation, and inhibits phase dissolution or precipitation, which could inhibit the pozzolanic reaction.Among these possibilities, the effect of a pH buffer by soil organic matters was not significant in any of the mixtures as discussed in Toda et al. [13]. The pH of the pore water in the mixtures was above 12 after 1 day of curing in all mixtures (Figure 8a). From the comparisons of calciumconcentrations of pore water in cement-treated soils of Tremblay et al. [15], which showed organic reagents to cause one to two order higher concentrations of calcium in solution with the control sample of Tremblay et al. [15] and our data, it is speculated that the formation of calciumcomplexation may not be significant in the mixtures 1D, 1G, and1H. The occurrence of surface coverage by soil organic matters could not be clarified, yet it is clear that the dissolution of portlandite was not inhibited, as shown by the pH andcalciumconcentrations of pore water in mixtures 1D, 1G, and1H at saturation of portlandite with pH around 12.5 andcalciumconcentration above 20 mmol/L (Figure 8a,b). In addition, silicaconcentrations of all mixtures at all curing times were similar (Figure 8c), so the soil organic matters in soils D, G, and H may not inhibit the dissolution of amorphous silica either, which leaves precipitation sites of C-S-H as possible surface-covering sites for soil organic matters. It was confirmed that a pH buffering effect does not play a role in the inhibition of the pozzolanic reaction in steel slag-dredged soil mixtures. The calciumcomplexation ability of soil organic matters in soils D, G, and H, and its ability to cover the mineral surface will be investigated to determine how pozzolanic reaction inhibition occurs in the mixtures made with soils D, G, and H in future research.
5. Conclusions
The inhibition of strength development in steel slag-dredged soil mixtures by soil organic matters is detailed. Our data especially highlight the importance of the quantification of specificcomponents among soil organic matter in evaluating the effect on the strength development of such mixtures. Dredged soils with enrichedsulfurcontent in the humic acid fraction, and/or N/C ratio of extractedhumic acids similar to that of landhumic acids, resulted in the formation of soft mixtures. These characteristics could be used as indicators of dredged soils that form soft mixtures, together with the inorganic amorphous silicacontent in the dredged soils. Also, the TOC andhumic acidcontent in dredged soils are not suggested as indicators of soft mixture formation. Our findings clarify that the strength development indicators have significant implications for the utilization of steel slag-dredged soil mixtures. The discovery of indicators of strength development of steel slag-dredged soil mixtures will accelerate evaluation processes for the strength development of mixtures made with newly sampleddredged soils by making the estimation of their strength development possible, which would facilitate and promote the utilization of steel slags anddredged soils.Subsequently, the inhibition of the pozzolanic reaction by soil organic matters that form soft mixtures was not due to the pH-buffering capacity of soil organic matters but may be occurring because of calciumcomplexation or mineral surface coverage by soil organic matters. An understanding of the inhibition mechanism of the strength development requires further studies, clarification of what component in the soil organic matters to attribute to the inhibition of the pozzolanic reaction, and how this component inhibits it; however, the results show the potential of this study for further investigations to facilitate the validation of dredged soils by mixing with cementing additives that form C-S-H as the major binding phase via the pozzolanic reaction. Overall, the findings shouldcontribute to an increased utilized fraction of dredged soils and industrial by-products that act as alkaline activators that replaces the destination of such materials from disposal wastes to construction resources, which would promote their utilization in the construction industry.
Authors: Vsévolod Mymrin; Roberto C Y Pan; Kirill Alekseev; Monica A Avanci; Jacqueline C Stella; Cristofer B Scremim; Daniela N Schiavini; Letícia S Pinto; Rhanna Berton; Silvana L Weber Journal: J Environ Manage Date: 2019-02-05 Impact factor: 6.789