HOSTED BY Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Soils and Foundations 59 (2019) 407–418
www.elsevier.com/locate/sandf

Electro-osmosis treatment techniques and their effect on dewatering

of soils, sediments, and sludge: A review
Lucas Martin a,⇑, Vahid Alizadeh b, Jay Meegoda a
a
New Jersey Institute of Technology, University Heights, Newark, NJ 07102, United States
b
Fairleigh Dickinson University, 1000 River Rd, Teaneck, NJ 07666, United States

Received 30 April 2018; received in revised form 14 November 2018; accepted 5 December 2018
Available online 3 May 2019

Abstract

Electro-osmosis is an established method of dewatering fine soils, sediments, and sludge (SSS). The efficiency of electro-osmotic treat-
ment is controlled by the electrical resistance of the system. Due to an increase in SSS resistance during treatment, its cost efficiency is
reduced, limiting the widespread use of this technique. The aim of this paper is to discuss the main reasons for the increase in SSS resis-
tance during treatment and then to analyze the most recent and widely spread modifications to classical electro-osmotic treatment that
attempt to combat these issues and improve the efficiency of the technique. These modifications to electro-osmotic treatment are polarity
reversal, an intermittent current, the injection of chemical solutions at the electrodes, and the use of geo-synthetics. The paper discusses
the relevant research on the above adaptations, and the advantages and disadvantages of each are evaluated and compared using the
available laboratory and field tests in the literature on electro-osmotic dewatering research. All four methods of modification are shown
to provide significant improvements and can be successfully translated to the field for greater use. However, the improvements they bring
about may not be sufficient to warrant their general use in geotechnical applications.
Ó 2019 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of The Japanese Geotechnical Society.
This is an open access article under CC BY-NC-ND license. (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Keywords: Electro-osmosis; Dewatering; Polarity reversal; Intermittent current; Chemical injection; Geo-synthetics; Energy consumption; Ground resi-
stance; Consolidation

1. Introduction expedite SSS dewatering with the installation of geo-

The electro-osmosis-assisted method of dewatering fine
soils, sediments, and sludge (SSS) has been predominantly
used for SSS remediation and dewatering for construction,
but it can also be used for mineral enrichment and filtra-
tion, among other applications. When subjected to loading,
SSS will drain and then undergo significant settlement
which can have detrimental effects on structures. Due to
the low permeability of SSS, water removal takes longer
to achieve. Nowadays, this method is commonly used to
Peer review under responsibility of The Japanese Geotechnical Society.
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: lm83@njit.edu (L. Martin).
drains or wick drains followed by preloading. Preloading
is a technique by which substantial dewatering of SSS
can be achieved before the imposition of actual construc-
tion loads. However, the preloading technique alone may
not be satisfactory for reducing the dewatering time to
the desired extent (Bhattacharya & Basack, 2011). The
dewatering period can be further expedited by electro-
osmosis (Bergado et al., 2000). Electro-osmotic treatment
has been extensively tested and has been proven to have
clear benefits to dewatering SSS. Electro-osmosis has also
been extensively studied for its use in SSS remediation.
With the application of an electric field, contaminants in
SSS can be forced to migrate towards one of the electrodes,
where they can be removed more efficiently. Alternatively,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2018.12.015
0038-0806/Ó 2019 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of The Japanese Geotechnical Society.
This is an open access article under CC BY-NC-ND license. (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
408 L. Martin et al. / Soils and Foundations 59 (2019) 407–418
a neutralizing agent can be added to the SSS by injecting it
around the electrodes and using electro-osmosis to circu-
late it. However, certain problems have prevented the wide-
spread use of electro-osmotic treatment and dewatering.
Following is a discussion of these issues. The paper then
reviews the available literature on the use of certain differ-
ent electro-osmotic treatment techniques to combat these
problems. Iwata et al. (2013) provided a summary of both
theoretical treatments and empirical research results of
electro-osmotic dewatering for various materials. However,
there was only a limited discussion on the use of an inter-
mittent current, polarity reversal, and the other techniques
considered here. Thus, a more comprehensive study is nec-
essary to assess the value of these techniques for their effec-
tiveness in dewatering SSS.
Electro-osmosis is an established method of treating SSS
whereby a direct current (DC) is applied by electrodes. Due
to the application of an electric field, hydrated positively
charged ions are attracted to the negative electrode (cath-
ode). Those ions drag the hydrated water molecules
towards the cathode, creating a flow of water. If drainage
is provided at the cathode, and no water is permitted to
enter at the positive electrode (anode), negative pore water
pressure develops and dewatering of the SSS occurs, result-
ing in higher shear strength and lower compressibility.
Negative pore water pressure will be generated by
electro-osmosis and is expressed as follows (Esrig, 1968):
k e cw
ue ð x Þ ¼  Ex ð1Þ
kh
where cw is the unit weight of water, x is the distance from
the cathode to the anode, E is the electric field intensity (V/
m), kh is the hydraulic permeability of the sediment, and ke
is the electro-osmotic conductivity based on Casagrande
(1949). The development of negative pore water pressure
in this equation increases the effective stress in the SSS,
leading to consolidation during electro-osmosis. Alterna-
tively, the flow of water can be maintained by supplying
the anode with liquid and allowing a constant water flow.
This can be used to introduce remedial agents into the sys-
tem and to migrate and remove the contaminants.
According to this equation, the effectiveness of electro-
osmotic dewatering is controlled by the ratio of ke/kh.
The typical hydraulic conductivity of SSS reported in
electro-osmosis literature is in the range of 1  1010 to
1  109 m/sec, whereas the coefficient of electro-osmotic
permeability is in the range of 1  109 to 1  108 m2/
sec/V. The electro-osmotic dewatering effect will be signif-
icant if the ratio of ke/kh is higher than 0.1
(Mohamedelhassan and Shang, 2001). Due to the discharge
of water at the cathode, a hydraulic gradient develops
between the two electrodes. Dewatering of the SSS will
continue until the system reaches equilibrium where the
electro-osmotic force driving the water to the cathode is
equal to the reverse flow due to the hydraulic gradient
(Mitchell and Soga, 2005). This can be prevented by pump-
ing water out of the cathode.
In addition to the movement of water molecules, the
application of an electric field generates electrochemical
and physical reactions that negatively affect the perfor-
mance of the electro-osmotic dewatering, namely,
1. Crack formation due to negative pore pressure and the
resulting extensive drying at the anode;
2. Extreme changes in pH at both electrodes; and,
3. Bubble formation at the electrodes due to the electroly-
sis of water that reduces the soli-electrode contact.
Crack formation is a result of the extensive drying of the
SSS around the anode. These cracks reduce the contact
area with the electrode material, effectively increasing the
electric resistance. When water migrates away from the
anode, the SSS around it shrinks, creating tensile forces
that cause cracking. Additionally, crack formation is incen-
tivized by the heating of the SSS due to the current flow
(Burnotte et al., 2004). As suggested by Wu et al. (2015)
and others, crack formation can be mitigated by applying
electro-osmosis with preloading. The surcharge load com-
presses the SSS as the water is drained; this prevents tensile
forces from creating cracks.
The main culprit of the changes in pH at the electrodes
and the bubble formation is the electrolysis of water. Oxy-
gen and hydrogen gases are produced at the anode and
cathode, respectively.
At the anode:
2H 2 O ! O2 ðgÞ þ 4H þ þ 4e ; Eo ¼ 1:23 V ð2Þ
At the cathode:
2H 2 O þ 2e ! H 2 ðgÞ þ 2ðOH Þ ; Eo ¼ 0:83 V ð3Þ
The accumulation of gas decreases the contact area at the
electrode interface, and therefore, increases the electrical
resistance (Mahmoud et al., 2010). This can be easily
mitigated by providing a perforated cylindrical electrode
and adding a slight vacuum. However, as the electrolysis
proceeds, hydroxide ions are produced at the cathode and
hydrogen ions are produced at the anode. This results in a
pH gradient across the SSS (Lockhart, 1983; Yoshida,
2000; Yuan and Weng, 2003). A qualitative illustration
Fig. 1. Schematic of EO process in SSS.
 L. Martin et al. / Soils and Foundations 59 (2019) 407–418
of this is presented in Fig. 1. An acidic front produced at
the anode migrates towards the cathode, and a basic front
produced at the cathode migrates towards the anode. The
acid front moves faster than the base front due to the
higher mobility of H+; and therefore, the drop in pH
dominates the chemistry across the SSS, except for a
small region close to the cathode. Drops in pH are asso-
ciated with a reduction in the absolute value of the zeta
potential, which is related to electro-osmotic conductivity,
reducing the electro-osmotic flow during direct current
application (Rabie et al., 1994; Tuan et al., 2008). On
the cathode side, the hydroxide ions can combine with
metallic ions in the SSS and precipitate, clogging the
pores. Eventually the electro-osmotic process stops, signif-
icantly reducing the cost efficiency of electro-osmosis. For
reactive electrodes, such as copper and iron, oxidation
and a reduction of the electrodes also take place (Wu
et al., 2015). Yoshida (2000) and Burnotte et al. (2004)
showed in laboratory and field investigations that with
the continuous application of a direct current, the electri-
cal contact resistance between the electrodes (mainly the
anode) and the SSS is considerably increased, leaving an
effective voltage gradient too small for significant
electro-osmotic dewatering. According to Iwata et al.
(2013), their short service life has impeded the widespread
application of electro-osmotic dewatering due to the cost
of the material.
Due to the ability for rapid dewatering of the SSS
using this technique, electro-osmosis has generated much
interest in geotechnical engineering, as evidenced by the
numerous laboratory studies that have been published.
However, widespread use of this method is not seen due
its low electrical efficiency. In order to reduce the exces-
sive increase in the electrical contact resistance and
improve the performance of electro-osmotic dewatering,
a number of technical solutions have been proposed and
investigated experimentally, including electrode polarity
reversal, an intermittent current, the injection of saline
solutions at the electrodes, and the use of geo-synthetic
electrodes.
A compilation of the most relevant findings in this par-
ticular area of electro-osmosis is not readily available.
Hence, this paper presents a review of the research by
others on the use of electro-osmosis coupled with the dif-
ferent current application methods and an analysis of
these methods including a comparison among them. This
review includes a comprehensive examination of the effi-
ciency of each method in aiding electro-osmotic dewater-
ing including its pros and cons and details that have not
been investigated yet. Different experiments using these
techniques are analyzed and presented below to assess
the benefits of their use. Additionally, a comprehensive
comparison is presented between polarity reversal and
an intermittent current across many variables to assess
which method is superior for use in electro-osmotic
consolidation.
409
2. Polarity reversal
The unidirectional direct current (DC) electric field has
been commonly used for electro-osmotic dewatering. The-
oretically, periodic reversals in the direction of the electric
current, and thus, the electro-osmotic flow, eliminate the
zeta-potential gradient and restore the high value of the
zeta potential near the anode, thereby restoring the
electro-osmotic process. Fig. 2 shows a test done by
Rittirong et al. (2008) where current decay appears to be
delayed through the use of polarity reversal. The study,
however, did not look at the relationship between the
cycles. A trendline has been added by the reviewers for this
purpose and will be discussed later in this paper.
Gray and Somogyi (1977) performed a series of electro-
osmotic tests on red mud samples with high water contents
using electrode polarity reversals every 30 min. The test
results showed that the rise in temperature at the anode
was not as high and that the voltages were considerably
lower in the polarity reversal modes compared with the
conventional unidirectional mode (DC). Polarity reversal
caused a more uniform increase in shear strength and
decrease in water content compared to the asymmetrical
effect of the DC. It also significantly reduced the expansion
of the pH gradient and the non-uniform electrochemical
changes in the treated samples.
Yoshida et al. (1999) studied the effect of polarity rever-
sal to reduce the electrical contact resistance during electro-
osmotic dewatering experiments. The experiments on white
clay samples were performed using an alternating current
(AC) in the region of very low frequencies (0.01 and
0.001 Hz) with constant voltage (20 and 40 V). Both rect-
angular and sine waves were used. The test results showed
a higher final dewatered volume under polarity reversal
than under DC application. This indicates that the polarity
reversal method reduced the excessive increase in electrical
contact resistance because the water moved periodically in
both directions. Their study showed that the DC removed
more water than polarity reversal for the same amount of
power used. However, the current flow lasted longer with
polarity reversal, increasing the volume of water removed
past that of the DC. With the use of polarity reversal,
the changes in pH and water content distributions within
the treated samples were reduced; and therefore, the dewa-
tering could proceed more effectively. The best dewatering
results were achieved by the lowest reversal frequency
tested, 0.001 Hz, while frequencies higher than 0.01 Hz
had worse results than the DC. The higher frequencies,
1 Hz and 50 Hz, yielded the same dewatering results.
Despite the reported favorable effects, some researchers
have pointed out that the polarity reversal technique could
not improve the effectiveness of electro-osmosis in terms of
the discharged water and the undrained shear strength
(Bjerrum et al., 1967; Ou et al., 2009; Chien et al., 2011;
Kaniraj et al., 2011). This might be due to the drying and
acidic conditions near the anode being generated before
410 L. Martin et al. / Soils and Foundations 59 (2019) 407–418
Fig. 2. Current improvement through polarity reversal (Rittirong et al., 2008).
the polarity is reversed. This indicates that if the interval is
too long, adverse conditions will be generated such that
polarity reversal has a minimal impact on the treatment.
If the sediments near the anode are unsaturated before the
polarity is reversed, they need to be re-saturated to maintain
the electro-osmotic flow in the reverse direction when it
becomes a cathode (Kaniraj, 2014). Chien et al. (2011) sta-
ted that the unfavorable effect of polarity reversal in their
laboratory study on Taipei clay was also due to cementation
near the anode before the polarity reversal which did not
allow for the discharge of water when it became a cathode.
Kaniraj and Yee (2011) showed that the effects of polarity
reversal did not depend on polarity reversal interval.
3. Intermittent current
Current intermittence is an alternate method of power
application for electro-osmosis that has the potential to
reduce power consumption and affect electrochemical reac-
tions differently than DC application. The applied voltage
gradient is intermittently turned off and then turned on again
at regular intervals. For example, direct current is applied
for 2 min, the power is turned off for 1 min, then the process
is repeated, and the SSS receives an intermittent current.
Rabie et al. (1994) demonstrated that the electro-
osmotic dewatering of SSS with interrupted power pro-
vides a 20% improvement in water removal compared to
the continuous use of the DC (see Fig. 3). Their method
of power interruption involved periodically disconnecting
the power supply and short circuiting the electrodes while
the power was off. During the power-off period, a residual
current flowed through the sediments in an opposite direc-
tion to the external power supply (Rabie et al., 1994). This
short-circuit current reversed the electrochemical reactions
which had occurred at both electrodes. This reduced the
negative effects of electro-osmosis on the sample and
allowed the treatment time to be extended. This effect is
similar to what occurs during polarity reversal treatment.
The experiment also showed that the interval of current
intermittence is critical to the efficiency of the treatment.
Mohamedelhassan and Shang (2001) performed a series
of experiments on marine sediment and reported that, with
current intermittence, a higher electro-osmotic flow was
generated compared with a continuous DC. According to
the Casagrande (1949) equation of electro-osmotic flow,
under the same voltage gradient and cell dimensions, with
a high electro-osmotic flow, the electro-osmotic permeabil-
ity, ke, of the SSS has to increase in the course of the inter-
mittence current application. This was shown in
experiments. Thus, the current intermittence technique
improved the electro-osmotic permeability. The enhanced
electro-osmotic flow might be attributed to the charge
redistribution related to the current interruption. Under a
DC field, the electrical diffuse double layers surrounding
the sediment particles will polarize and the charge orienta-
tion resulting from this polarization is against the applied
electric field, which reduces the effectiveness of the field in
moving the water. The current intermittence allows the
double layer to restore its original charge distribution,
which increases the efficiency of the electro-osmotic pro-
cess. However, it is also possible that normal DC applica-
tion decreases the coefficient of electro-osmotic
permeability due to pH changes and other factors. The
effect of the intermittent current in this case is simply the
reduction of this drop. According to Casagrande’s equa-
tion, water depletion in the system will also cause a
decrease in the coefficient of electro-osmotic permeability.
By allowing the residual current and hydrostatic head to
redistribute water in the sample during OFF (power-off)
times, the intermittent current also reduces the drop in
the coefficient of electro-osmotic permeability.
The optimal current intermittence intervals to maximize
the electro-osmotic flow depend on the relaxation time
for the double layer to align with the applied electric
field. In the current intermittence experiments by
Mohamedelhassan and Shang (2001), various on/off inter-
vals of 1/0.5, 2/1, 3/1.5, 4/2, and 5/2.5 min were used. The
optimum combination was found to be 2 min on and
1 min off, which increased the ke up to 100% compared with
the continuous DC. Mohamedelhassan and Shang (2001)
 L. Martin et al. / Soils and Foundations 59 (2019) 407–418 411

6
economical because of the high power consumption and
IS (30/20) rapid corrosion of the anode. They concluded that the
Volume of water removed (cm^3)

5 IS (30/3) intermittent current method can be useful when treating

IS (30/0.5) marine sediment with high salinity (low resistivity) in which
4 DC the current levels in the system will be high and the elec-
trode corrosion and power consumption will be too large
3 if current intermittence is not used. This has also been
shown in a large-scale laboratory study in a model tank
2
by Lo et al. (2000). Their use of an intermittent current
was seen to provide better treatment over time due to the
1
reduction in power consumption and the extension of the
0 electrode life.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Yoshida (2000) evaluated the intermittent power appli-
Cumulave ON-Time (min) cation for reducing the excessive increase in the electrical
contact resistance with the lapse of time. The intermittent
Fig. 3. Volume of water removed over time for current intermittence at electric field was made by rectifying an AC electric field
different ON/OFF intervals vs. DC (Rabie et al., 1994). with very low frequencies (0.01 Hz and 0.001 Hz).
Electro-osmotic dewatering of kaolinite was investigated
also showed that the open-circuit configuration is superior to
under the same peak-value voltage and effective-value volt-
the short-circuit configuration used in the experiments by
age as those under DC and AC electric fields. The results
Rabie et al. (1994). The results are summarized in Table 1.
showed that the intermittent electric field which had the
The residual current in the short electric circuit may
same peak-value voltage is capable of removing more water
enhance the capacity of the current intermittence to restore
than the DC field with the same power. When applying
the double layer original charge distribution, but it also
power to maintain a constant voltage, the rate and the
reverses the direction of the electro-osmotic flow. For the
amount of water removed under the current intermittence
open-circuit configuration, since the electric circuit between
was slightly smaller than under the DC, but almost the
electrodes is open during the power interruption, a residual
same as under the AC, except near the end of dewatering.
voltage exists across the sample and will reduce the energy
Based on these findings, Yoshida (2000) concluded that the
required to recharge the sample when the power is on
intermittent electric field considerably reduces the increase
again. Additionally, the intermittence interval is much
in the electrical contact resistance with time during electro-
more effective for enhancing electro-osmosis with an
osmosis.
open-circuit configuration, while a closed-circuit configura-
Other research in electro-osmosis has also shown that
tion seems to have limited electro-osmosis enhancement.
the efficiency of the treatment can be significantly improved
However, Mohamedelhassan and Shang (2001) did not
and the corrosion of the electrodes and the power con-
explain why ke in the short-circuit configuration seems to
sumption can be reduced if the applied current is periodi-
be unaffected by the intermittence interval.
cally interrupted but that will depend on intial water
Micic et al. (2001) investigated the use of current inter-
contents (Sprute and Kelsh, 1976; Lo et al., 1991; Shang
mittence in the electro-osmosis treatment of high-salinity
and Lo, 1997; Hu et al., 2015). Thus, current intermittence
marine sediment with steel electrodes. The investigation
has been proved as a useful alternative to DC application
was performed with on/off intervals of 10/2, 4/2, and
in terms of current efficiency.
2/2 min and compared with a constant DC. It was found
that the test with constant power on was the most effective
4. Injection of saline solution at electrodes
in terms of the increase in undrained shear strength and the
decrease in water content. However, this test was the least
Several recent studies have been focused on the injection
Table 1 of saline solutions into SSS during electro-osmosis to
Average Ke for different current intermittence intervals (data from increase the effect on dewatering. Using different injection
Mohamedelhassan and Shang, 2001). solutions during electro-osmosis, such as NaCl, KCl,
Circuit ON-time (min) OFF-time (min) Average Ke (m2/s V) CaCl2, aluminum ions, phosphoric ions, methacrylate poly
Open 1 0.5 9.45E09 cations, Al2(SO4)3, Mg(CH3COO)2, MgSO4, Mg(NO3)2,
Open 2 1 1.23E08 ZnSO4, AgNO3, NaOH, and Na2CO3, can enhance the
Open 3 1.5 1.07E08 effect of electro-osmosis. This method makes use of the
Open 4 2 8.82E09
interactions between the chemical solutions and the SSS
Open 5 2.5 8.79E09
Short 1 0.5 7.71E09 particles, such as cation exchange and particle cementation,
Short 2 1 7.24E09 under the influence of an electric field (Ozkan et al., 1999;
Short 3 1.5 7.21E09 Lefebvre and Burnotte, 2002; Alshawabkeh and Sheahan,
Short 4 2 7.16E09 2003; Mohamedelhassan and Shang, 2003; Burnotte
DC – – 6.12E09
et al., 2004; Paczkowska, 2005; Otsuki et al., 2007; Chien
412 L. Martin et al. / Soils and Foundations 59 (2019) 407–418

et al., 2009; Ou et al., 2009; Chang et al., 2010; Chien et al.,
2011). For example, the addition of the NaOH solution at
the anode has a dual purpose. The OH– ions will reduce the
concentration of the H+ ions generated at the anode. The
Na+ ions will then aid electro-osmosis by migrating
towards the cathode. Saichek and Reddy (2003) showed
that using NaOH to buffer the low pH and increase the
effects of electro-osmosis is a valid approach. At the cath-
ode, electro-osmosis generates OH– ions that limit the effi-
ciency of the dewatering. Zhou et al. (2005) performed tests
using different acidic solutions introduced at the cathode to
buffer the high pH. The most effective was found to be HCl.
By introducing 0.5 M of an HCl solution at the cathode,
the efficiency of electro-osmosis was greatly increased.
Thus, conditioning the pH at the electrodes is shown to
be a valid method for improving the results of electro-
osmotic dewatering.
Lefebvre and Burnotte (2002) carried out experiments
on clay samples in which the anodes were chemically trea-
ted by the injection of a saline solution at the beginning of
the electro-osmotic treatment. The study showed that the
injection of the saline solution significantly decreased the
power loss and doubled the voltage gradient. The experi-
ment also looked at the effect of the treatment on the
undrained shear strength. For a sample without treatment,
the undrained shear strength increased by 158%. On the
other hand, for two samples with electro-osmotic treatment
by means of the injection of a saline solution, the
undrained shear strength increased by over 200%.
Chien et al. (2009) performed experiments on Taipei
clay to study the effects of different electrolytes on the
removed water and the zeta potential. The experiment
tested NaCl, KCl, and CaCl2 with different concentrations
of CaCl2. After testing for 24 h at a constant applied volt-
age of 10 V, the drained water and the zeta potential were
measured. The results are summarized in Table 2. All the
above electrolytes had a beneficial effect, in terms of water
removal, with CaCl2 having the best impact. However, due
to the cation exchange properties of the clay, the zeta
potential of the tests using CaCl2 was reduced to half that
of the sodium and potassium tests. This could have adverse
effects on long-term treatment. Different concentrations of
CaCl2 had a limited impact on the water removal, but had
a major influence on the zeta potential. The lower concen-
tration resulted in a zeta potential similar to that of the
other saline solutions. Lastly, the treatment time with the
application of CaCl2 had a limited impact on the water
removal and the zeta potential. While a 1-day test yielded
a 172% increase in water removal, compared to regular
electro-osmosis, a 7-day trial resulted in only a 22.1%
increase, showing that the benefits of adding saline solu-
tions might only have an impact during the initial stages
of treatment. This could be due to the negative effects of
the CaCl2 on the zeta potential.
While the concentration of positive ionic species in the
system may benefit the process by allowing a higher cur-
rent, Hu (2008) showed that an excess of these ions will
be detrimental to the overall efficiency of the treatment.
The higher the concentration of ions, the higher the current
through the sample will be. This translates to higher power
consumption. However, the increase in the volume of the
removed water is minimal. This means that salt concentra-
tion is beneficial, but will become detrimental if the concen-
tration is too high.
Chien et al. (2011) studied the effect of the injection of
calcium chloride (CaCl2) and sodium silicate (Na2OnSiO2,
n = 3.4) solutions in a series of electro-osmotic experiments
on Taipei silty clay. These chemicals are known to be non-
toxic and have been used as grouting materials in sandy
sediments. Perforated stainless steel tubes were installed
as electrodes for the injection of chemicals at the anode
and for the drainage of fluid at the cathode. Different
sequences for the injection of solutions and the application
of the voltage gradient were used. For the control test, only
a voltage gradient of 50 V/m was applied for 7 days and the
undrained shear strength was measured to be 39 kPa. For
the second experiment, calcium chloride was injected for
1 h and then the same voltage gradient was applied for
7 days. This increased the undrained shear strength to
49 kPa which indicates the positive effect of the short-
term injection prior to electro-osmotic treatment. For the
third experiment, calcium chloride was injected during
the application of the same voltage gradient for 7 days
and the undrained shear strength changed to 25 kPa, indi-

Table 2
Injections of saline solutions to improve electro-osmosis (data from Chien et al., 2009).
Test Chemical Concentration Treatment Drained Su (kPa) Su due to Ke (m2/s V) Zeta
solution (N) time (day) water (mL) injection (kPa) potential
Normalized position (%) Normalized (mV)
position (%)
25 50 75 50
EO1 1 64.5 22 13 11 2.8  10–10
EO2 7 523.2 52 37 30 3.2  10–10
EOC1 NaCl 0.1 1 127.5 24 11 9 2 5.5  10–10 87.3
EOC2 KCl 0.1 1 152.7 26 12 12 4 6.6  10–10 87.3
EOC3 CaCl2 0.1 1 169.5 30 12 11 8 7.3  10–10 47.3
EOC4 CaCl2 0.01 1 158.2 22 13 11 0 6.8  10–10 78.4
EOC5 CaCl2 1 1 175.3 36 18 16 14 7.5  10–10 17.7
EOC6 CaCl2 1 7 683 70 41 38 18 4.1  10–10 17.7
 L. Martin et al. / Soils and Foundations 59 (2019) 407–418
cating the unfavorable effect of the continuous injection
during electro-osmotic treatment. In another test, calcium
chloride was injected for 2 days followed by the injection
of sodium silicate for another 2 days and then the same
voltage gradient was applied for the next 3 days. The
undrained shear strength increased to 59 kPa, indicating
the positive effect of the long-term injection of saline solu-
tions before the beginning of the electro-osmotic treatment.
Ca2+ ions are seen to reduce the double layer thickness and
allow a more dense packing of the particles, which is ben-
eficial for dewatering purposes. However, as shown by
Chien et al. (2009), the use of CaCl2 does have adverse
effects on the zeta potential that need to be considered since
the electro-osmotic permeability is proportional to the zeta
potential.
5. Electrically conductive geo-synthetics (EKGs)
Electro-kinetic geo-synthetics (EKGs) are new forms of
electrodes based on the use of electrically conductive geo-
synthetics. Electro-kinetic geo-synthetics combine the
electro-osmotic function of electrically conductive poly-
mers and the drainage, filtration, and reinforcement func-
tions of geo-synthetics. Electro-kinetic geo-synthetics are
formed by incorporating conductive elements within or
associated with a conventional geo-synthetic material.
Alternatively, the geo-synthetic material can be formed of
a conducting polymer. Recent research using electro-
kinetic geo-synthetics has shown the potential for the appli-
cation of these materials in the electro-osmotic dewatering
of SSS and mining tailings (Hamir et al., 2001; Glendinning
et al., 2005; Fourie et al., 2007; Jones et al., 2011).
Hamir et al. (2001) investigated four types of EKG elec-
trodes, including a needle-punched geo-synthetic with a
woven copper wire stringer (Type 1), a needle-punched
geo-synthetic incorporating stainless-steel fibers (Type 2),
a composite formed by a carbon fiber sheet sandwiched
between two layers of non-woven polypropylene sheets
(Type 3), and geo-composite strip reinforcement with a cop-
per wire stringer (Type 4). The effectiveness of the EKG elec-
trodes in generating negative pore pressure was compared
with the copper electrodes, as electro-osmotic dewatering
is directly related to the development of negative pore pres-
sure. If the EKG electrodes are to replace regular electrodes,
then the pore pressure generated should be similar, and the
resulting flow rate will then be similar. Test results demon-
strated that there was very little difference between EKG
Type 1 and the copper electrodes; EKG Types 2 and 3
appeared to be more effective at generating negative pore
pressure. The resistance over time for Types 1 and 2 and that
for the copper electrode are shown in Fig. 4.
The EKG electrodes showed a little more increase in
resistance than the copper electrode, especially Type 1.
EKG Type 4 was used as ground reinforcement to study
the effect of electro-osmotic dewatering on the bond perfor-
mance under undrained conditions. The application of a
potential gradient of 30 V, in addition to surcharge load-
413
1600
1200
Resistance (Ohms)
800
EKG Type 1
400
EKG Type 2
Copper
0
0 400 800 1200 1600
Time (min)
Fig. 4. Variation in electrical resistance of copper and EKG Types 1 and 2
electrodes (Hamir et al., 2001).
ing, caused a reduction in the water content of the sample
ranging from 5.5% for a sample with a surcharge load of
350 kPa to 14% for a sample with a surcharge load of
110 kPa. Electro-osmosis using EKG electrodes created a
significant improvement in the bond strength, ranging from
54 to 210%, which was in proportion to the increase in
shear strength.
Glendinning et al. (2005) demonstrated the successful
use of EKGs in the construction of a 4.8-m-high reinforced
soil wall. Clay slurry was used as backfill and was dewa-
tered by electro-osmosis using EKG electrodes. Many
potential benefits to EKGs were identified. First, encasing
the metallic filaments in a relatively inert polymer effec-
tively eliminates electrode corrosion. Second, by forming
the electrode as a geo-synthetic and utilizing the drainage
function of geo-synthetics, EKGs overcome the problem
of removing water since they provide a suitable drainage
path for the pore water removed by electro-osmosis. Third,
geo-synthetics have the ability to take on a wide variety of
shapes and forms to suit different applications. Last, mak-
ing electrodes identical, polarity reversal can be easily
achieved without compromising either the drainage func-
tion or the electrical efficiency. Details of applications
and case studies are provided in Jones et al. (2011).
Hu (2008) provided extensive research on the use of
EKGs for different applications. The research included an
analysis of the best geo-synthetics to use in combination
with electro-osmosis for drainage, reinforcement, filtration,
separation, or the containment of water and other sub-
stances in different types of SSS. Carbon was seen to have
the best resistance to corrosion when used for the electri-
cally conductive filaments in EKGs. Additionally, the
study reported the best treatment practices when using
EKGs for different applications. These are shown in
Table 3.
414 L. Martin et al. / Soils and Foundations 59 (2019) 407–418
Table 3
EKG applications (data from Hu, 2008).
Dewatering Strengthening
Objectives Reduce water Reduces water content and
content increase strength
Harnessed Electroosmosis Electroosmosis, pore
Eletrokinetic pressure modification,
effects electrokinetic hardening
Electrodes Closed anode Closed anode
configuration
Geosynthetic Drainage, Drainage, filtration,
functions filtration, reinforcement
containment
Polarity regulation Normal Normal and reversed
polarity
6. Discussion
The reversal of polarity causes a switch of the electroly-
sis reactions. This can balance the high H+ concentration
generated during the previous interval, thus maintaining
an overall pH that will not greatly affect the zeta potential.
The ability of the system to balance once the polarity is
changed depends on the reversal interval. If drainage is
available at the cathode, too many hydrated ions might
be removed before the reversal and the pH will be allowed
to change and expand too much. Also, the SSS around the
electrodes might cement and be unable to transfer the cur-
rent. Hence, the interval of polarity reversal is very impor-
tant for the effectiveness of this technique. The experiments
of Yoshida et al. (1999), with different frequencies, showed
that the best dewatering results were achieved by the lowest
reversal frequency tested, 0.001 Hz, while frequencies
higher than 0.01 Hz had worse results than the DC. The
highest frequencies, 1 Hz and 50 Hz, showed no difference
in dewatering. This suggests that a normal high frequency
alternating current is not beneficial for electro-osmotic
dewatering.
Polarity reversal will create a more even distribution of
the water content along the path from the anode to the
cathode, while applying a constant direct current will result
in significant drying near the anode, but only minor dewa-
tering near the cathode. Simply reversing polarity will cir-
culate water back and forth within the system. For this
reason, and especially since water is not being drained to
maintain the current, net dewatering will not be as high
as under the DC. However, water molecules are being
removed from the chemical structure of the SSS and moved
to the pore spaces. In this form, they are easier to remove
with the help of a surcharge load.
Interestingly, while it might appear that polarity reversal
delays the current decay in the SSS, it actually does not.
Shown in Fig. 2 are different intervals of polarity reversal.
When the polarity is switched, the current peaks for a short
time. However, as evidenced by the trendline in the figure,
the current returns to the level it would have had at that
time had the polarity not been reversed. This disproves
the idea that polarity reversal can increase the treatment
Conditioning Clean up
Reduces water content, increase Flush water through, mobilize/
strength, promote biological activity, entrain contaminants, treat all soil,
pathogen reduction capture contaminants
Electroosmosis, pore pressure Electroosmosis, electrolysis, Joule
modification, electrolysis, Joule heating
heating
Closed/semi closed anode Open anode and cathode
Drainage, filtration Drainage/irrigation, filtration,
sequestration
Normal and reversed Normal polarity
time. In terms of the current, the only improvement it is
providing is the short peaks right after the polarity has
been switched. Thus, the benefits of polarity reversal lay
in the recirculation of water and the reduction of pH
changes, not in its current effectiveness for net dewatering
purposes. This can be most helpful for the chemical treat-
ment of SSS by recirculating a reagent with polarity
reversals.
While current intermittence is subject to the same prob-
lems as the DC, it is able to prolong the treatment life. As
the studies show, the power efficiency is increased. How-
ever, the treatment times required to obtain dewatering
results similar to those of the DC are longer. This means
that current intermittence is more efficient in the long
run, but that the DC can provide faster results if the treat-
ment time is limited and the power consumption costs are
not critical. While the short-circuit method allows current
and water recirculation to reduce the resistance in SSS,
some power is wasted in transporting the recirculated water
to the cathode. Thus, the OFF interval should be short in
order to prevent too much recirculation. An open circuit,
on the other hand, provides a benefit in power efficiency
over the DC, since it allows the soil to relax while not
draining the residual voltage.
Mohamedelhassan and Shang (2001) observed a 25%
residual voltage during intermittent current OFF times.
This suggests that the SSS might be acting as a capacitor.
When the power is turned ON, the SSS-capacitor system
stores charge and the current in the system decreases. Then,
when the power is turned OFF, the SSS-capacitor system
has a residual voltage that slowly drains. This can be seen
in the following voltage equation for a discharging
capacitor:
V c ¼ V o  et=RC ð4Þ
where Vo is the voltage in the capacitor when the current in
turned OFF, R and C are the resistance and the capaci-
tance of the SSS-water system, and t is the elapsed time.
The resistance can be written as
R ¼ L=ðr  AÞ ð5Þ
 L. Martin et al. / Soils and Foundations 59 (2019) 407–418
where r is the SSS conductivity, L is the length of the spec-
imen, and A is the cross-sectional area. The SSS capaci-
tance can be written as
C ¼ A  e0  ðea =LÞ ð6Þ
where e0 is the apparent dielectric constant and ea is the
dielectric constant measured in a vacuum
(8.85  1014 F/cm). Hence, Eq. (4) can be written as
0 is not significant, as evidenced by the presented studies. In
V c ¼ V o  etr=e ea ð7Þ
This might explain why intervals with the same ON/OFF
ratios, but higher OFF times, have lower efficiency. Eq.
(7) shows that the relaxation of the electrical potential is
a function of the electrical properties of SSS. The r=e0 ea
term refers to the SSS’s electrical relaxation time. Hence,
Eq. (7) has a significant implication in electro-osmotic
treatment. This is corroborated by findings from
Meegoda and Ratnaweera (2008) and will be discussed in
a separate manuscript. If the SSS is allowed to relax for
too long, the benefit of the residual voltage is lost and
the reactivating current requires the recharge of the SSS.
The selection of the current intermittence intervals must
be based on factors such as the overall effectiveness of
the treatment, the degree of electrode corrosion, and the
power consumption. When compared to polarity reversal,
current intermittence provides the best results in terms of
water removed for power consumed. Several studies have
been carried out to investigate these methods, but none
has compared the overall effectiveness of each. To conclude
which treatment procedure is best, the electro-osmotic per-
meability, ke, was calculated for each study based on
Casagrande (1949)’s equation. A detailed comparison of
the procedures is presented in Table 4.
While the variables in these experiments vary, there are
clear trends. The calculation of the electro-osmotic perme-
ability includes the discharged water and the applied electric
field. The vast majority of intermittent current experiments
show an improvement in ke, while the polarity reversal tests
show a reduction. For example, Yoshida (2000) and
Yoshida et al. (1999) tested the same sample and electrodes.
Compared to their DC electro-osmotic permeability, the
intermittent current clearly outperformed the polarity
reversal. The results of these studies prove that the intermit-
tent current is superior to polarity reversal in water removal
for power consumed, which is key for dewatering projects.
When the polarity is reversed, the water is recirculated
and energy is consumed moving the water to the new cath-
ode. This can even create a lower discharge for the same
applied power as the DC. Table 4 also confirms that the cur-
rent intermittence interval, the circuit type during OFF
times, and the wave type all influence the discharge of water.
While different samples will react differently, the compar-
ison between polarity reversal and the intermittent current
includes multiple types of SSS and still shows valid trends.
Across the referenced works, polarity reversal shows mostly
negative efficiency of water removed for power used, while
the intermittent current shows mostly significant improve-
415
ments. This holds true despite the different SSS tested, elec-
trode materials, and power application variables.
EKGs improve on the basic electrodes by providing
longer lasting electrodes that solve other problems com-
mon to normal electrodes. They will not corrode as fast
as regular electrodes since they are coated with an inert
polymer. Though covering the metallic filaments in a some-
what inert polymer might increase resistance, the difference
addition to the electrical properties of EKGs, they also
provide better drainage paths for water molecules that have
made wick drains popular. These paths not only allow
water to flow out of the SSS systems faster, but they also
help liberate the gas bubbles generated around the elec-
trodes due to electrolysis. While the production of highly
customized EKGs might cost more, EKGs will last longer,
effectively reducing costs. As EKGs can be designed to stay
in SSS and act as nails, they can provide additional
strength for little cost. EKGs also work well in combina-
tion with other enhancement techniques, especially chemi-
cal injections, by facilitating their introduction into SSS.
The use of saline solutions to aid in electro-osmosis is
shown to be beneficial by providing new ions that will
hydrate and carry water towards the cathode and buffer
the large pH changes. However, close consideration must
be paid with regards to what type of electrolyte to use.
The main factor that seems to affect electrolyte effectiveness
is the ease of exchange. This in turn depends mainly on the
valence, ion size, and relative abundance of different ions.
Chien et al. (2011) reported that continuous injection dur-
ing treatment is detrimental to the effectiveness of electro-
osmosis. The tests used CaCl2 which is shown to decrease
the zeta potential by Chien et al. (2009). The continuous
injection of other solutions might provide different results
since they interact differently with SSS particles based on
their cation exchange capacity (CEC) and the initial struc-
ture (dispersed or flocculated). The injection of saline solu-
tions increases the electrolytes present in the SSS and
provides a temporary boost to the current and the
electro-osmotic flow. Unfortunately, with an increased cur-
rent and flow, the rate of water electrolysis also increases.
Hydrogen and hydroxide are produced faster at the elec-
trodes, which increases pH-related problems. While most
studies focused on anode conditioning, further studies
should be performed on the effects of conditioning at the
cathode as a means to prevent precipitation and high alka-
linity due to OH– generation, which increase resistance.
The reported experiments show that the injection of sal-
ine solutions to aid in electro-osmosis worked best when
used prior to current application. Studies also tested the
use of polarity reversal in combination with chemical injec-
tions. Ou et al. (2009) reported that sediment was cemented
around the anode and this impeded the flow of water when
the polarity was reversed, decreasing strength and increas-
ing water content. However, this aspect of the study was
not extensive and the interval of polarity reversal was not
taken into account. The combined use of these two tech-
 416
Table 4
Comparison between current intermittence and polarity reversal based on previous studies.
Reference Type of test Ke for DC Ke for IC or PR Improvement Electrical properties Soil conditions
(m2/s V) (m2/s V)
Mohamedelhassan and Intermittent 6.15E09 9.44538E09 53.6% Open 1 m-ON 0.5 m-OFF Remolded marine sediment from seabed, south-west coast of Korea.
Shang (2001) current 1.22857E08 99.8% Open 2 m-ON 1 m-OFF Carbon-steel electrodes
1.07227E08 74.4% Open 3 m-ON 1.5 m-OFF
8.82353E09 43.5% Open 4 m-ON 2 m-OFF
8.78992E09 42.9% Open 5 m-ON 2.5 m-OFF
7.71429E09 25.4% Short 1 m-ON 0.5 m-OFF

L. Martin et al. / Soils and Foundations 59 (2019) 407–418

7.2437E09 17.8% Short 2 m-ON 1 m-OFF
7.21008E09 17.2% Short 3 m-ON 1.5 m-OFF
7.15966E09 16.4% Short 4 m-ON 2 m-OFF
Shang and Lo (1997) Intermittent 1.29986E08 8.22934E09 36.7% 15 m-ON 1 m-OFF Florida phospate clay. Steel electrodes. Samples had different water
current 3.56575E08 174.3% 15 m-ON 2 m-OFF contents
1.3786E08 6.1% 15 m-ON 5 m-OFF
Micic et al. (2001) Intermittent 1.76199E08 1.78697E08 1.4% 10 m-ON 2 m-OFF Marine clay from northwest coast of Korea. Steel electrodes.
current 1.80235E08 2.3% 4 m-ON 2 m-OFF
1.81964E08 3.3% 2 m-ON 2 m-OFF
3.69308E08 109.6% 4 m-ON 2 m-OFF
3.70076E08 110.0% 4 m-ON 2 m-OFF Higher
surcharge
Yoshida (2000) Intermittent 1.41537E10 1.43043E10 1.1% Rectangular wave Kaolin. Platinum electrodes.
current f = 0.001 Hz
2.13309E10 54.0% Sine wave f = 0.001 Hz
1.91225E10 38.0% Sine wave f = 0.01 Hz
Hu et al. (2016) Intermittent 1.44162E09 1.47366E09 2.2% 12 hr intervals Kaolinite Suzhou, China. Iron
current
Kaniraj (2014) Polarity 8.33531E10 4.9979E10 40.0% PR every 8 hrs Peats and an organic soil from Sarawak, Malaysia. Copper EVD
reversal 4.98968E10 40.1% PR every 12 hrs
5.1212E10 38.6% PR every 24 hrs
Chien et al. (2011) Polarity 5.00092E10 1.93762E11 96.1% Ke before and after PR Taipei silty clay. Steel elctrodes
reversal
Yoshida et al. (1999) Polarity 1.46725E09 9.29949E10 36.6% PR after 500 s Kaolin. Platinum electrodes.
reversal 1.15046E09 21.6% PR after 50 s
5.91786E10 59.7% PR after 5s
3.28703E10 77.6% PR after 0.5 s
3.28703E10 77.6% PR after 0.01 s
 L. Martin et al. / Soils and Foundations 59 (2019) 407–418
niques could provide a substantial improvement over clas-
sic electro-osmotic treatment, but the electrolyte type and
the reversal interval must be carefully chosen. Since the
polarity reversal interval depends on the amount of water
drained and the changes in pH that occur at the electrodes,
and because adding chemical solutions increases the
electro-osmotic flow of water, the intervals will have to
be lower than if only polarity reversal is used.
While Ou et al. (2009) presented similar issues to Chien
et al. (2011), they demonstrated that the injection of saline
solutions improved the effectiveness of the electro-osmosis
in the field. The researchers concluded that polarity rever-
sal in conjunction with chemical treatment is not beneficial.
However, as shown above, the reversal interval has been
shown to be a critical variable. A shorter period between
polarity reversals could provide better results. The effec-
tiveness of these techniques might be different in the field,
due to having a less controlled environment, but the bene-
fits would still be present.
7. Summary and conclusions
In this manuscript, different techniques used to enhance
electro-osmotic dewatering were described and analyzed.
The improvement they provided over the classic electro-
osmotic treatment was discussed with a focus on dewater-
ing efficiency. Table 5 shows the pros and cons of each
method. This study has indicated that polarity reversal
and an intermittent current positively affected the electro-
osmotic treatment of SSS compared to the DC, but that
the power variation interval was critical to the success of
both techniques. Polarity reversal was seen to provide a
more even distribution of water removal than the DC,
but failed in power efficiency for the water removal. Cur-
rent intermittence, especially under an open circuit, showed
a clear increase in the efficiency of the water removed for
the power consumed. The injection of saline solutions at
the electrodes was shown to provide some improvement
in the electro-osmotic dewatering and that it works best
when the application is done before testing or during the
Table 5
Advantages and disadvantages of different enhancement techniques compared to DC.
Enhancement Advantages
technique
Polarity Longer treatment time, ions are recirculated, higher power
reversal efficiency, longer electrode life, reduced pH changes
Intermittent Higher power efficiency for water removed, longer treatment
current time, longer electrode life
Chemical Increase in current flow, improved water removal at low
injection concentrations, increase in undrained shear strength
Geosynthetics Cost, corrosion control, shape customization for different
applications, can be used as soil nails, can be used in conjunction
with the other enhancement techniques, provides a better
drainage path
417
initial stages. The intermittent current suffers from the
same problems that the DC has with pH; thus, an investi-
gation of the effect of combining the intermittent current
and an injection of a buffer solution at the electrodes would
be useful. Last, EKG electrodes were described and their
benefits were analyzed. They were seen to provide a suit-
able replacement for classical electrodes and to have addi-
tional functions. These techniques have been shown to
have similar effects on the electro-osmotic dewatering of
SSS in the field just as they do in the laboratory.
Following are the significant directions for future
research:
 A difficulty in comparing the effects of these techniques
with each other and with other studies is the influence of
the different samples tested. The comparison is based on
studies made on different SSS with different composi-
tions and states. Sometimes the data provided lack suf-
ficient characterization of the SSS properties. A
common and solid theoretical understanding of different
types of soil still does not exist. A more detailed study
on the effects of different soil types when the above-
discussed methods are used should be done.
 It is possible that with fine-tuning, the intermittent cur-
rent will be able to provide sufficient improvement to
begin its use in foundation projects in western countries.
However, a cost-benefit analysis is necessary for the
proper assessment of its use in the field, particularly
because installation costs in the field are not comparable
to those in the laboratory.
 As discussed above, the combination of polarity reversal
and chemical injections can yield positive results. Fur-
ther study combining polarity reversal to remove water
from the clay structure followed by an intermittent cur-
rent to carry that water toward the cathode to be
drained should be done and might yield very favorable
results.
While polarity reversal, an intermittent current, the
injection of chemical solutions at the electrodes, and the
Disadvantages
Water is maintained in the soil system, lower undrained shear
strength, ON/OFF interval is critical, possible cementation and
excessive ion removal
Lower time efficiency for water removal, ON/OFF interval is
critical
Continuous injection is detrimental, improvement in strength is
limited to immediate area around electrode, high concentrations
reduce power efficiency, higher ion valence provides better
immediate water removal but can stifle long term treatment
Minimal increase in resistance due to inert polymer coating of
electric filaments
418 L. Martin et al. / Soils and Foundations 59 (2019) 407–418

use of geo-synthetics might increase the overall efficiency of Lefebvre, G., Burnotte, F., 2002. Improvements of electroosmotic
electro-osmotic treatment, the improvement might not be consolidation of soft clays by minimizing power loss at electrodes.
Can. Geotech. J. 39, 399–408.
sufficient to justify the use of electro-osmotic dewatering, Lockhart, N.C., 1983. Electroosmotic dewatering of clays. I Influence of
and thus, further enhancements are necessary. However voltage. Colloids Surf. 6, 229–238.
these techniques are very promising, especially if combined. Lo, K.Y., Ho, K.S., Inculet, I.I., 1991. Field test of electroosmotic
strengthening of soft sensitive clay. Can. Geotech. J. 28, 74–83.
References Lo, K.Y. et al., 2000. Electrokinetic strengthening of a soft marine
sediment. Int. J. Offshore Polar Eng. 10, 137–144.
Mahmoud, A., Olivier, J., Vaxelaire, J., Hoadley, A., 2010. Electrical field:
Alshawabkeh, A.N., Sheahan, T.C., 2003. Soft soil stabilization by ionic
a historical review of its application and contributions in wastewater
injection under electric fields. Ground Improv. 7, 177–185.
sludge dewatering. Water Res. 44, 2381–2407.
Bergado, D.T., Balasubramaniam, A.S., Patawaran, M.A.B., Kwunpreuk,
Meegoda, J.N., Ratnaweera, P., 2008. Prediction of effective porosity of
W., 2000. Electro-osmotic consolidation of soft Bangkok clay with
contaminated fine grained soils using electrical properties. Geotech.
prefabricated vertical drains. Ground Improvement 4, 153–163.
Test. J. 31 (4), 344–357.
Bhattacharya, A.K., Basack, S., 2011. A review of the use of the pre-
Micic, S. et al., 2001. Electrokinetic strengthening of a marine sediment
loading technique and vertical drains for soil consolidation. Kochi,
using intermittent current. Can. Geotech. J. 38, 287–302.
Proceedings of Indian Geotechnical Conference.
Mitchell, J.K., Soga, K., 2005. Fundamentals of Soil Behavior, third ed.
Bjerrum, L., Moum, J., Eide, O., 1967. Application of electroosmosis to a
John Wiley & Sons Inc., Hoboken, NJ.
foundation problem in a Norwegian Quick Clay. Geotechnique 17 (3),
Mohamedelhassan, E., Shang, J., 2003. Electrokinetics-generated pore
214–235.
fluid and ionic transport in an offshore calcareous soil. Can. Geotech.
Burnotte, F., Lefebvre, G., Grondin, G., 2004. A case record of
J. 40, 1185–1199.
electroosmotic consolidation of soft clay with improved soil–electrode
Mohamedelhassan, E., Shang, J.Q., 2001. Effects of electrode materials
contact. Can. Geotech. J. 41, 1038–1053.
and current intermittence in electro-osmosis. Ground Improvement 5,
Casagrande, L., 1949. Electro-osmosis in soils. Geotechnique 1 (3), 159–
3–11.
177.
Otsuki, N., Yodsudjai, W., Nishida, T., 2007. Feasibility study on soil
Chang, H.W. et al., 2010. Electro-osmotic chemical Treatment – a study
improvement using electrochemical technique. Constr. Build. Mater.
on distribution of calcium in kaolinite and its effect on strength and
21 (5), 1046–1051.
pH. Clays Clay Miner. 58, 154–163.
Ou, C., Chien, S., Chang, H., 2009. Soil improvement using electroos-
Chien, S., Ou, C., Wang, M., 2009. Injection of saline solutions to improve
mosis with the injection of chemical solutions: field tests. Can.
the electroosmotic pressure and consolidation of foundation soil.
Geotech. J. 46, 727–733.
Appl. Clay Sci. 44, 218–224.
Ozkan, S., Gale, R., Seals, R., 1999. Electrokinetic stabilisation of
Chien, S., Ou, C., Wang, Y., 2011. Soil improvement using electroosmosis
kaolinite by injection of Al and PO3- 4 ions. Ground Improve. 3, 135–
with the injection of chemical solutions: laboratory tests. J. Chinese
144.
Inst. Eng. 34 (7), 863–875.
Paczkowska, B., 2005. Electro-osmotic introduction of methacrylate
Esrig, M.I., 1968. Pore pressure, consolidation and electrokinetics. J. Soil
polycations to dehydrate clayey soil. Can. Geotech. J. 42, 780–786.
Mech. Found. Div. ASCE 94 (4), 899–921.
Rabie, H.R., Mujumdar, A.S., Weber, M.E., 1994. Interrupted electroos-
Fourie, A.B., Johns, D.G., Jones, C., 2007. Dewatering of mine tailings
motic dewatering of clay suspensions. Separat. Technol. 4, 38–46.
using electrokinetic geosynthetics. Can. Geotech. J. 44, 160–172.
Rittirong, A. et al., 2008. Effects of electrode configuration on electroki-
Glendinning, S., Jones, C., Pugh, R.C., 2005. Reinforced soil using
netic stabilization for caisson anchors in calcareous sand. J. Geotech.
cohesive fill and electrokinetic geosynthetics. Int. J. Geomech. 5 (2),
Geoenviron. Eng. 134 (3), 352–365.
138–146.
Saichek, R.E., Reddy, K.R., 2003. Effect of pH control at the anode for
Gray, D.H., Somogyi, F., 1977. Electroosmotic dewatering with polarity
the electrokinetic removal of phenanthrene from kaolin soil. Chemo-
reversals. J. Geotech. Eng. 103 (1), 51–54.
sphere 51, 273–287.
Hamir, R.B., Jones, C., Clarke, B.G., 2001. Electrically conductive
Shang, J.Q., Lo, K.Y., 1997. Electrokinetic dewatering of a phosphate
geosynthetics for consolidation and reinforced soil. Geotextiles and
clay. J. Hazard. Mater. 55, 117–133.
Geomembranes 19, 455–482.
Sprute, R.H., Kelsh, D.J., 1976. Dewatering and densification of coal
Hu, L., 2008. Recent research and applications in the use of elecetro-
waste by direct current: laboratory tests. Energy Citations Database.
kinetic geosynthetics. International Geosynthetics Society, Scotland.
Tuan, P.A., Jurate, V., Mika, S., 2008. Electro-dewatering of sludge under
Hu, L., Wu, H., Meegoda, J.N., Wen, Q., 2015. Experimental and
pressure and non-pressure conditions. Environ. Technol. 29, 1075–
numerical study of electro-osmosis on kaolinite under intermittent
1084.
current. Geotech. Eng. J. SEAGS AGSSEA 46 (4), 47–51.
Wu, H., Hu, L., Zhang, L., Wen, Q., 2015. Transport and exchange
Hu, L., Wu, H., Ren, Y., Wen, Q., 2016. Experimental study on soft soils
behavior of ions in bentonite during electroosmotic consolidation.
improvement by the deep electro-osmotic consolidation technique.
Clays Clay Miner. 63 (5), 395–403.
Chicago, Geo-Chicago, 235–244.
Yoshida, H., 2000. Electro-osmotic dewatering under intermittent power
Iwata, M., Tanaka, T., Jami, M.S., 2013. Application of electroosmosis
application by rectification of A.C. electric field. J. Chem. Eng. Jpn. 33
for sludge dewatering – a review. Drying Technol. 31, 170–184.
(1), 134–140.
Jones, C., Lamont-Black, J., Glendinning, S., 2011. Electrokinetic
Yoshida, H.K., Kitajyo, K., Nakayama, M., 1999. Electroosmotic
geosynthetics in hydraulic applications. Geotext. Geomembranes 29,
dewatering under A. C. electric field with periodic reversals of
381–390.
electrode polarity. Drying Technol. 17 (3), 539–554.
Kaniraj, S.R., 2014. Soft soil improvement by electroosmotic consolida-
Yuan, C., Weng, C.H., 2003. Sludge dewatering by electrokinetic
tion. Int. J. Integr. Eng. 6 (2), 42–51.
technique: effect of processing time and potential gradient. Adv.
Kaniraj, S.R., Huong, H.L., Yee, J., 2011. Electro-osmotic consolidation
Environ. Res. 7 (3), 727–732.
studies on peat and clayey silt using electric vertical drain. Geotech.
Zhou, D., Deng, C., Alshawabkeh, A.N., Chang, L., 2005. Effects of
Geol. Eng. 29, 277–295.
catholyte conditioning on electrokinetic extraction of copper from
Kaniraj, S.R., Yee, J., 2011. Electroosmotic consolidation experiments on
mine tailings. Environ. Int. 31, 885–890.
an organic soil. Geotech. Geol. Eng. 29, 505–518.