Optimization of resistance of biologically improved sand by response surface methodology

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Ph.D Student of Geotechnical engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, Qazvin Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qazvin, Iran

2 Associate Prof., Department of Civil Engineering, Qazvin Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qazvin, Iran

3 Assistant Prof., Department of Civil Engineering, Qazvin Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qazvin, Iran

Abstract

Need to increase urban infrastructure and lack of access to suitable quality soil increased demand for new methods for soil improvement. Recently, improving the parameters of strength, stiffness and permeability of sand under microbial induced calcite precipitation has received much attention from geotechnical experts as innovative and environmentally friendly methods. Therefore, it is very important to study the parameters affecting the biological improvement technique and find the ideal combination to increase efficiency and reduce costs. The main purpose of this paper is to investigate the effect of the variability of cementation solution molarity, bacterial optical density and curing time (three levels of variation for each) on the parameters of deviation and effective stresses for biologically improved sand under undrained triaxial compression test. The sand used in this study is a SP soil according to the unified soil classification system, and the adopted micro-organism is Bacillus pasteurii as the urease-positive bacterium. The response surface methodology was used to optimize the stress parameters in the improved sand and to significantly reduce the number of experiments. The experiments were designed using a Box-Behnken design with five central points. Three-dimensional schemes and regression model contours were used to evaluate and compare the effect of each variable. In this method, according to the analysis of variance for the data, the effect of all variables on the responses was significant and the optimal values for effective and deviation stresses were 958.2 and 1032.4 (kPa), respectively. Due to the slope of the curves, the molarity of the cementation solution had the greatest effect on the responses, and the effect of bacterial optical density on effective stress was less than deviation stress, that may be due to the accumulation of excess bacteria (lack of nutrients) and its impact on excess pore water pressure.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

[1] Xanthakos, P.P., Abramson, L.W. and Bruce, D.A. (1994). Ground Control and Improvement. John Wiley & Sons.
[2] Karol, R.H. (2003). Chemical Grouting and Soil Stabilization. Revised and Expanded. Vol 12, Crc Press.
[3] Van Paassen, LA. (2009). Biogrout, ground improvement by microbial induced carbonate precipitation. University of Delf. Dissertation.
[4] Rong, H., Qian, C-X. and Li, L. (2012). Study on microstructure and properties of sandstone cemented by microbe cement. Construction and Building Materials, 36, 687-694.
[5] DeJong, J.T., Fritzges, M.B. and Nüsslein, K. (2006). Microbially induced cementation to control sand response to undrained shear. Journal of geotechnical and geoenvironmental engineering, 132(11), 1381-1392.
[6] Whiffin, V.S., van Paassen, L.A. and Harkes, M.P. (2007). Microbial carbonate precipitation as a soil improvement technique. Geomicrobiology Journal, 24(5), 417-423.
[7] Cheng, L. and Shahin, M.A. (2019). Microbially induced calcite precipitation (MICP) for soil stabilization. In Ecological wisdom inspired restoration engineering, 47-68.
[8] Gao, Y., Tang, X., Chu, J. and He, J. (2019). Microbially Induced Calcite Precipitation for Seepage Control in Sandy Soil. Geomicrobiology Journal, 36(4), 366-375.
[9] Jiang, N.J. and Soga, K. (2017). The applicability of microbially induced calcite precipitation (MICP) for internal erosion control in gravel-sand mixtures. Géotechnique, 67(1), 42-55.
[10] Cheng, L., Kobayashi, T. and Shahin, M.A. (2020). Microbially induced calcite precipitation for production of “bio-bricks” treated at partial saturation condition. Construction and Building Materials, 231, 117095.
[11] Harkes, M.P., Van Paassen, L.A., Booster, J.L., Whiffin, V.S. and van Loosdrecht M.C.M. (2010). Fixation and distribution of bacterial activity in sand to induce carbonate precipitation for ground reinforcement. Ecological Engineering, 36(2), 112-117.
[12]  Al Qabany, A., Soga, K. and Santamarina, C. (2012). Factors affecting efficiency of microbially induced calcite precipitation. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 138(8), 992-1001.
[13]  Montoya, B.M. and DeJong, J.T. (2015). Stress-strain behavior of sands cemented by microbially induced calcite precipitation”, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 141(6),4015019.
[14]  Azadi, M., Ghayoomi, M., Shamskia, N. and Kalantari, H. (2017). Physical and mechanical properties of reconstructed bio-cemented sand. Soils and Foundations, 57(5), 698-706.
[15]  Kim, G., Kim, J. and Youn, H. (2018). Effect of temperature, pH, and reaction duration on microbially induced calcite precipitation. Applied Sciences,  8(8):1277.
[16]  Cheng, L., Shahin, M.A. and Chu, J. (2019). Soil bio-cementation using a new one-phase low-pH injection method. Acta Geotechnica, 14(3),615-626.
[17]  Salifu, E., MacLachlan, E., Iyer, K. R., Knapp, C. W., and Tarantino, A. (2016). Application of microbially induced calcite precipitation in erosion mitigation and stabilisation of sandy soil foreshore slopes: a preliminary investigation. Engineering Geology, 201, 96-105.
[18]  Riveros, G.A. and Sadrekarimi, A. (2020). Effect of Microbially-induced Cementation on the Instability and Critical State Behaviors of Fraser River Sand”, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 1(519),1-50.
[19]  Yuan, Y., Gao, Y., Mao, L., and Zhao, J. (2008). Optimisation of conditions for the preparation of β-carotene nanoemulsions using response surface methodology. Food chemistry, 107(3), 1300-1306.
[20] Khuri, A.I., and Mukhopadhyay, S. (2010). Response surface methodology. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics, 2(2), 128-149.     
[21]  Madigan, M.T., Martinko, J. (2003). Brock Biology of Microorganisms. 11th edited.
[22]  Whiffin, V.S. (2004). Microbial CaCO3 precipitation for the production of biocement”, Dissertation, Murdoch University, Western Australia.
[23]  Chen, L., Li, L., Xing, F., Peng, J., Peng, K., Wang, Y., and Xiang, Z. (2018). Human urine-derived stem cells: potential for cell-based therapy of cartilage defects. Stem cells international.
[24]  Lin, H., Suleiman, M.T., Brown, D.G., and Kavazanjian Jr, E. (2016). Mechanical behavior of sands treated by microbially induced carbonate precipitation. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 142(2), 1-13.
[25]  Han, Z., Cheng, X., and Ma, Q. (2016). An experimental study on dynamic response for MICP strengthening liquefiable sands. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 15(4), 673-679.
 [26] Sasaki, T., and Kuwano, R. (2016). Undrained cyclic triaxial testing on sand with non-plastic fines content cemented with microbially induced CaCO3. Soils and Foundations, 56(3), 485-495.
 [27] Gharibzahedi, S.M. T., Mousavi, S.M., Hamedi, M., and Ghasemlou, M. (2012). Response surface modeling for optimization of formulation variables and physical stability assessment of walnut oil-in-water beverage emulsions. Food Hydrocolloids, 26(1), 293-301.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 23 November 2021
  • Revise Date: 04 June 2022
  • Accept Date: 02 July 2022

Share

How to cite

Statistics