挥发性有机物污染泥浆固化稳定化试验研究

doi:10.16285/j.rsm.2016.05.009

›› 2016, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (5): 1281-1290.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2016.05.009

挥发性有机物污染泥浆固化稳定化试验研究

夏威夷^{1, 2}，杜延军^{1, 2}，魏明俐^{1, 2}，薄煜琳^{1, 2}，宋德君³

1.东南大学交通学院岩土工程研究所，江苏南京 210096；2.东南大学江苏省城市地下工程与环境安全重点实验室，江苏南京 210096； 3.江苏圣泰环境科技股份有限公司，江苏南京 210007

收稿日期:2014-07-23 出版日期:2016-05-10 发布日期:2018-06-09
通讯作者: 魏明俐，男，1983年生，博士研究生，主要从事环境岩土及城市地下空间工程的研究工作。E-mail: weimingli830716@sina.com E-mail: diguosj@163.com
作者简介:夏威夷，男，1989年生，博士研究生，主要从事环境岩土工程的研究工作。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金重点项目（No. 41330641）；江苏省自然科学基金（No. BK 2012022, BK 2010060）；国家高技术研究发展计划（863计划）（No. 2013AA06A206）；国家自然科学基金（No. 51278100）。

Experimental study of solidification/stabilization of VOCs contaminated slurry

XIA Wei-yi^{1, 2}, DU Yan-jun^{1, 2}, WEI Ming-li^{1, 2}, BO Yu-lin^{1, 2}, SONG De-jun³

1.Institute of Geotechnical Engineering, School of Transportation, Southeast University, Nanjing, Jiangsu 210096, China; 2.Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Urban Underground Engineering & Environmental Safety, Southeast University, Nanjing, Jiangsu 210096, China; 3.Jiangsu Sentay Environmental Science and Technology Co, Ltd., Nanjing, Jiangsu 210007, China

Received:2014-07-23 Online:2016-05-10 Published:2018-06-09
Supported by:
This work was supported by the Key Program for the National Natural Science Foundation of China (41330641), the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province, China(BK 2012022, BK 2010060), the National High-tech R & D Program of China (863 Program) (2013AA06A206) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China(51278100).

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 针对有机污染场地修复施工过程中出现的冒浆现象，选取2种典型有机污染泥浆，通过多组室内试验，对比分析了4种固化剂的固化稳定效果。结果表明：4种固化剂均有较好的减水效果，典型泥浆I的含水率28 d降幅可达45%，而典型泥浆II的28 d减水效果以固化剂A（5%水泥）最优，其含水率降幅为37%；固化土样孔隙水电导率EC随龄期先升高后降低，其峰值出现在3 d或7 d；固化土样pH值总体随龄期而增大，且典型泥浆II的pH值明显高于典型泥浆I；泥浆固化后qu值随龄期发展而快速增长，且典型泥浆I强度远高于典型泥浆II，并以固化剂A、C固化增强效果最佳，28 d时固化剂C固化的典型泥浆I、II的qu值分别达到233、48 kPa；添加固化剂尤其是含凹凸棒土的固化剂B、D能有效降低有机污染物的浸出，其28 d龄期对典型泥浆I、II的稳定率超过81%。固化泥浆EC、pH值与qu值关系具有明显规律，可反映其强度生长状况。

关键词: 有机物污染, 泥浆, 固化稳定化, pH, 强度, 水泥, 凹凸棒土

Abstract: To study the mud spillover problem in remediating the VOCs (volatile organic compounds) contaminated site, a series of laboratory tests was carried out on two typical types of VOCs contaminated slurry. The treatment effects of solidification/stabilization of 4 kinds of binding agents are studied. The results indicate that all the binding agents have strong water-reducing capacity and agent A (5% cement) performs best in slurry II with a water reducing rate of 37% after 28-day curing, while slurry I possesses a higher water reducing rate of about 45% for all the agents. The electrical conductivities of pore water solutions increase firstly and reach the maximum on the third day or seventh day, then decrease with the increase of curing time, and the pH value of slurry II is clearly higher than that of slurry I. The unconfined compressive strength qu of soil samples quickly increases with the curing time, and the qu of slurry I is much higher than that of slurry II. It is also shown that agents A and C have a significantly better reinforcing effect, and the qu values for slurry I and II treated by agent C can reach 233 and 48 kPa, respectively, after 28-day curing. Besides that, the addition of attapulgite-based agents B and D can reduce the total organic concentration of TCLP (toxicity characteristic leaching procedure) leachate and improve the environmental safety dramatically. There is also good correlation among the values of EC, pH and qu of stabilized soil, which can reflect the strength growth.

Key words: organic contaminant, slurry, solidification/stabilization, pH, strength, cement, attapulgite

中图分类号:

TU 411

夏威夷，杜延军，魏明俐，薄煜琳，宋德君，. 挥发性有机物污染泥浆固化稳定化试验研究[J]. , 2016, 37(5): 1281-1290.

XIA Wei-yi , DU Yan-jun , WEI Ming-li , BO Yu-lin , SONG De-jun，. Experimental study of solidification/stabilization of VOCs contaminated slurry[J]. , 2016, 37(5): 1281-1290.

参考文献

相关文章 15

[1]	徐刚, 张春会, 于永江, . 综放工作面覆岩破断和压架的试验研究及预测模型[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(S1): 106-114.
[2]	桂跃, 吴承坤, 赵振兴, 刘声钧, 刘锐, 张秋敏. 微生物分解有机质作用对泥炭土工程性质的影响[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(S1): 147-155.
[3]	刘杰, 杨玉婳, 姚海林, 卢正, 岳婵, . 基于不同改性方法的分散性黏土处治试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(S1): 163-170.
[4]	邹先坚, 王益腾, 王川婴. 钻孔图像中岩石结构面三维形貌特征及优势抗滑方向研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(S1): 290-298.
[5]	李丽华, 余肖婷, 肖衡林, 马强, 刘一鸣, 杨星, . 稻壳灰加筋土力学性能研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(7): 2168-2178.
[6]	高玮, 胡承杰, 贺天阳, 陈新, 周聪, 崔爽, . 基于统计强度理论的破裂岩体本构模型研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(7): 2179-2188.
[7]	朱剑锋, 徐日庆, 罗战友, 潘斌杰, 饶春义, . 考虑固化剂掺量影响的镁质水泥固化土非线性本构模型[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(7): 2224-2232.
[8]	袁庆盟, 孔亮, 赵亚鹏, . 考虑水合物填充和胶结效应的深海能源土弹塑性本构模型[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(7): 2304-2312.
[9]	陈昊, 胡小荣. 非饱和土三剪强度准则及验证[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(7): 2380-2388.
[10]	吴再海, 纪洪广, 姜海强, 齐兆军, 寇云鹏, . 尾砂胶结含盐冻结充填体力学特性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(6): 1874-1880.
[11]	瑜璐, 杨庆, 杨钢, 张金利. 塑性极限分析鱼雷锚锚尖贯入阻力[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(6): 1953-1962.
[12]	刘新宇, 张先伟, 岳好真, 孔令伟, 徐超, . 花岗岩残积土动态冲击性能的SHPB试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(6): 2001-2008.
[13]	张振, 张朝, 叶观宝, 王萌, 肖彦, 程义, . 劲芯水泥土桩承载路堤渐进式失稳破坏机制[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(6): 2122-2131.
[14]	刘海峰, 朱长歧, 汪稔, 王新志, 崔翔, 王天民, . 礁灰岩-混凝土界面剪切特性试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(5): 1540-1548.
[15]	谈云志, 柯睿, 陈君廉, 吴军, 邓永锋. 碱溶液预降解淤泥有机质的效果与机制讨论[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(5): 1567-1572.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

挥发性有机物污染泥浆固化稳定化试验研究

Experimental study of solidification/stabilization of VOCs contaminated slurry

PDF (Chinese)

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0