Biopolymer Stabilization/Solidification of Soils: A Rapid, Micro-Macro, Cross-Disciplinary Approach
Samuel J. Armistead,Andrea E. Rawlings,Colin C. Smith,Sarah S. Staniland
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.0c02001
2020-10-23
Abstract:In this study, we describe a novel high throughput, micro-macro approach for the identification and efficient design of biopolymer stabilized soil systems. At the "microscopic" scale, we propose a rapid Membrane Enabled Bio-Mineral Affinity Screening (MEBAS) approach supported by Mineral Binding Characterization (MBC) (TGA, ATR-FTIR and ζ Potential), while at the "macroscopic" scale, micro scale results are confirmed by Geotechnical Verification (GV) through unconfined compression testing. We illustrate the methodology using an exemplar mine tailings Fe<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub>–SiO<sub>2</sub> system. Five different biopolymers were tested against Fe<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub>: locust bean gum, guar gum, gellan gum, xanthan gum, and sodium carboxymethyl cellulose. The screening revealed that locust bean gum and guar gum have the highest affinity for Fe<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub>, which was confirmed by MBC and in agreement with GV. This affinity is attributed to the biopolymer's ability to form covalent C–O–Fe bonds through β-(1,4)-<span class="smallcaps smallerCapital">d</span>-mannan groups. Upon their 1% addition to a "macroscopic" Fe<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub> based exemplar MT system, unconfined compressive strengths of 5171 and 3848 kPa were obtained, significantly higher than those for the other biopolymers and non-Fe systems. In the current study, MEBAS gave an approximately 50-fold increase in rate of assessment compared to GV alone. Application of the proposed MEBAS–MBC-GV approach to a broad range of soil/earthwork components and additives is discussed.The Supporting Information is available free of charge at <a class="ext-link" href="/doi/10.1021/acs.est.0c02001?goto=supporting-info">https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.0c02001</a>.Typical Mine Tailing ore, mineral composition, and pH (Figure S1); LB, GG, XG, Ge, CMC biopolymer characteristics (Figure S2); UCS of LB & GG stabilized samples upon a variation in initial moisture content (Figure S3); UCS of GG stabilized samples upon a variation in additive solution preparation conditions and curing times (Figure S4); example method to determine biopolymer average monomer molecular weight (Figure S5); typical biopolymer additive solution preparation conditions (Figure S6); schematic showing MEBAS methodology used to quantify biomineral interactions (Figure S7); Moisture Content Retention (%) of biopolymer stabilized samples (Figure S8); Fe<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub> particle characterization (Figure S9); Chemi Doc membrane images post Fe<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub> MEBAS experiments (Figure S10); individual bio-Fe<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub> TGA curves (Figure S11); XG, CMC, and Ge bio-Fe<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub> ATR-FTIR (Figure S12); schematic showing biomineral binding models determined via the MEBAS-MBC framework (Figure S13); circular dichroism of Ge biopolymer solutions (Figure S14); qualitative analysis of LB stabilized samples strength under saturation (Figure S15); table highlighting expected "results per day" using individual MEBAS-MBC-GV techniques (Figure S16) (<a class="ext-link" href="/doi/suppl/10.1021/acs.est.0c02001/suppl_file/es0c02001_si_001.pdf">PDF</a>)This article has not yet been cited by other publications.
environmental sciences,engineering, environmental