Materials and Structures

, 52:111 | Cite as

Glucose addition improves the bio-remediation efficiency for crack repair

  • Xiaohao SunEmail author
  • Linchang Miao
  • Chengcheng Wang
Original Article


This study developed a novel method of glucose addition for the crack repair of concrete samples, which improved the bio-remediation efficiency. Various amounts of glucose were added to the medium at different sequence and the resulting absorbances were measured. Urea, calcium salt, and various amounts of glucose were mixed with an absorbance-fixed bacterial suspension and the resulting effect on calcium carbonate production was analyzed. Concrete specimens with irregular cracks were subjected to glucose addition for bio-remediation. Glucose addition decreased the pH, which inhibited the growth of bacteria. However, in a strong alkaline environment, this procedure was beneficial for crack repair. Informed by the bacterial growth and precipitation rates for calcium carbonate, addition of 10 g/L glucose was identified as the optimum concentration. After repair, the area recovery ratios of all samples exceeded 79%, while water penetration rates decreased significantly. The sonic time values of measurement points decreased and the strength of samples reached about 35% of the initial strength. Adding glucose to the medium during the repair improved the effect of the repair. This method can repair irregular cracks, accelerate the bio-remediation reaction, and reduce the repair time.


Crack repair Glucose Calcium carbonate Sonic time value Unconfined compressive strength 



This study was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Number 51578147), Scientific Research Foundation of Graduate School of Southeast University (Grant Number YBJJ1846). This work was also Supported by “the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities” and “Postgraduate Research and Practice Innovation Program of Jiangsu Province” (Grant Number KYCX18_0107).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.


  1. 1.
    Dejong JT, Soga K, Banwart SA et al (2011) Soil engineering in vivo: harnessing natural biogeochemical systems for sustainable, multi-functional engineering solutions. J R Soc Interface 8(54):1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Edvardsen C (1999) Water permeability and autogenous healing of cracks in concrete. ACI Mater J 96(4):448–454Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yang Y, Lepech MD, Yang E-H, Li VC (2009) Autogenous healing of engineered cementitious composites under wet-dry cycles. Cem Concr Res 39:382–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lee HXD, Wong HS, Buenfeld NR (2015) Self-sealing of cracks in concrete using superabsorbent polymers. Cem Concr Res 79:194–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stuckrath C, Serpell R, Valenzuela LM et al (2014) Quantification of chemical and biological calcium carbonate precipitation: performance of self-healing in reinforced mortar containing chemical admixtures. Cem Concr Compos 50:10–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hearn N (1998) Self-sealing, autogenous healing and continued hydration: what is the difference? Mater Struct 31(8):563–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lv Z, Chen H (2012) Modeling of self-healing efficiency for cracks due to unhydrated cement nuclei in hardened cement paste. In: Procedia Engineering, 2011 Chinese materials conference, vol 27. Elsevier, Atlanta, pp 281–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ranaivomanana H, Verdier J, Sellier A et al (2013) Sealing process induced by carbonation of localized cracks in cementitious materials. Cem Concr Compos 37(1):37–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Snoeck D, Van Tittelboom K, Steuperert S, Dubruel P, De Belie N (2014) Self-healing cementitious materials by the combination of microfibers and superabsorbent polymers. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 25(1):13–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Araújo M, Vlierberghe SV, Feiteira J (2016) Cross-linkable polyethers as healing/sealing agents for self-healing of cementitious materials. Mater Des 98:215–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Feiteira J, Gruyaert E, Belie ND (2016) Self-healing of moving cracks in concrete by means of encapsulated polymer precursors. Constr Build Mater 102:671–678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ferrara L, Krelani V, Moretti F (2016) On the use of crystalline admixtures in cement based construction materials: from porosity reducers to promoters of self healing. Smart Mater Struct 25(8):084002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pang B, Zhou Z, Hou P et al (2016) Autogenous and engineered healing mechanisms of carbonated steel slag aggregate in concrete. Constr Build Mater 107(6):191–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wu M, Johannesson B, Geiker M (2012) A review: self-healing in cementitious materials and engineered cementitious composite as a self-healing material. Constr Build Mater 28(1):571–583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wang J, Tittelboom KV, Belie ND, Verstraete W (2012) Use of silica gel or polyurethane immobilized bacteria for self-healing concrete. Constr Build Mater 26(1):532–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Van Tittelboom K, De Belie N, De Muynck W et al (2010) Use of bacteria to repair cracks in concrete. Cem Concr Res 40(1):157–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jonkers HM, Thijssen A, Muyzer G, Copuroglu O, Schlangen E (2010) Application of bacteria as self-healing agent for the development of sustainable concrete. Ecol Eng 36(2):230–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sun X et al (2018) The method of repairing microcracks based on microbiologically induced calcium carbonate precipitation. Adv Cem Res, pp 1–11Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sun X, Miao L, Tong T et al (2018) Improvement of microbial-induced calcium carbonate precipitation technology for sand solidification. J Mater Civ Eng 30(11):04018301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sun X, Miao L, Tong T, Wang C (2019) Study of the effect of temperature on microbially induced carbonate precipitation. Acta Geotech 14(3):627–638CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sun X, Miao L (2018) The comparison of microbiologically-induced calcium carbonate precipitation and magnesium carbonate precipitation. In: The international congress on environmental geotechnics. Springer, Singapore, pp 302–308Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Stocks-Fisher S, Galinat JK, Bang SS (1999) Microbiological precipitation of CaCO3. Soil Biol Biochem 31(11):1563–1571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schlangen E, Sangadji S (2013) Addressing infrastructure durability and sustainability by self healing mechanisms—recent advances in self healing concrete and asphalt. Procedia Eng 54:39–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zhu T, Dittrich M (2016) Carbonate precipitation through microbial activities in natural environment, and their potential in biotechnology: a review. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 4(4):4Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dejong JT, Fritzges MB, Nusslein K (2006) Microbially Induced Cementation to control sand response to undrained shear. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 132(11):1381–1392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cunningham AB, Lauchnor E, Eldring J et al (2013) Abandoned well CO2, leakage mitigation using biologically induced mineralization: current progress and future directions. Greenh Gases Sci Technol 3(1):40–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Phillips AJ, Gerlach R, Lauchnor E et al (2013) Engineered applications of ureolytic biomineralization: a review. Biofouling 29(6):715–733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ramachandran SK, Ramakrishnan V, Bang SS (2001) Remediation of concrete using microorganisms. ACI Mater J 98(1):3–9Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Luo M, Qian C (2016) Influences of bacteria-based self-healing agents on cementitious materials hydration kinetics and compressive strength. Constr Build Mater 121:659–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wiktor V, Jonkers HM (2011) Quantification of crack-healing in novel bacteria-based self-healing concrete. Cem Concr Compos 33(7):763–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sierra-Beltran MG, Jonkers HM, Schlangen E (2014) Characterization of sustainable bio-based mortar for concrete repair. Constr Build Mater 67:344–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Achal V, Mukherjee A, Kumari D et al (2015) Biomineralization for sustainable construction—a review of processes and applications. Earth Sci Rev 148:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bang SS, Lippert JJ, Yerra U et al (2010) Microbial calcite, a bio-based smart nanomaterial in concrete remediation. Int J Smart Nano Mater 1:28–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    De Muynck W, Debrouwer D, De Belie N et al (2008) Bacterial carbonate precipitation improves the durability of cementitious materials. Cem Concr Res 38(7):1005–1014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Pacheco-Torgal F, Labrincha JA (2013) Biotech cementitious materials: some aspects of an innovative approach for concrete with enhanced durability. Constr Build Mater 40(7):1136–1141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Tziviloglou E, Wiktor V, Jonkers HM et al (2016) Bacteria-based self-healing concrete to increase liquid tightness of cracks. Constr Build Mater 122:118–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Achal V, Mukherjee A (2015) A review of microbial precipitation for sustainable construction. Constr Build Mater 93:1224–1235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Edvardsen C (1999) Water penetrability and autogenous healing of separation cracks in concrete. ACI Mater J 96:448–454Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pu Q, Jiang L, Xu J, Chu H, Xu Y, Zhang Y (2012) Evolution of ph and chemical composition of pore solution in carbonated concrete. Constr Build Mater 28(1):519–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sun X, Miao L, Chen R (2019) Adding aluminum oxide to improve the repairing effect of cracks based on bio-remediation. J Adv Concr Technol 17(4):177–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wang JY, Soens H, Verstraete W et al (2014) Self-healing concrete by use of microencapsulated bacterial spores. Cem Concr Res 56(2):139–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Caruso MM, Blaiszik BJ, White SR et al (2008) Full recovery of fracture toughness using a nontoxic solvent-based self-healing system. Adv Funct Mater 18(13):1898–1904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hillewaere XK, Teixeira RF, Nguyen LTT et al (2014) Autonomous self-healing of epoxy thermosets with thiol-isocyanate chemistry. Adv Funct Mater 24(35):5575–5583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Castellani A, Chalmers AJ (1919) Manual of tropical medicine. William Wood and Company, New York, pp 934–936Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Domb AJ, Kost J, Wiseman D (1998) Handbook of biodegradable polymers. CRC Press, Boca Raton, p 275Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Entner N, Doudoroff M (1952) Glucose and gluconic acid oxidation of Pseudomonas saccharophila. J Biol Chem 196(2):853–862Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Hammes F, Verstraete W (2002) Key roles of pH and calcium metabolism in microbial carbonate precipitation. Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol 1(1):3–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Fredrickson JK, Fletcher M, Frederickson JK et al (2001) Subsurface microbiology and biogeochemistry. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    And HC, Antonietti M (1998) Crystal design of calcium carbonate microparticles using double-hydrophilic block copolymers. Langmuir 14(3):582–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Zhang Y, Guo HX, Cheng XH (2015) Role of calcium sources in the strength and microstructure of microbial mortar. Constr Build Mater 77:160–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    De Rooij M, Van Tittelboom K, De Belie N et al (eds) (2013) Self-healing phenomena in cement-based materials: state-of-the-art report of RILEM technical committee 221-SHC: self-healing phenomena in cement-based materials, vol 11. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Lors C, Ducasse-Lapeyrusse J, Gagné R et al (2017) Microbiologically induced calcium carbonate precipitation to repair microcracks remaining after autogenous healing of mortars. Constr Build Mater 141:461–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Wu X (2003) Technical handbook for nondestructive testing of concrete. China Communications Press, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Zhan Q, Qian C, Yi H (2016) Microbial-induced mineralization and cementation of fugitive dust and engineering application. Constr Build Mater 121:437–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Luhar S, Gourav S (2015) A review paper on self healing concrete. J Civ Eng Res 5(3):53–58Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Jauberthie R, Rendell F (2003) Physicochemical study of the alteration surface of concrete exposed to ammonium salts. Cem Concr Res 33(1):85–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Lang X, Zhang J, Liu B (2016) Changes in the pH value in the culture medium after high-pressure steam sterilization and their effects on bacterial growth. Heilongjiang Anim Sci Vet Med 7:30–33 Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Whiffin VS (2004) Microbial CaCO3 precipitation for the production ofbiocement. Murdoch University, PerthGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Sun X, Miao L, Wu L Wang C (2019) Study of magnesium precipitation based on biocementation. Mar Georesources GeotechnolGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Martinez B, DeJong J, Ginn T et al (2013) Experimental optimization of microbial-induced carbonate precipitation for soil improvement. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 139(4):587–598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Whiffin VS, van Paassen LA, Harkes MP (2007) Microbial carbonate precipitation as a soil improvement technique. Geomicrobiol J 24(5):417–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Ivanov V, Chu J (2008) Applications of microorganisms to geotechnical engineering for bioclogging and biocementation of soil in situ. Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol 7(2):139–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Jiang NJ, Yoshioka H, Yamamoto K et al (2016) Ureolytic activities of a urease-producing bacterium and purified urease enzyme in the anoxic condition: implication for subseafloor sand production control by microbially induced carbonate precipitation (MICP). Ecol Eng 90:96–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Hammes F, Boon N, de Villiers J, Verstraete W, Siciliano SD (2003) Strain-specific ureolytic microbial calcium carbonate precipitation. Appl Environ Microbiol 69:4901–4909CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Rodriguez-Navarro C, Rodriguez-Gallego M, Ben Chekroun K, González-Munoz MT (2003) Conservation of ornamental stone by Myxococcus xanthus-induced carbonate biomineralization. Appl Environ Microbiol 69:2182–2193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    De Muynck W, Verbeken K, De Belie N, Verstraete W (2013) Influence of temperature on the effectiveness of a biogenic carbonate surface treatment for limestone conservation. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 97:1335–1347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Li Wei, Liu L, Chen W, Yu L, Li Wenbing, Yu H (2010) Calcium carbonate precipitation and crystal morphology induced by microbial carbonic anhydrase and other biological factors. Process Biochem 45:1017–1021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Qabany AA, Soga K, Santamarina C (2012) Factors affecting efficiency of microbially induced calcite precipitation. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 138(8):992–1001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    De Muynck W, Verbeken K, De Belie N, Verstraete W (2013) Influence of temperature on the effectiveness of a biogenic carbonate surface treatment for limestone conservation. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 97:1335–1347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Huang H, Ye G, Damidot D (2013) Characterization and quantification of self-healing behaviors of microcracks due to further hydration in cement paste. Cem Concr Res 52:71–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Luo M, Qian CX, Li RY (2015) Factors affecting crack repairing capacity of bacteria-based self-healing concrete. Constr Build Mater 87:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Roig-Flores M, Pirritano F, Serna P et al (2016) Effect of crystalline admixtures on the self-healing capability of early-age concrete studied by means of permeability and crack closing tests. Constr Build Mater 114:447–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    White SR, Sottos NR, Geubelle PH et al (2001) Autonomic healing of polymer composites. Nature 409(6822):794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Kessler MR, Sottos NR, White SR (2003) Self-healing structural composite materials. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf 34(8):743–753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Blaiszik BJ, Kramer SL, Olugebefola SC et al (2010) Self-healing polymers and composites. Annu Rev Mater Res 40:179–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Cui D, Ping G (2011) Rehabilitation of concrete beam by using martensitic shape memory alloy strands. Adv Mater Res 243:5527–5530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Shin M, Andrawes B (2011) Emergency repair of severely damaged reinforced concrete columns using active confinement with shape memory alloys. Smart Mater Struct 20(6):065018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Alazhari M, Sharma T, Heath A, Cooper R, Paine K (2018) Application of expanded perlite encapsulated bacteria and growth media for self-healing concrete. Constr Build Mater 160:610–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Khaliq W, Ehsan MB (2016) Crack healing in concrete using various bio influenced self-healing techniques. Constr Build Mater 102:349–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Achal V, Mukerjee A, Reddy MS (2013) Biogenic treatment improves the durability and remediates the cracks of concrete structures. Constr Build Mater 48(19):1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© RILEM 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Geotechnical EngineeringSoutheast UniversityNanjingChina

Personalised recommendations