Otwarty dostęp

Influence of composition of curing agent and sand ratio of engineering excavated soil on mechanical properties of fluidized solidified soil


Zacytuj

Fig. 1.

Appearance of different excavated soils
Appearance of different excavated soils

Fig. 2.

Variation diagram of strength of fluidized solidified soil with composition ratio of curing agent
Variation diagram of strength of fluidized solidified soil with composition ratio of curing agent

Fig. 3.

Unconfined compressive strength of fluidized solidified soil with different sand ratio
Unconfined compressive strength of fluidized solidified soil with different sand ratio

Fig. 4.

X-ray diffraction patterns of fluidized solidified soil with different sand ratio after 28 days of curing. (AFt: ettringite (3CaO·Al2O3·3CaSO4·32H2O); CSH: calcium silicate hydrate (Ca5Si6O16(OH)*4H2O); CASH: calcium silicoaluminate hydrate (Ca2Al2 SiO7(OH)*4nH2O))
X-ray diffraction patterns of fluidized solidified soil with different sand ratio after 28 days of curing. (AFt: ettringite (3CaO·Al2O3·3CaSO4·32H2O); CSH: calcium silicate hydrate (Ca5Si6O16(OH)*4H2O); CASH: calcium silicoaluminate hydrate (Ca2Al2 SiO7(OH)*4nH2O))

Fig. 5.

Micrograph of fluidized solidified soil with different sand ratio after 28 days of curing (AFt: ettringite (3CaO·Al2O3·3CaSO4	·32H2O))
Micrograph of fluidized solidified soil with different sand ratio after 28 days of curing (AFt: ettringite (3CaO·Al2O3·3CaSO4 ·32H2O))

Fig. 6.

Variation of softening coefficient of fluidized solidified soil with different sand ratio with curing age before soaking
Variation of softening coefficient of fluidized solidified soil with different sand ratio with curing age before soaking

Fig. 7.

Comparison diagram of carbon emissions of fluidized solidified soil and traditional backfill materials
Comparison diagram of carbon emissions of fluidized solidified soil and traditional backfill materials

Fig. 8.

Field application of the fluidized solidified soil prepared in this paper
Field application of the fluidized solidified soil prepared in this paper

Fig. 9.

Surface morphology of uncured and cured solidified soil
Surface morphology of uncured and cured solidified soil

Physical characteristics of engineering excavated soil

Type Water content (%) Density (g/cm3) Liquid limit (%) Plastic limit (%) Plasticity index (%)
A 28.8 1.94 39.9 21.7 18.2
B 23.2 1.98 38.9 20.9 18.0
C 26.6 1.95 35.3 20.6 14.7

Basic properties of fly ash

Fineness (%) Chloride ion content (%) Water demand ratio (%) Loss on ignition (%) Sulfur trioxide (%) Water content (%)
19.8 0.014 102 2.38 0.79 0.11

Mixing ratio of the fluidized solidified soil

Number Type of soil Soil (kg) Cement (kg) Fly ash (kg) Quicklime (kg) Water (kg) Slump (kg)
A-1 A 800 60 60 0 736 240
A-2 A 800 60 45 15 736 235
A-3 A 800 60 30 30 736 220
A-4 A 800 60 15 45 736 190
A-5 A 800 60 0 60 736 180
B-1 B 800 60 20 30 400 220
C-1 C 800 60 30 30 294 220

Mass ratio (kg) and corresponding raw material carbon emission factor used in carbon emission calculation of different backfill materials [28–32]

Backfill materials Clay Quicklime Cement Fly ash Sand Aggregate Water Water reducer Foaming agent Excavated soil
Lime-soil 1120 360                
C15 plain concrete     168 82 840 1170 160 2.5    
Foamed concrete     332   812   358   0.23  
Fluidized solidified soil   48 72 24     598     958
Carbon emission factor (kg CO2e/t) 2.69 1190 735 8 2.51 2.18 0.168 28 1950 1.0

Chemical composition of cement (wt%)

Materials CaO SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 MgO SO3 Alkali content Loss
Cement 59.09 22.82 6.98 2.25 2.33 2.27 0.70 3.08
eISSN:
2083-134X
Język:
Angielski
Częstotliwość wydawania:
4 razy w roku
Dziedziny czasopisma:
Materials Sciences, other, Nanomaterials, Functional and Smart Materials, Materials Characterization and Properties