Skip to main content
Log in

Comparisons of operating envelopes for contaminated soil stabilised/solidified with different cementitious binders

Environmental Science and Pollution Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This work initiated the development of operating envelopes for stabilised/solidified contaminated soils. The operating envelopes define the range of operating variables for acceptable performance of the treated soils. The study employed a soil spiked with 3,000 mg/kg each of Cd, Cu, Pb, Ni and Zn, and 10,000 mg/kg of diesel. The binders used for treatment involved Portland cement (CEMI), pulverised fuel ash (PFA), ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS) and hydrated lime (hlime). The specific binder formulations were CEMI, CEMI/PFA = 1:4, CEMI/GGBS = 1:9 and hlime/GGBS = 1:4. The water contents employed ranged from 13 % to 21 % (dry weight), while binder dosages ranged from 5 % to 20 % (w/w). We monitored the stabilised/solidified soils for up to 84 days using different performance tests. The tests include unconfined compressive strength (UCS), hydraulic conductivity, acid neutralisation capacity (ANC) and pH-dependent leachability of contaminants. The water content range resulted in adequate workability of the mixes but had no significant effect on leachability of contaminants. We produced design charts, representing operating envelopes, from the results generated. The charts establish relationships between water content, binder dosage and UCS; and binder dosage, leachant pH and leachability of contaminants. The work also highlights the strengths and weaknesses of the different binder formulations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams RH (2004) Chemical–biological stabilisation of hydrocarbon-contaminated soil and drilling cuttings in tropical Mexico. Land Contamination and Reclamation 12(4):349–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akhter H, Butler LG, Branz S, Cartledge FK, Tittlebaum ME (1990) Immobilization of As, Cd, Cr and Pb-containing soils by using cement or pozzolanic fixing agents. J Hazard Mater 24:145–155

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Akinwumi I, Adeyeri J, Ejohwomu O (2012) Effects of steel slag addition on the plasticity, strength, and permeability of lateritic soil. In: Chong WKO, Gong J, Chang J, Siddiqui MK (eds) International conference on sustainable design, engineering, and construction, Fort Worth, TX, United States. Available: http://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/9780784412688.055, 2012. pp 457–464

  • Al-Sanad HA, Ismael NF (1997) Aging effects on oil-contaminated Kuwaiti sand. ASCE Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering 123(3):290–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Tabbaa A, Evans CW (2000) Pilot in situ auger mixing treatment of a contaminated site. Part 3. Time-related performance. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers. Geotech Eng 143:103–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arickx S, De Borger V, Van Gerven T, Vandecasteele C (2010) Effect of carbonation on the leaching of organic carbon and of copper from MSWI bottom ash. Waste Manag 30:1296–1302

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Arora S, Aydilek AH (2005) Class F fly-ash-amended soils as highway base materials. J Mater Civ Eng 17:640–649

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • ASTM D1633-00 (2000) Standard method for compressive strength of molded soil–cement cylinders. American Society for Testing of Materials, West Conshohocken, PA

  • ASTM D5084-03 (2003) Standard test methods for measurement of hydraulic conductivity of saturated porous materials using a flexible wall permeameter. American Society for Testing of Materials, West Conshohocken, PA

  • Bone BD, Barnard LH, Boardman DI, Carey PJ, Hills CD, Jones HM, MacLeod CL (2004) Review of scientific literature on the use of stabilisation/solidification for the treatment of contaminated soil, solid waste and sludges. UK Environment Agency Science Report SC980003/SR2, Bristol

  • Brautigan DJ (2010) Chemistry, phytotoxicity and remediation of alkaline soils. PhD thesis, The University of Adelaide, Australia. Available at: http://digital.library.adelaide.edu.au/dspace/bitstream/2440/69719/1/02whole.pdf. Accessed June 2012.,

  • BSI BS1377: Part 4 (1990) Methods of test for soils for civil engineering purposes: compaction-related tests. British Standards Institution, London.

  • Christensen TH, Lehmann N, Jackson T, Holm PE (1996) Cadmium and nickel distribution coefficients for sandy aquifer materials. J Contam Hydrol 24:75–84

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Conner JR, Hoeffner SL (1998) A critical review of stabilization/solidification technology. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 28(4):397–462

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dermatas D, Menounou N, Meng XG (2006) Mechanisms of lead immobilization in treated soils. Land Contamination and Reclamation 14(1):43–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El-Rawi MN, Awad AAA (1981) Permeability of lime stabilized soils. Journal of Transportation Engineering Division ASCE 107:25–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Environment Agency (2006) Guidance for waste destined for disposals in landfills, Version 2, Interpretation of the Waste Acceptance Requirements of the Landfill (England and Wales) Regulations (as amended). Environment Agency, Bristol

  • Guerinot ML (2007) It's elementary: enhancing Fe3+ reduction improves rice yield. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104(18):7311–7312

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins DD (2005) Soil stabilisation with ground granulated blastfurnace slag. UK Cementitious Slag makers Association report. Available at: http://www.ecocem.ie/downloads/Soil_Stabilisation.pdf?PHPSESSID=5ec729224273596073a6071e4f56075d, (Accessed: December 2012).

  • Jegandan S (2010) Ground improvement with conventional and novel binders. PhD thesis, Cambridge University, UK

  • Kabata-Pendias A, Mukherjee AB (2007) Trace elements from soil to human. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kogbara RB, Al-Tabbaa A (2011) Mechanical and leaching behaviour of slag–cement and lime-activated slag stabilised/solidified contaminated soil. Sci Total Environ 409(11):2325–2335

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kogbara RB, Yi Y, Al-Tabbaa A (2011) Process envelopes for stabilisation/solidification of contaminated soil using lime–slag blend. Environ Sci Pollut Res 18(8):1286–1296

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kogbara RB, Al-Tabbaa A, Yi Y, Stegemann JA (2012) pH-dependent leaching behaviour and other performance properties of cement-treated mixed contaminated soil. J Environ Sci 24(9):1630–1638

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kogbara RB, Al Tabbaa A, Yi Y, Stegemann JA (2013) Cement-fly ash stabilisation/solidification of contaminated soil: performance properties and initiation of operating envelopes. Appl Geochem 33:64–75

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • LaGrega MD, Buckingham PL, Evans JC, Management ER (2001) Hazardous waste management, 2nd edn. McGraw Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Moon DH, Lee J-R, Grubb DG, Park J-H (2010) An assessment of Portland cement, cement kiln dust and Class C fly ash for the immobilization of Zn in contaminated soils. Environmental Earth Sciences 61(8):1745–1750

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Oner A, Akyuz S (2007) An experimental study on optimum usage of GGBS for the compressive strength of concrete. Cem Concr Compos 29:505–514

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Perera ASR, Al-Tabbaa A, Reid JM, Stegemann JA (2005) State of practice report, UK stabilisation/solidification treatment and remediation: Part IV. Testing and performance criteria. In: Al-Tabbaa A, Stegemann JA (eds) Proceedings of the International conference on stabilisation/solidification treatment and remediation, Cambridge, 2005. Taylor and Francis, London, pp 415–435

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Samsatli NJ, Sharif M, Shah N, Papageorgiou LG (2001) Operational envelopes for batch processes. AIChE J 47:2277–2288

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schifano V, Macleod CL, Dudeney AWL, Dudeney R (2005) Remediation of soils contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons using quicklime mixing. In: Al-Tabbaa A, Stegemann JA (eds) Proceedings of the International conference on stabilisation/solidification treatment and remediation, Cambridge. Taylor and Francis, London, pp 69–78

  • Shi C, Fernandez-Jimenez A (2006) Stabilization/solidification of hazardous and radioactive wastes with alkali-activated cements. J Hazard Mater B137:1656–1663

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence RD, Shi C (eds) (2005) Stabilization and solidification of hazardous, radioactive and mixed wastes. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL

    Google Scholar 

  • Stegemann JA (2005) Interactions between wastes and binders. In: Spence RD, Shi C (eds) Stabilization and solidification of hazardous, radioactive and mixed wastes. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp 151–176

    Google Scholar 

  • Stegemann JA, Côté PL (1991) Investigation of test methods for solidified waste evaluation – cooperative program. Environment Canada Report EPS 3/HA/8. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

  • Stegemann JA, Côté PL (1996) A proposed protocol for evaluation of solidified wastes. Sci Total Environ 178:103–110

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stegemann JA, Zhou Q (2008) Development of process envelopes for cement-based stabilisation/solidification of metal treatment filtercakes. WIT Trans Ecol Environ 109:21–30

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Trussell S, Spence RD (1994) A review of solidification/stabilisation interferences. Waste Manag 14:507–519

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • UFC (2004) Soil stabilization for pavements. United Facilities Criteria (3-250-11), TM 5-822-14/AFJMAN 32/1019. Available: http://www.wbdg.org/ccb/DOD/UFC/ufc_3_250_11.pdf (Accessed March 2013).

  • UKQAA (2006) Pulverised fuel ash for grouting. United Kingdom Quality Ash Association (UKQAA) Technical Data Sheet. <http://www.ukqaa.org.uk/> (accessed December 2010).

  • van der Sloot HA, Comansa RNJ, Hjelmarb O (1996) Similarities in the leaching behaviour of trace contaminants from waste, stabilized waste, construction materials and soils. Sci Total Environ 178:111–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wild S, Kinuthia JM, Robinson RB, Humphreys I (1996) Effects of ground granulated blastfurnace slag (GGBS) on strength and swelling properties of lime stabilized kaolinite in the presence of sulphates. Clay Miner 31(3):423–433

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yilmaz O, Cokca OE, Unlu K (2003) Comparison of two leaching tests to assess the effectiveness of cement-based hazardous waste solidification/stabilization. Turk J Eng Environ Sci 27:201–212

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This paper was written to support the ProCeSS project, which was conducted by a consortium of five universities, led by University College London, and 17 industrial partners, under the UK DIUS Technology Strategy Board (TP/3/WMM/6/I/15611). The project website is at http://www.cege.ucl.ac.uk/process

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Reginald B. Kogbara.

Additional information

Reponsible editor: Zhihong Xu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kogbara, R.B., Al-Tabbaa, A. & Stegemann, J.A. Comparisons of operating envelopes for contaminated soil stabilised/solidified with different cementitious binders. Environ Sci Pollut Res 21, 3395–3414 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-013-2276-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-013-2276-7

Keywords

Navigation