Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T17:39:44.223Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of hydrocarbon contamination on clay soil microstructure

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 July 2018

D. Izdebska-Mucha ,
J. TrzcińSk ,
M. S. Żbik  and
R. L. Frost
D. Izdebska-Mucha
Affiliation:
Institute of Hydrogeology and Engineering Geology, Faculty of Geology, University of Warsaw, Żwirki i Wigury 93, Warsaw, 02-089, Poland
J. TrzcińSk
Affiliation:
Institute of Hydrogeology and Engineering Geology, Faculty of Geology, University of Warsaw, Żwirki i Wigury 93, Warsaw, 02-089, Poland
M. S. Żbik
Affiliation:
Chemistry Discipline, Faculty of Science and Technology, Queensland University of Technology, 2 George Street, GPO Box 2434, Brisbane, Queensland 4001, Australia
R. L. Frost*
Affiliation:
Chemistry Discipline, Faculty of Science and Technology, Queensland University of Technology, 2 George Street, GPO Box 2434, Brisbane, Queensland 4001, Australia
*
*E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Microstructural (fabric, forces and composition) changes due to hydrocarbon contamination in a clayey soil (glacial till) were studied using scanning electron microscopy (microfabric analysis), atomic force microscopy (force measurement) and a sedimentation bench test (particle size measurements). Non-polluted and polluted glacial till from NE Poland (in the area of a fuel terminal) were used for the study. Electrostatic repulsive forces in the polluted samples were much lower than in non-polluted samples. In comparison with non-polluted samples, the polluted samples exhibited lower electric charge, attractive forces on approach and strong adhesion on withdrawal. The results of the sedimentation tests indicate that clay particles form larger aggregates and settle out of the suspension rapidly in diesel oil. In non-polluted soil, the fabric is strongly aggregated – dense packing, dominating face-to-face and edge-to-edge types of contacts, clay film tightly adhering to the surface of larger grains and interparticle pores are more common. In polluted soil the clay matrix is less aggregated – loose packing, dominating edge-to-face types of contacts and inter-micro-aggregate pores are more frequent. Substantial differences were observed in the morphometric and geometrical parameters of the pore space. The polluted soil micro-fabric proved to be more isotropic and less oriented than in non-polluted soil. The polluted soil, in which electrostatic forces were suppressed by hydrocarbon interaction, displays more open porosity and larger voids than non-polluted soil, which is characterized by the occurrence of strong electrostatic interaction between the clay particles.

Keywords

clay soilfabricinterparticle forcespetroleum pollutionparticle size
Type
Research Papers
Information
Clay Minerals , Volume 46 , Issue 1 , March 2011 , pp. 47 - 58
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

ASTM, (1990) Annual Book of ASTM Standards. American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, D422.Google Scholar
Berger, W., Kalbe, U. & Goebbels, J. (2002) Fabric studies on contaminated mineral layers in composite liners. Applied Clay Science, 21, 89–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowders, J.J. & Daniel, D.E. (1987) Hydraulic conductivity of compacted clay to dilute organic chemicals. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 113, 1432–1448.Google Scholar
BS (1990) British Standards Institution, London. 1377: Part 2: 9.5.Google Scholar
Carambassis, A., Jonker, L.C., Attard, P. & Rutland, M.W. (1998) Forces measured between hydrophobic surfaces due to a submicroscopic bridging bubble. Physical Review Letters, 80, 5357–5360.Google Scholar
Considine, R.F., Hayes, R.A. & Horn, R.G. (1999) Forces measured between latex spheres in aqueous electrolyte: non-DLVO behavior and sensitivity to dissolved gas. Langmuir, 15, 1657–1659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ducker, W.A., Senden, T.J. & Pashley, R.M. (1991) Direct measurement of colloidal forces using an atomic force microscope. Nature, 353, 239–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fang, H.Y. (1997) Introduction to Environmental Geotechnology. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.Google Scholar
Fernandez, F. & Quigley, R.M. (1985) Hydraulic conductivity of natural clays permeated with simple liquid hydrocarbons. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 22, 205–214.Google Scholar
Fernandez, F. & Quigley, R.M. (1988) Viscosity and dielectric constant controls on the hydraulic conductivity of clayey soils permeated with watersoluble organics. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 25, 582–589.Google Scholar
Gillott, J.E. (1987) Clay in Engineering Geology. Developments in Geotechnical Engineering, 41, Elsevier, Amsterdam - Oxford - New York - Tokyo.Google Scholar
Grabowska-Olszewska, B., Osipov, V.I. & Sokolov, V.N. (1984) Atlas of Microstructure of Clay Soils. Pań stwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, Warszawa, Poland.Google Scholar
Izdebska-Mucha, D. (2005) Influence of oil pollution on geological-engineering properties of clay soils. Przegla˛d Geologiczny, 53, 766–769 (in Polish with English abstract).Google Scholar
Izdebska-Mucha, D. & Trzciński, J. (2008) Effects of petroleum pollution on clay soil microstructure. Geologija, 50, 68–74.Google Scholar
Kaya, A. & Fang, H.Y. (2000) The effects of organic fluids on physicochemical parameters of fine-grained soils. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 37, 943–950.Google Scholar
Kaya, A. & Fang, H.Y. (2005) Experimental evidence of reduction in attractive and repulsive forces between clay particles permeated with organic liquids. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 42, 632–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khamehchiyan, M., Charkhabi, A.H. & Tajik, M. (2007) Effects of crude oil contamination on geotechnical properties of clayey and sandy soils. Engineering Geology, 89, 220–229.Google Scholar
Korzeniowska-Rejmer, E. & Izdebska-Mucha, D. (2006) Evaluation of the influence of oil pollution on particle size distribution and plasticity of clay soils. Inz˙ynieria i Ochrona Środowiska, 9, 89–103 (in Polish with English abstract).Google Scholar
Mitchell, J.K. (1976) Fundamentals of Soil Behaviour. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Moavenian, M.H. & Yasrobi, S.S. (2008) Volume change behavior of compacted clay due to organic liquids as permeant. Applied Clay Science, 39, 60–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riser-Roberts, E. (1998) Remediation of Petroleum Contaminated Soils. Lewis Publishers, London.Google Scholar
Sergeyev, Y.M., Grabowska-Olszewska, B., Osipov, V.I., and Sokolov, V.N. (1978) Types of the microstructures of clayey soils Proceedings of the III International Congress I.A.E.G., 1, 31 9-327.Google Scholar
Sergeyev, Y.M., Grabowska-Olszewska, B., Osipov, V.I., Sokolov, V.N. & Kolomenski, Y.N. (1980) The classification of microstructure of clay soil. Journal of Microscopy, 120, 237–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sergeyev, Y.M., Spivak, G.V., Sasov, A.Y., Osipov, V.I., Sokolov, V.N. & Rau, E.I. (1983) Quantitative morphological analysis in a SEM microcomputer system II. Morphological analysis of complex SEM images. Journal of Microscopy, 135, 1 3–24.Google Scholar
Singh, S.K., Srivastava, R.K. & John, S. (2009) Studies on soil contamination due to used motor oil and its remediation. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 46, 1077–1083.Google Scholar
Smart, P. & Tovey, N.K. (1982) Electron Microscopy of Soils and Sediments: Techniques. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Sokolov, V.N., Yurkovets, D.I. & Razgulina, O.V. (2002) Stiman (Structural Image Analysis): a Software for Quantitative Morphological Analysis of Structures by their Images (User’s Manual, Version 2.0). Laboratory of Electron Microscopy, Moscow State University Press, Moscow, Russia.Google Scholar
Surygała, J. & Ś liwka, E. (1999) Wycieki ropy naftowej. Przemysł Chemiczny, 78, 323–325.Google Scholar
Tovey, N.K. & Wong, K.Y. (1973) The preparation of soils and other geological materials for the S.E.M. Pp. 59-67 in: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Soil Structures. Swedish Geotechnical Society, Stockholm.Google Scholar
Trzciński, J. (2004) Combined SEM and computerized image analysis of clay soils microstructure: technique & application. Pp. 654-666 in: Advances in Geotechnical Engineering: the Skempton Conference (Jardine, R.J., Potts, D.M. & Higgins, K.G., editors) 1, Thomas Telford, London.Google Scholar
Trzciński, J. (2008) Microstructure and physico-mechanical properties of tills in Poland. Geologija, 50, 26–39.Google Scholar
Uppot, J.O. & Stephenson, R.W. (1989) Permeability of clays under organic permeants. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 115, 1 1 5–131. Z˙Google Scholar
Żbik, M.S. & Frost, R.L. (2010) Influence of smectite suspension structure on sheet orientation in dry sediments: XRD and AFM applications. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 346, 31 1–316. Z˙Google Scholar
Żbik, M.S., Martens, W., Frost, R.L., Song, Y.F., Chen, Y.M. & Chen, J.H. (2008) Transmission X-ray microscopy (TXM) reveals the nanostructure of a smectite gel. Langmuir, 24, 8954–8958.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed