Liquefaction Mitigation Using Microbial Induced Calcite Precipitation

Abstract

The potential of a novel, bio-mediated soil improvement to increase resistance to liquefaction triggering and to reduce the consequences of liquefaction if it occurs was evaluated. Microbial induced calcite precipitation (MICP) binds sand particles together through calcite crystal formation at particle-particle contacts. This results in an increase in the small-strain stiffness and strength of treated loose sand. Geotechnical centrifuge tests were used to evaluate the increased resistance of MICP treated sand relative to untreated loose sand when subjected to seismic shaking. Results of one model with a structure founded on sand treated to a moderate level of cementation and another model with the structure founded on loose untreated sand are compared. The centrifuge models were subjected to ground motions consisting of sine waves with increasing amplitudes. The accelerations, pore pressures, and shear wave velocities measured in the soil during shaking are presented. The resistance to liquefaction and deformation in the MICP treated model showed significant increases, as evidenced by substantial decreases in excess pore pressure ratios and vertical strains beneath the structure.

Construction Biotechnology: a new area of biotechnological research and applications

“…2 and 3) in water-saturated sandy soil produces a big quantity of nitrogen gas partially desaturating this soil and thus mitigating earthquake soil liquefaction (Hamdan et al 2011;He et al 2013;Eseller-Bayat et al 2012;Montoya et al 2012;Rebata-Landa and Santamarina 2012;Weil et al 2011;Yegian et al 2007). The major advantages of the biogas production in situ are as follows: (1) the distribution of the gas bubbles in soil is uniform because a biogrout is a liquid with the same viscosity as water and can be distributed evenly in porous soil; (2) nitrogen gas is inert and has low solubility in water (Chu et al , 2014b; Rebata-Landa and Santamarina 2012).…”

“…There are known several reports on denitrification and even simultaneous biocementation of sand using calcium salt under denitrification process (DeJong et al 2006;EsellerBayat et al 2012;Hamdan et al 2011;Montoya et al 2012;Rebata-Landa and Santamarina 2012;Weil et al 2011;Yegian et al 2007). However, our experiments on an application of denitrifying bacteria Paracoccus denitrificans DSM 413 for bioclogging of sand showed that an addition of Ca 2?…”

Comparison of Nanomaterials with Other Unconventional Materials Used as Additives for Soil Improvement in the Context of Sustainable Development: A Review

“…The CSR of both untreated loose sand and MICP-treated sand are plotted against the number of cycles needed to induce liquefaction. It is obvious that the MICP-treated sand needs a significantly larger number of cycles to liquefaction compared with untreated sand on the condition that the CSR remains the same, indicating that the liquefaction resistance is improved by MICP treatment [ 55 ]. Moreover, the acceleration and pore pressure response of pure sand and treated sand are compared in a centrifuge model test.…”

Biocimentação de um solo arenoso com recurso a enzimas: efeito de diversos fatores

“…Por outro lado, a deposição de CaCO 3 nos vazios e na envolvente das partículas de solo promove a diminuição da porosidade (Whiffin et al, 2007) e da condutividade hidráulica do solo (Al Qabany e Soga, 2013;Yasuhara et al, 2012). Em paralelo, diversos trabalhos de investigação têm mostrado que a biocimentação também altera o comportamento dos solos, tornando-os não colapsáveis (DeJong et al, 2006) passando a exibir expansão volumétrica positiva durante ensaios de corte direto (Chou et al, 2011), diminuindo por conseguinte o seu potencial de liquefação (Ivanov e Chu 2008;Van der Ruyt e van der Zon 2009;DeJong et al, 2010;Inagaki et al, 2011;Montoya et al, 2012;Burbank et al, 2011Burbank et al, , 2013Cheng et al, 2013;Kalantary e Kahani, 2015).…”