Journals / Turkish Journal of Engineering / 2023 / Cilt: 7 Sayı: 4

Bentonite and polymeric support fluids used for stabilization in excavations

Pages
338–348
Publication Date
2023-10-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

This information will be highly useful to scientific community for their future ventures and will lay a foundation to understand the mechanisms of stabilization in open and deep excavations.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Bentonite is a natural and finite mineral resource.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Nevertheless, synthetic polymers have advantage over bentonite, however, foundation engineers and scientists have also certain concerns about their use because of their performance related issues.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This information will be highly useful to scientific community for their future ventures and will lay a foundation to understand the mechanisms of stabilization in open and deep excavations.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Benotonite · Excavation support fluids · Natural & synthetic polymers

Abstract

Bentonite is a natural and finite mineral resource. Dilute suspensions of sodium montmorillonite clay in water represents bentonite slurries. Suspension and orientation of colloidal clay particles define rheological properties in bentonite slurry (BS). The BS has been used about seventy years to temporarily support the excavations. More recently, polymer support fluids (PSF) gained much popularity and are widely used compared to bentonite support fluids. The PSF are categorized into natural (pure) and synthetic polymers. Physico-chemical properties of PSF are different than BS irrespective of the quite similarity in the mode of action. Synthetic polymer fluids are molecularly engineered fluids that can be a popular alternative of conventional BS deployed as excavation support fluids in different foundation applications such as diaphragm wall panels and pile bores. The synthetically engineered fluids of polymers (water-soluble) are different from conventional BS. The PSF offer additional benefits because their use is cost effective, eco-friendly, and these polymers need smaller site footprint as well as easy preparation, mixing, handling, management and ultimately the final disposal. Nevertheless, synthetic polymers have advantage over bentonite, however, foundation engineers and scientists have also certain concerns about their use because of their performance related issues. For an efficient use of polymers, specific properties and in situ behavior of polymers as well as their sorption onto the soils must be recognized because the polymer concentration in the solution is decreased with time during their use. The present manuscript reviewed the relative performance of excavation support fluids and displayed an arranged marriage of physicochemical and rhelogical properties of natural and synthetic excavation support fluids used in the foundation industry. This information will be highly useful to scientific community for their future ventures and will lay a foundation to understand the mechanisms of stabilization in open and deep excavations.

🔖

Cite This Article

AKHTAR, M. S. (2023). Bentonite and polymeric support fluids used for stabilization in excavations. Turkish Journal of Engineering, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 4, 338–348. https://ajindex.com/articles/950914

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Jefferis, S., Troughton, V., & Lam, C. (2011). Polymer systems for fluid supported excavations. In: Proceedings of 2nd Conference on Geotechnical Issues in Construction, London, CIRIA Report X513, 7–12. FPS (Federation of Piling Specialists). (2006). Bentonite Support Fluids in Civil Engineering. 2nd Edn. Federation of Piling Specialists, Kent, U.K. Veder, C. (1953). Method for the construction of impermeable diaphragms at great depth by means of thixotropic muds. (in French). In: Proceedings of 3rd International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, 91–94.
  2. Lam, C., Jefferis, S. A., & Martin, C. M. (2014). Effects of polymer and bentonite support fluids on concrete–sand interface shear strength. Géotechnique, 64(1), 28–39. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.13.p.012
  3. Lam, C. (2011). Properties and Applications of Polymer Support Fluids in Geotechnical Engineering. DPhil Thesis, University of Oxford, UK. Lam, C., Jefferis, S. A., Suckling, T. P., & Troughton, V. M. (2015). Effects of polymer and bentonite support fluids on the performance of bored piles. Soils and Foundations, 55(6), 1487–1500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2015.10.013
  4. Lennon, D. J., Ritchie, D., Parry, G. O., & Suckling, T. P. (2006). Piling projects constructed with vinyl polymer support fluid in Glasgow, Scotland”, Proc., 10th International Conference on Piling and Deep Foundations, Deep Foundations Institute, Hawthorne, NJ., 499–506.
  5. Schünmann, D. (2004). Fisherman's friend. Ground Engineering, 37(12), 17. Jefferis, S. A., & Lam, C. (2013). Polymer support fluids: use and misuse of innovative fluids in geotechnical works. In: Proceedings of 18th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Paris, 3219–3222.
  6. Fleming, K., Weltman, A., Randolph, M., & Elson, K. (2009). Piling Engineering. 3rd Ed., Taylor & Francis, Abingdon, UK. Veder, C. (1963). The excavation of trenches in the presence of bentonite suspensions for the construction of impermeable and load bearing diaphragms. In: Proceedings of Grouts and Drilling Muds in Engineering Practice, Symposium of the British National Society on Soil Mechanics and Foundations Engineering. Institution of Civil Engineers, London, 181-188.
  7. Xanthakos, P. P. (1979).
  8. Slurry Waifs. McGraw Hill Publishers,
  9. London. Hajnai, I., Marton, J., & Regele, Z. (1984). Construction of Diaphragm Walls. John Wiley & Sons, USA. Wheeler, P. (2003). Piles unlock polymer potential. Ground Engineering, 36, 8–9.
  10. Kelessidis, V. C.,