Applsci 10 00015

applied
sciences
Review
State-of-the-Art of Colloidal Silica-Based Soil
Liquefaction Mitigation: An Emerging Technique
for Ground Improvement
Mingzhi Zhao 1,2 , Gang Liu 1,2, *, Chong Zhang 1,2 , Wenbo Guo 1,2 and Qiang Luo 3
1 School of Civil Engineering, Architecture and Environment, Xihua University, Chengdu 610039, China;
1220180013@mail.xhu.edu.cn (M.Z.); civilzhangchong@163.com (C.Z.); civilguowenbo@163.com (W.G.)
2 Institute of Geotechnical Engineering, Xihua University, Chengdu 610039, China
3 MOE Key Laboratory of High-speed Railway Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University,
Chengdu 610031, China; LQrock@home.swjtu.edu.cn
* Correspondence: 0120130047@mail.xhu.edu.cn

Received: 21 November 2019; Accepted: 29 November 2019; Published: 18 December 2019
Abstract: In the booming field of nanotechnology, colloidal silica (CS) has been introduced for
ground improvement and liquefaction mitigation. It possesses a great ability to restrain pore pressure
generation during seismic events by using an innovative stabilization technique, with the advantages
of being a cost-effective, low disturbance, and environmentally friendly method. This paper firstly
introduces molecular structures and some physical properties of CS, which are of great importance
in the practical application of CS. Then, evidence that can justify the feasibility of CS transport in
loose sand layers is demonstrated, summarizing the crucial factors that determine the rate of CS
delivery. Thereafter, four chemical and physical methods that can examine the grouting quality are
summed and appraised. Silica content and chloride ion concentration are two effective indicators
recommended in this paper to judge CS converge. Finally, the evidence from the elemental tests,
model tests, and field tests is reviewed in order to demonstrate CS’s ability to inhibit pore water
pressure and lower liquefaction risk. Based on the conclusions drawn in previous literature, this paper
refines the concept of CS concentration and curing time being the two dominant factors that determine
the strengthening effect. The objective of this work is to review CS treatment methodologies and
emphasize the critical factors that influence both CS delivery and the ground improving effect. Besides,
it also aims to provide references for optimizing the approaches of CS transport and promoting its
responsible use in mitigating liquefaction.
Keywords: liquefaction mitigation; colloidal silica; transport mechanism; grouting material
1. Introduction
In the past few decades, large destructive earthquakes, such as the 1964 Niigata earthquake in Japan,
the 1964 Alaskan earthquake, the 1985 Michoacán earthquake in Mexico, the 1995 Hyogoken-Nambu
earthquake in Kobe, Japan, the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake in China, the 2010 Chile earthquake, and the
2011 Great East Japan earthquake, have resulted in various geological hazards in which liquefaction was
particularly remarkable [1–6]. The 1976 Tangshan earthquake in China induced serious liquefaction
in a vast area of 24,000 square meters. In the liquefaction area, the ground suffered a rapid and
dramatic loss of soil strength, and the bearing capacity suddenly disappeared due to the motion of the
earthquake, leading to the significant settlement or collapse of massive buildings. Liquefaction is a kind
of natural hazard that usually occurs in loose, saturated sand during an earthquake. Under the effect
of a vibrating load, sand particles deviate from their original location, separating from each other and
becoming suspended in the pore water. Both dead seismic loads can only act on the pore water under
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15; doi:10.3390/app10010015 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 2 of 31
this circumstance, and the lateral movement of intact soil blocks over shallow liquefied deposits is
typically induced. Some sloping areas in mountainous regions and those along the waterfront are more
susceptible to lateral movement compared with the flat terrain. Therefore, the infrastructure in these
areas is presented with a great risk from lateral spreading due to liquefaction [7]. Liquefaction-induced
lateral spreading and ground failure will bring great damage to the upper parts of structures, which is
a costly natural phenomenon. For example, a major part of the billion-dollar damage in the 1964 Niigata
earthquake can be attributed to the lateral movement triggered by liquefaction. Besides, liquefaction
also caused billions of dollars of damage to port facilities during the 1995 Kobe event [8,9].
To increase liquefaction resistance and limit the potential deformations of ground soil, one of the
most popular soil improvement techniques is densification. Dynamic compaction, vibro-compaction,
and explosive compaction have been extensively adopted to densify soil to mitigate liquefaction risk.
Pioneering works, conducted by Dappolonia et al. (1954), Menard and Broise (1975), Mayne et al. (1984),
and Welsh (1986), have facilitated the development and implementation of these densification
techniques [10–13]. However, these reinforcement measures can only be adopted in undeveloped sites,
given the fact that the buildings and structures are sensitive to vibration and dynamic compaction.
At constrained and developed sites, underpinning and grouting seems to be the most feasible
technique [7]. With underpinning, foundation is extended in depth or breadth so that it can either
rest on a more supportive soil stratum or distribute its load across a broader area. The stress states
of the existing structural elements are significantly improved in order to mitigate liquefaction.
Nevertheless, this method targets specific structures rather than the entire ground. In the case of
grouting, permeation grout can be classified into two categories, namely, cement suspension and
chemically based solutions [14]. Both grouting materials are of high viscosity, so that they are often
adopted to form grout columns rather than a uniform distribution across the entire ground beneath the
structure [7,15]. In addition, most typical chemical solutions, such as acrylate and epoxy, are toxic and
likely to create pollution to the local underground water. Especially in the case of cement, where the
mean particle size of Portland cement ranges from 10–30 µm, allowing it to permeate through voids
with a size greater than 0.2–0.3 mm. As a consequence, only on the condition that the soil stratum is
mainly composed of medium to coarse sand can Portland cement be adopted as a grouting material.
This is even the case with ultra-fine cement, where the mean grain size decreases to 3–5 µm, which has
been proposed to be used in pressure grouting in recent years. Even this cement is only appropriate
for use in fine to medium sand. However, liquefaction is more likely to occur when the stratum is
mainly composed of silty sand or fine sand [16,17], so there are some limitations when using these
traditional materials to mitigate liquefaction risk.
With the development of nanotechnology, nanomaterials have been proposed by many researchers
to be introduced into ground treatment to improve mechanical properties and mitigate liquefaction
risk [18–25]. The concepts and inspirations of nanotechnology originate from a famous talk hold by
Richard Feynman entitled “There’s Plenty of Room at the Bottom” at Caltech, in Pasadena, California,
in December of 1959 [26]. Since then, a new field, exploring and manipulating nanoscale microscopic
particle has begun to develop at a breathtaking pace. At present, the economic benefit created by
nanomaterials and relevant products annually increases by 20%. Meanwhile, the cost of nanoproduction
decreases significantly with the promoting effect of booming market development [15]. Under these
circumstances, nanomaterials, such as carbon nanotubes, nanoalumina, colloidal silica, nanobentonite,
laponite, and so on, have an expansive application space in civil engineering, especially as kinds of
additives to improve the properties of cement, concrete and soils [27–29].
Among these advanced nanomaterials, the cheapest and most widely used one in soil treatment
is colloidal silica (CS) [30,31]. CS is a kind of powerful material that can be used for passive site
stabilization, which is a relatively new technique that has been proposed by Gallagher (2002) as
a nondisruptive treatment to mitigate liquefaction risk [32]. The passive site stabilization technique
involves three critical procedures, namely, the injection of grouting materials at the upgradient edge of
the site, the delivery of the stabilizing materials to the targeted location, and gelation into a rigid gel
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 3 of 31
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 31
grouting
(Figure 1). materials, with the
The most critical condition
point of low-gradient
in passive site stabilizationterrain.
is theHere,
smoothit isdelivery
requiredofthat the given
the grouting
material in use has a low initial viscosity and excellent permeability characteristics,
materials, with the condition of low-gradient terrain. Here, it is required that the given material which it needsinto
sustain
use has afor
low sufficient time such
initial viscosity andthat the modifier
excellent could be
permeability transported to
characteristics, the desired
which it needslocation
to sustain[32,33].
for
sufficient time such that the modifier could be transported to the desired location [32,33]. Since CSwater
Since CS has an extremely low initial viscosity of around 2 cP (where, as a comparison, pure has
has
an an initiallow
extremely viscosity
initialof 1 cP), after
viscosity mixing2with
of around a salt solution,
cP (where, it can easily
as a comparison, pureflow through
water has an theinitial
voids
of liquefiable soil and permeate across the soil stratum, along with the underground
viscosity of 1 cP), after mixing with a salt solution, it can easily flow through the voids of liquefiable water flow
induced by the extraction wells [32]. Once CS reaches the target location,
soil and permeate across the soil stratum, along with the underground water flow induced by the extraction is eliminated,
waiting for
extraction the CS
wells grouting
[32]. Once CS gelreaches
to change theinto a firm
target solid. CS
location, has beenisinvestigated
extraction eliminated,by many scholars
waiting for the
CS grouting gel to change into a firm solid. CS has been investigated by many scholars asmechanical
as a kind of grouting material for soil improvement and liquefaction mitigation. The a kind of
behaviormaterial
grouting of the soil
forstabilized with CS has
soil improvement andbeen evaluated
liquefaction in conventional
mitigation. geotechnical
The mechanical tests, of
behavior bench-
the
scale model tests and field tests [17–19,32–37]. It has been proven that CS can
soil stabilized with CS has been evaluated in conventional geotechnical tests, bench-scale model tests decrease the axial strain
andfield
and restrain pore pressureItdevelopment
tests [17–19,32–37]. has been proven in the
that soil subjected
CS can decreasetothe cyclic
axialloading.
strain and Therefore,
restrain pore it is
potentialdevelopment
pressure material to in bethe
adopted in ground
soil subjected treatment,
to cyclic loading.especially
Therefore, for itstrata mainlymaterial
is potential composed to beof
liquefiable soils.
adopted in ground treatment, especially for strata mainly composed of liquefiable soils.
Stabilizer Injection
Wells
Extraction Wells
Building
r flow
by nd wate
orted Grou
s T ran s p
ilizer w
Stab ter flo
ndwa
Grou
Figure 1. Concept for passive site stabilization [7,32].

Figure 1. Concept for passive site stabilization [7,32].
The paper reviews the main experimental studies and scientific findings in the field of the applied
The paper reviews the main experimental studies and scientific findings in the field of the
research of colloidal silica for soil improvement and liquefaction mitigation. The paper is organized
applied research of colloidal silica for soil improvement and liquefaction mitigation. The paper is
as follows: The first section describes the physical, gelling, curing, and mechanical properties of CS.
organized as follows: The first section describes the physical, gelling, curing, and mechanical
The effect of ionic strength and pH on the gelation process are both discussed in detail. The paper
properties of CS. The effect of ionic strength and pH on the gelation process are both discussed in
then focuses on the mechanism of CS transport. Here, soil type, CS viscosity, and injection rate
detail. The paper then focuses on the mechanism of CS transport. Here, soil type, CS viscosity, and
are summarized as three main factors that determine grouting quality and CS coverage. Thereafter,
injection rate are summarized as three main factors that determine grouting quality and CS coverage.
evidence from laboratory tests and field tests is presented to demonstrate the potential ability of CS in
Thereafter, evidence from laboratory tests and field tests is presented to demonstrate the potential
inhibiting pore water generation and decreasing dynamic strain. Finally, in the last section, the paper
ability of CS in inhibiting pore water generation and decreasing dynamic strain. Finally, in the last
reviews further CS applications in other branches of civil engineering and sums some significant
section, the paper reviews further CS applications in other branches of civil engineering and sums
advantages of this innovative technique compared with traditional methods.
some significant advantages of this innovative technique compared with traditional methods.
2. Characteristics of Colloidal Silica (CS)
2. Characteristics of Colloidal Silica (CS)
2.1. Physical Properties of CS
2.1. Physical Properties of CS
Colloidal silica (CS) is an aqueous suspension of microscopic nanosilica, extracted from saturated
Colloidal
solutions silica
of silicic acid.(CS) is an aqueous
In general, suspension
the particle of microscopic
size of nanosilica nanosilica,
is uniform, ranging extracted
from 7–22 from
nm.
saturated solutions of silicic acid. In general, the particle size of nanosilica is uniform,
CS is nontoxic, chemically and biologically inert, and environmentally friendly [38,39]. When diluted ranging from
to7–22
a 5%nm. CS is nontoxic,
concentration chemically
by weight, and biologically
the viscosity inert,isand
of CS solution onlyenvironmentally friendly
1.5–2 cP, and is quite [38,39].
similar to
When diluted to a 5% concentration by weight, the viscosity of CS solution is only 1.5–2 cP, and is
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 4 of 31
quitewater.
pure similar to pure water. With the addition of an solution
electrolyte,canaabeCS solution can be destabilized in
quite similarWith to pure the water.
addition Withof an
theelectrolyte,
addition ofa CS an electrolyte, CSdestabilized
solution caninbeorder to start the
destabilized in
order
gelation to start
process.the gelation process.
order to start the gelation process.
CS nanoparticles
CS nanoparticles
nanoparticles are are formed
are formed as as aa result of the interaction between H4SiO SiO4 andand other
other molecules.
molecules.
CS formed as a result of the interaction between H44SiO44and other molecules.
During
During the the manufacturing
the manufacturing
manufacturing process, process, alkaline solutions are added
process, alkaline solutions are added into the CS into the CS
CS to to keep
to keep the
keep the silica
the silica particles
silica particles
particles
During
ionized and
ionized and repelled
repelled from from eacheach other,
other, so
so that
that gelation
gelation can can bebe inhibited,
inhibited, and
and thethe CS
CS solution
solution cancan stay
stay
ionized and repelled from each other, so that gelation can be inhibited, and the CS solution can stay
steady [7].
steady [7]. The
[7]. The surfaces
The surfaces
surfacesof of the
of the
the CSCS particles
CS particles
particles areare initially
are initially distributed
initially distributed
distributed by by uncombined
by uncombined
uncombined silanol silanol (Si-O-H)
silanol (Si-O-H)
(Si-O-H)
steady
groups. When
groups. When exposed
exposed to
to an alkaline
an alkaline environment,
environment, the the alkali
alkali materials
materials react
react with
with the the surfaces
surfaces of of
groups. When exposed to an alkaline environment, the alkali materials react with the surfaces of
nanoparticles, leading
nanoparticles, leading to to negative
negative charges
charges (O (O−) on
− the particles
particles andand resulting
resulting in in repulsive
repulsive forces
forces
nanoparticles, leading to negative charges (O−) )on on the
the particles and resulting in repulsive forces
(Figure
(Figure 2a). 2a).
2a). AsAs
As thethe amount
the amount
amount of of charge
of charge
charge on on particle
on particle surfaces
particle surfaces
surfaces is is proportional
is proportional
proportional to to
to thethe amount
the amount
amount of of hydroxyl
of hydroxyl
hydroxyl
(Figure
ions, interparticle
ions, interparticle repulsive
repulsive force
force weakens
weakens and
and particles
particles start
starttoto
interact with
interact with each
eachother
otherwhen the the
when pH
ions, interparticle repulsive force weakens and particles start to interact with each other when the pH
pHdrops to a to
drops relatively
a relativelylow value.
low value.Under this circumstance, some of the silica particles still have negative
drops to a relatively low value. UnderUnder this circumstance,
this circumstance, some ofsome of the
the silica silica particles
particles still havestill have
negative
charges (O −), while− the others become uncharged (–OH). Here, siloxane bonds (Si-O-Si) start to
charges (O ), while the others become uncharged (–OH). Here, siloxane bonds (Si-O-Si) startstart
negative charges
− (O ), while the others become uncharged (–OH). Here, siloxane bonds (Si-O-Si) to
develop
to develop (Figure
(Figure 2b) and the gelation of the CS suspension
suspensionisisismotivated
motivated (Figure 3). As the pH drops
drops
develop (Figure 2b)2b)
and andthethe gelation
gelation ofof
thetheCSCSsuspension motivated(Figure
(Figure3). 3).AsAsthethepHpH drops
continuouslybelow
continuously below 5, positive charges attach to the silica particles, and repulsive forces dominate
continuously below 5,5,positive
positivechargeschargesattach
attachto to
the silica
the particles,
silica andand
particles, repulsive
repulsiveforces dominate
forces once
dominate
once
again again
(Figure (Figure
2c). 2c). Therefore,
Therefore, the the
gelation gelation
time time
increases increases
with a with a
decreasing decreasing
formation formation
rate of rate of
siloxane
once again (Figure 2c). Therefore, the gelation time increases with a decreasing formation rate of
siloxane
bonds. bonds.
Itbonds.
has been It has been investigated and that
determined that the minimum gelation time can be
siloxane It investigated and determined
has been investigated the minimum
and determined that the gelation
minimum time gelation
can be obtained
time can when
be
obtained
the pH ranges when the pH ranges from 5 to 7 [40-42].
obtained whenfrom the pH 5 toranges
7 [40–42].
from 5 to 7 [40-42].
-
OH
O - O
O- -
OH
- Si O Si
Si O O- Si O Si Si O
O Si Si O O O
O O
O
Si
O
- O O Si O
Si O O- Si Si
O
O - OO Si
O
OO Si O
O
O- Si O OO Si Si
OO
O
Si Si Si OH O- Si
O
Si O- - Si
(a) O (b) OH O-
(a) O- O -
(b)
H2O+ H2O+
H O+ H2O+
Si 2 Si
O Si Si O
O
O O O
O
+ +
O Si H2O+
H2O
+
Si O
OO Si H2O H2O Si O O
OO Si
Si
O
Si H2O+ H2O + Si
(c) H2O+ +
(c) H2O
Figure 2. Surface charge characteristics of silica particles on the condition of different pH values: (a)
Figure 2.
Figure Surfacecharge
2. Surface chargecharacteristics
characteristics
of of silica
silica particles
particles on on
thethe condition
condition of different
of different pH pH values:
values: (a)
pH > 8, O− − on the particle surface and repulsive forces demonstrated; (b) 5 ≤ pH ≤ 8, some particles
(a) pH
pH > 8,>O8, on
O− the
on the particle
particle surface
surface andand repulsive
repulsive forcesdemonstrated;
forces (b)55≤≤pH
demonstrated;(b) pH≤≤8,8,some
someparticles
particles
still with O−−− and others become uncharged; (c) pH > 8, H2O+++ on the particle surface and repulsive
still with
still with O and and others
others become
become uncharged;
uncharged; (c)(c) pH > 8, H22O
> 8, O ononthe
theparticle
particle surface
surface and
and repulsive
repulsive
forces indicated [7].
forces indicated
forces indicated [7].
[7].
Figure 3.
Figure Formation of
3. Formation of siloxane
siloxane bonds
bonds and
and aa schematic
schematic of
of the
the colloidal
colloidal silica
silica (CS)
(CS) particle
particle [40,
[40,43,44].
43, 44].
Figure 3. Formation of siloxane bonds and a schematic of the colloidal silica (CS) particle [40, 43, 44].
In
In addition to pH,
addition to pH,the
thecritical
criticalfactors
factors that
that could
could influence
influence gelation
gelation process
process also also include
include the
the ionic
ionicInstrength,
additionsilica
to pH, the concentration,
solids critical factors that
and could influence
temperature gelation process
[7,36,45,46]. Since alsoconcentration
silica include the ionic
and
strength, silica solids concentration, and temperature [7,36,45,46]. Since silica concentration and
strength,
temperaturesilica solids concentration, gelation
and temperature [7,36,45,46]. Since silica concentration and
temperature areare relatively
relatively constant,
constant, gelation time
time can
can be
be controlled
controlled by
by adjusting
adjusting the
the ionic
ionic strength
strength
temperature are relatively constant, gelation time can be controlled by adjusting the ionic strength
and pH value. The evolvement characteristics of viscosity in the gelation process for solutions with 5
and pH value. The evolvement characteristics of viscosity in the gelation process for solutions with 5
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 5 of 31
and
wt %pH value. silica
colloidal The evolvement characteristics
have been measured of viscosity
and depicted in the gelation
quantitatively process
[7,40,45], for solutions
as shown with
in Figure 4.
wt
5Itwt %% colloidal
colloidalsilica
silicahave
havebeenbeenmeasured
measured and
and depicted
depicted quantitatively
quantitatively [7,40,45],
[7,40,45], asasshown
shown in
in Figure
Figure 4.4.
is obvious that the shape of gelation curve is similar regardless of gel time. Moreover, silica particles
It is
is obvious
Ithave obvious that
that the shape
shape of
theperiod ofgelation
gelation curve
curve is
issimilar
similar regardless
regardless of gel
gel time. Moreover, silica particles
an induction in the gelation process, during whichofviscositytime.stays
Moreover,
fairly silica
low andparticles
silica
have
have an
an induction
induction period
period in
in the
the gelation
gelation process,
process, during
during which
which viscosity
viscosity stays
stays fairly
fairly low
low and
and silica
silica
suspension has a flow rate close to pure water. With an appropriate amount of time elapsed, viscosity
suspension
suspension has
has aa flow
flow rate
rate close to
to pure
close and pure water.
water. With
With an
an appropriate
appropriate amount
amount of time
time elapsed, viscosity
starts to increase dramatically, a firm gel is finally obtained [47,48]. In of
detail, elapsed,
gel viscosity
time increases
starts
starts to increase
to increase dramatically, and a firm gel is finally obtained [47,48]. In detail, gel time increases
with pH value ondramatically,
the conditionand a firm
of pH gelwhile
> 7.5, is finally obtained
it decreases as[47,48].
normalityIn detail, gel time
(i.e., ionic increases
strength) rises
with
with pH
pH value
value on
on the
the condition
condition of
of pH
pH >> 7.5,
7.5, while
while itit decreases
decreases as
as normality
normality (i.e.,
(i.e., ionic
ionic strength)
strength) rises
rises
from 0.225 N to 0.3 N. As a consequence, the time from mixing to the point where viscosity increases
from
from 0.225 NN to
to 0.3 N.
N. As aa consequence, the
the time from mixing to
to the
the point where viscosity increases
has a0.225
significantly0.3wide Asscope,
consequence,
ranging from atime
fewfrom
minutes mixing
to several point
months. where viscosity
In other words,increases
CS has
has
has aa significantly
significantly wide
wide scope,
scope, ranging
ranging from
from a
a few
few minutes
minutes to
to several
several months.
months. In
In other
other words,
words, CS
CS has
has
a widely ranged controllable gel time, which is favorable for the transportation of grouting materials
aa widely
widely ranged
ranged controllable
controllable gel
gel time,
time, which
which is
is favorable
favorable for
for the
the transportation
transportation of
of grouting
grouting materials
materials
to the desired location.
to
to the
the desired
desired location.
location.
(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 4. Viscosity increasing law of CS suspension in the gelation process at different (a) pH values
Figure
Figure 4. Viscosity
Viscosity increasing
increasing law
law of
of CS
CS suspension
suspension in
in the
the gelation
gelation process
process at
at different
different (a)
(a) pH
pH values
values
and (b) ionic normalities [40,45].
and
and (b)
(b) ionic
ionic normalities [40,45].
2.2. Gelling
2.2. Gelling and
and Curing
Curing Process
Process forfor CS
CS
2.2. Gelling and Curing Process for CS
Persoff (1999)
Persoff divided
(1999)divided
dividedthethe
the gelation
gelation process
process into 11 gel states to describe the course during which
Persoff (1999) gelation process intointo 11 states
11 gel gel states to describe
to describe the course
the course duringduring
which
a CS solution evolves into a rigid gel [49], as[49],
shown in Figure 5. Gel state 1 state
is such a such
process, where
awhich a CS solution
CS solution evolvesevolves into agel
into a rigid rigid
[49],gel
as shown as shown
in Figure in 5.
Figure 5. Gel
Gel state 1 is such1 is
a process,a process,
where
an original
where CS
an original solution has
CS solutiona viscosity quite
has a viscosity close to
quite pure
closewater and
to pure no
waterdetectable formed
and noformed
detectablegel. During
formed
an original CS solution has a viscosity quite close to pure water and no detectable gel. During
this During
gel. stage, CS acts
this like aCS
stage, Newtonian
acts like a fluid. When fluid.
Newtonian the pH or salt
When concentration
the pH or salt is adjusted, the
concentration is gelation
adjusted,
this stage, CS acts like a Newtonian fluid. When the pH or salt concentration is adjusted, the gelation
process
the is triggered,
gelation process isand and CS enters
triggered, into
andinto gel state
CS enters into2.2.
gelHere, viscosity
stateviscosity increasing
2. Here, viscosity gradually,
increasing and the gel
gradually,
process is triggered, CS enters gel state Here, increasing gradually, and the andgel
becomes a
the gel becomesnon-Newtonian
a non-Newtonian fluid. Since then,
fluid. then,
SinceCSCS
then,transforms
CS transforms from a flowing gel into a nonflowing gel,
becomes a non-Newtonian fluid. Since transforms from afrom a flowing
flowing gel ainto
gel into a nonflowing
nonflowing gel,
andand
gel, finally into a rigid
finally gel. gel.
When arriving at gel state 10, CS particles gel into chainlike structures and
and finally into into a rigid
a rigid gel. When When arriving
arriving at gelatstate
gel state
10, CS10,particles
CS particles gel chainlike
gel into into chainlike structures
structures and
then into
and then uniform
into uniform three dimensional
three dimensional networks. As
networks. a result, a CS
As aaresult, resonating, rigid
a CS resonating, gel can
rigid be obtained.
then into uniform three dimensional networks. As a result, CS resonating, rigid gel can begel can be
obtained.
Therefore,Therefore,
gel time can be defined asdefined
the time needed for a CS solution to evolve to from gel state 1 to
Therefore, gel time can be defined as the time needed for a CS solution to evolve from gel state 1gel
obtained. gel time can be as the time needed for a CS solution evolve from to
gel state
state 10
1 to10 [40,45].
gel[40,45].
state 10 [40,45].
gel state
Figure 5. Gel state classification and description [49].

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 6 of 31
Since
Sincethe
therelationship
relationship of
of gel time with
gel time with pHpHvalue
valueisisnot
notasasclear
clearasas that
that with
with ionic
ionic strength,
strength, thethe
salt
salt concentration has always been adjusted to control the gel time in previous experimental
concentration has always been adjusted to control the gel time in previous experimental studies in studies
inthe
theliterature
literature[14,17,20,32,50].
[14,17,20,32,50].Sodium
Sodiumchloride
chloride (NaCl)
(NaCl) oror calcium
calcium chloride
chloride (CaCl
(CaCl22))has
hasmostly
mostlybeen
been
adopted
adopted as the electrolyte solution of choice to adjust salt concentration in order to start thegelation
as the electrolyte solution of choice to adjust salt concentration in order to start the gelation
process.
process.The Theaddition
additionofofsalt
saltwill
willshrink
shrinkthe
thedouble
doublelayer
layerofofCSCSparticles,
particles,which
whichwillwillincrease
increasethethe
probability of interparticle collisions [45]. These collisions will undoubtedly the
probability of interparticle collisions [45]. These collisions will undoubtedly the motivate gel formationmotivate gel
formation
process and process and the
facilitate facilitate the CS suspension
CS suspension to transform to transform
into a rigid,into
firma rigid, firm NaCl
gel. With gel. With NaClto
addition
addition to adjust the salt concentration, the CS gelling process was monitored by
adjust the salt concentration, the CS gelling process was monitored by Wong et al. (2018), as shown Wong et al. (2018),
asinshown
Figurein 6. Figure 6.
(a) (b) (c)

Figure
Figure6.6.CS
CSgelation
gelationprocess:
process:(a)(a)before
beforegelling;
gelling;(b)
(b)close
closetotogelling;
gelling;(c)
(c)after
aftergelling
gelling[50].
[50].
Mollamahmutogluand
Mollamahmutoglu andYilmaz
Yilmaz(2010)
(2010)performed
performeda aseries seriesofofgel
gelexperiments
experimentswith withdifferent
differentsalt salt
concentrationsand
concentrations andsalt saltsolution
solutionquantities,
quantities,and andthe thegel
geltime
timecurves
curvesfor forthree
threemagnitudes
magnitudesofofsalt salt
concentrations were plotted against the addition quantities of the salt solution.
concentrations were plotted against the addition quantities of the salt solution. It was concluded that It was concluded that
geltime
gel time decreases with withan anincreasing
increasing salt concentration
salt concentration andand an increasing ratio of
an increasing saltof
ratio solution volume
salt solution
to CS volume [14]. Wong proposed that a 1.7 mol/L NaCl solution
volume to CS volume [14]. Wong proposed that a 1.7 mol/L NaCl solution should be hand mixed should be hand mixed with CS in
a 1:5 CS
with ratioinbya volume
1:5 ratio to obtain
by volumea 1 h gel to formation
obtain a 1time [50].formation
h gel The required timesalt[50].
concentrations
The required to obtain
salt
the targeted geltotime
concentrations obtain canthebe determined
targeted gelwith timethecananalytical model with
be determined proposed by Pedrotti
the analytical et al. proposed
model (2017) [51].
Uponet
by Pedrotti rigid gel formation,
al. (2017) [51]. the gelation process is accomplished, and the curing period begins.
TheUpon
curingrigid
timegel is the time from
formation, thewhere
gelation gelprocess
formation has finished to
is accomplished, andstrength
the curing testing starts.
period It has
begins.
been
The verified
curing time that curing
is the timetimefromhaswhere
a significant effect on
gel formation has thefinished
strengthtoproperties of a CS-soil
strength testing starts.mixture.
It has
Wong
been et al. (2018)
verified investigated
that curing time hasthe influence effect
a significant of curing
on thetime and curing
strength conditions
properties on themixture.
of a CS-soil strength
properties
Wong et al. of CS specimens.
(2018) investigatedFour the CS samples
influence of were
curing placed
time under de-aired
and curing water to
conditions oncure
the for 1, 2, 4,
strength
and 8 weeks
properties of CSafter gelation was
specimens. Fouraccomplished.
CS samples were At the same
placed time,de-aired
under another water
CS sample to curewas forcured
1, 2, for
4,
1 week
and at 90%
8 weeks afterrelative
gelation humidity (RH). Oedometer
was accomplished. tests were
At the same time, performed
another CSon the five
sample wassamples,
cured forand 1
the corresponding
week at 90% relativecompression
humidity (RH). curves are shown
Oedometer inwere
tests Figure 7. It can on
performed be the
seenfive in Figure
samples, 7aand
thatthethe
samples curedcompression
corresponding for 1 and 2 weeks curveshad are ashown
singlein compression
Figure 7. It can curve, while
be seen inthe samples
Figure cured
7a that for 4 and
the samples
8 weeks
cured for have
1 andanother
2 weekssingle had a(but
singledifferent) compression
compression curve.the
curve, while Thesamples
samplescured curedfor for4 4and
and88weeks
weeks
tended
have to have
another a stiffer
single behavior compression
(but different) at low vertical stress.
curve. TheFigure
samples7b depicts
cured for that
4 andthe 8sample
weeks curedtendedat
to90%
haverelative
a stifferhumidity
behaviorsuffered some water
at low vertical stress.loss during
Figure the curing
7b depicts period,
that the sampleleading
curedtoata90% lower initial
relative
void ratiosuffered
humidity compared some with the specimens
water loss during immersed
the curing in de-aired water. Moreover,
period, leading to a lowerthe 90% void
initial RH sample
ratio
showed awith
compared stiffertheresponse
specimens thanimmersed
the immersed samples.
in de-aired water. Moreover, the 90% RH sample showed a
stiffer Persoff
response et al.
than (1999) measuredsamples.
the immersed the strength properties of CS-sand mixtures for a year and found
that there is a continuously increasing strength gain during that period [49]. However, Gallagher and
Lin (2005) found that strength gain only occurs during curing periods approximately four times as
long as the gel time [45]. In any event, although a rigid gel is formed during the gelation process,
the mechanical properties continuously develop during the curing process [52,53]. Therefore, both the
curing time and curing condition have a significant impact on the strength behavior of a CS sample.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 7 of 31
σ′
(a)
Void ratio, e
σ′
(b)
Figure7.7.One-dimensional
Figure One-dimensional compression
compressioncurves for CSfor
curves samples: (a) Those
CS samples: (a)cured
Thosewith different
cured withdurations;
different
(b) those cured
durations; in different
(b) those cured evaporation conditions [50].
in different evaporation conditions [50].
2.3. Mechanical Properties of CS-Soil Mixtures

Persoff et al. (1999) measured the strength properties of CS-sand mixtures for a year and found
that Once
there the
is agelling
continuously increasing
and curing processstrength gain
have been during that period
accomplished, [49]. However,
some experiments can Gallagher and
be performed
LinCS-soil
on (2005)samples
found that strength
to assess theirgain
staticonly occurs during
mechanical curing
properties. periods
Seyedi et al. approximately four
(2013) studied the times as
properties
long
of as the gelmixture
a clay-lime time [45].
byIn any event, CBR
performing although a rigid Bearing
(California gel is formed
Ratio)during the found
tests and gelation process,
that the
strength
mechanical
of the mixture properties
increasedcontinuously
by 2, 7.5, anddevelop
8 times during the curing
when adding 1%, process
3%, and [52,53]. Therefore,
5% CS [54]. bothand
Yonekora the
curing
Mika timeobserved
(1993) and curing condition unconfined
a significant have a significant impactstrength
compressive on the strength
gain for behavior
CS-treatedofsand
a CSsamples
sample.
compared to the original ones. They declared that the unconfined compressive strength reached
2.3.kPa
335 Mechanical
when 32 Properties
wt % CSofwasCS-Soil Mixtures
grouted [18]. Moreover, the unconfined compressive strength of the
treated sample was increased with the
Once the gelling and curing process haveincreased concentration of the CS some
been accomplished, additive [19,55], as shown
experiments can be
in Figure 8. The increase in CS concentration will aid in intensifying the bonds between
performed on CS-soil samples to assess their static mechanical properties. Seyedi et al. (2013) studied CS and soil
the properties of a clay-lime mixture by performing CBR (California Bearing Ratio) tests and found
Yonekora and Mika (1993) observed a significant unconfined compressive strength gain for CS-
treated sand samples compared to the original ones. They declared that the unconfined compressive
strength reached 335 kPa when 32 wt % CS was grouted [18]. Moreover, the unconfined compressive
strength of the treated sample was increased with the increased concentration of the CS8additive
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 of 31
[19,55], as shown in Figure 8. The increase in CS concentration will aid in intensifying the bonds
between CS and soil particles, thus developing a higher compressive strength. They further reported
that particles,
the logarithmthus developing a higher compressive strength. They further reported that the logarithm of
of hydraulic conductivity of the mixtures decreases almost linearly with the
hydraulic conductivity of the mixtures decreases almost linearly with the increase of CS concentration.
increase of CS concentration. The relationship between CS concentration and unconfined
The relationship between CS concentration and unconfined compressive strength, as well as hydraulic
compressive strength, as well as hydraulic conductivity, has been recognized and summarized by
conductivity, has been recognized and summarized by Ghasabkolaei et al. (2017) [56]. Noll (1992)
Ghasabkolaei
also reported et al.
the(2017) [56].
reduced Noll (1992)
hydraulic also reported
conductivity the
of loose reduced
sand hydraulic
when mixed withconductivity of loose
5 wt % CS. It was
sandinteresting
when mixed withthat
to find 5 wt
the%hydraulic
CS. It was interestingreduced
conductivity to find that the
to 9 × 10hydraulic
−9 cm/s forconductivity reduced
the grouted sand
to 9 ×sample
10 cm/s
−9
[57].for the grouted sand sample [57].
Figure 8. Relationship between unconfined compressive strength and CS concentration (data collected
Figure 8. Relationship between unconfined compressive strength and CS concentration (data
from Persoff et al.) [19].
collected from Persoff et al.) [19].
Since soil samples grouted with CS will improve compressive strength, CS-soil mixtures should
Since
also soil samples
obtain a higher grouted with CS
shear strength will improve
compared compressive
with pure soil samples. strength,
Changizi CS-soil mixtures
and Haddad should
(2015)
also added
obtain0.5%,
a higher
0.7% shear
and 1%strength
CS to soilcompared
to discoverwith pure soil enhancing
the mechanical samples. effect.
Changizi TheyandfoundHaddad (2015)
that both
added 0.5%, 0.7% and 1% CS to soil to discover the mechanical enhancing effect. They found that
the friction angle and cohesion were enhanced for grouted soils [58]. Besides, the relationship between
both the
theshear stress
friction ratioand
angle (the cohesion
ratio of shear
werestress to effective
enhanced for vertical
groutedstress)
soils and
[58].shear displacement
Besides, was
the relationship
investigated for a pure sand sample, a 1-week-cured CS-sand sample, and a
between the shear stress ratio (the ratio of shear stress to effective vertical stress) and shear 4-week-cured CS-sand
sample, as was
displacement shown in Figure 9 [50].
investigated for In the conditions
a pure where the
sand sample, effective vertical
a 1-week-cured stress equaled
CS-sand sample,100 and
kPa, a 4-
200 kPa, and 300 kPa, all of the grouted sand samples had a higher peak stress when compared with
week-cured CS-sand sample, as shown in Figure 9 [50]. In the conditions where the effective vertical
the untreated samples. Furthermore, the 4-week-cured CS-sand sample had a greater peak shear stress
stress equaled 100 kPa, 200 kPa, and 300 kPa, all of the grouted sand samples had a higher peak stress
than the 1-week-cured sample when the vertical stress was 200 kPa. At an effective vertical stress
whenofcompared
100 kPa and with
300 the
kPa,untreated
although thesamples. Furthermore,
shear stresses the 4-week-cured
of the grouted samples seem CS-sand
to sharesample
a similarhad a
greater
peakpeak shear
value stressof
regardless than thetime,
curing 1-week-cured
the sample sample
cured forwhen
4 weekstheshowed
verticalanstress
initialwas 200
stiffer kPa. At an
response
effective vertical stress of 100 kPa and 300 kPa, although the shear stresses
than the sample cured for 1 week. In summary, CS grouting can remarkably improve the static of the grouted samples
seemmechanical
to share aproperties
similar peak value
of sand regardless
samples. In thisofprocess,
curingcuring
time, thetimesample cured
is a main factorfor 4 weeks
that showed
determines
an initial stiffer response
the strengthening than the sample cured for 1 week. In summary, CS grouting can remarkably
effect.
improve the static mechanical properties of sand samples. In this process, curing time is a main factor
that determines the strengthening effect.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 9 of 31
σ v′ = 100kPa
τ / σ v′
(a)
σ v′ = 200kPa
τ / σ v′
(b)
σ v′ = 300kPa
τ / σ v′
(c)
FigureFigure 9. Horizontal
9. Horizontal displacementversus
displacement versus the
the ratio
ratio of
ofshear
shearstress to vertical
stress stress
to vertical for a for
stress purea sand
pure sand
sample and a sand sample grouted with CS under effective vertical stresses of (a) 100 kPa, (b) 200 kPa,
sample and a sand sample grouted with CS under effective vertical stresses of (a) 100 kPa, (b) 200 kPa,
and (c) 300 kPa [50].
and (c) 300 kPa [50].
3. Colloidal Silica Transport Through Soil Stratum
3. Colloidal Silica Transport Through Soil Stratum
3.1. Feasibility of CS Transport Through Porous Media
3.1. Feasibility of CS Transport Through Porous Media
The transport issue of CS is the most critical aspect, determining the feasibility of CS when
The transport
adopted issue ofimprovement
for ground CS is the most critical
and aspect, mitigation.
liquefaction determining the feasibility
Laboratory of CStests
and field when adopted
have
for ground
indicated that colloids can potentially mobilize in aquifers [45], which provides direct evidence for that
improvement and liquefaction mitigation. Laboratory and field tests have indicated
colloids
CScan potentially
transport mobilize
in liquefiable in aquifers
soil layers. Ryan et[45], which
al. (1999) providesthe
investigated direct evidence
permeability for CS transport
characteristics
in liquefiable soil layers. Ryan et al. (1999) investigated the permeability characteristics of a mixture
of bacteriophage PRD1 (62 nm diameter) and CS (107 nm diameter) in sewage-contaminated and
uncontaminated areas of an iron oxide-coated sand layer. Although attachment of the mixture to the
porous media appeared initially, release occurred by adjusting the pH, adding an anionic surfactant to
change the surface charge, and adding a reductant to dissolve the iron oxide coating on the particles.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 10 of 31
The results demonstrate

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEERthatREVIEW
the physicochemical properties of the porous media could be modified
10 of 31
to facilitate the permeability of colloids [59]. Therefore, the transport of colloids in porous media is
of a mixture of bacteriophage PRD1 (62 nm diameter) and CS (107 nm diameter) in sewage-
feasible with or without treatment of the soil stratum.
contaminated and uncontaminated areas of an iron oxide-coated sand layer. Although attachment of
Higgo et al. (1993)
the mixture monitored
to the porous media the permeable
appeared properties
initially, releaseof CS in aby
occurred kind of glacial
adjusting the sand by conducting
pH, adding an
a laboratory
anionic surfactant to change the surface charge, and adding a reductant to dissolve the iron oxide could
column test and field test. In the laboratory test, almost 100% of the silica particles
be transported
coating onin the the porousThe
particles. media. However,
results demonstrate onlythat70–80% CS particles mobilized
the physicochemical properties of over
the aporous
distance of
1.6 m. media could be modified
The differences in these to twofacilitate the permeability
tests could be due to the of colloids [59]. Therefore,
heterogeneity of the sandthe transport
layer in theof field
colloids in porous media is feasible with or without treatment of the
compared with that in the column, but both tests provide evidence that CS particles can be delivered soil stratum.
Higgo et al. (1993) monitored the permeable properties of CS in a kind of glacial sand by
in a liquefiable sand layer to the targeted location with sufficient concentrations in order to stabilize
conducting a laboratory column test and field test. In the laboratory test, almost 100% of the silica
the soil [60]. Saiers et al. (1994) proposed that a one-dimensional advection-dispersion equation could
particles could be transported in the porous media. However, only 70–80% CS particles mobilized
be adopted
over a to modelofCS
distance 1.6transport throughinnonreactive
m. The differences these two tests porous
could media,
be due to onthe the condition that
heterogeneity of the a small
amount of CS deposition occurred [61]. In engineering practice, CS
sand layer in the field compared with that in the column, but both tests provide evidence that CS will suffer various degrees of
physical and chemical deposition due to the geochemical properties
particles can be delivered in a liquefiable sand layer to the targeted location with sufficient of the underground water and
porousconcentrations
media. The in order to stabilize
deposition process thecan
soil [60]. Saiers et al.delay
significantly (1994)theproposed
transport that aofone-dimensional
CS [62]. However,
Johnsonadvection-dispersion
et al. (1996) performed equation could of
a series be short
adopted to model
column CStotransport
tests study the through
influencenonreactive
of ionicporous
strength on
media, on the condition that a small amount of CS deposition occurred [61]. In engineering practice,
the transportation of CS. He pointed out that CS deposition took place for chemically active sand media
CS will suffer various degrees of physical and chemical deposition due to the geochemical properties
and was more obvious at a low ionic strength. Despite deposition occurring, full colloid concentration
of the underground water and porous media. The deposition process can significantly delay the
could transport
be achieved of CSat[62].
the However,
desired location
Johnson et [63].
al. (1996) performed a series of short column tests to study
Athe
box model of
influence was adopted
ionic strengthby onGallagher et al. (2007)
the transportation of CS. to
Hestudy
pointed theoutfeasibility of CS transport
that CS deposition took in
liquefiable
place sand. The box active
for chemically was divided
sand media intoandthree was compartments,
more obvious namely,
at a low aionic central chamber
strength. used for
Despite
deposition and
sand placement occurring, full colloid
two water concentration
reservoirs, locatedcould at bothbe sides,
achieved foratgroundwater
the desired location
control[63].
[7]. The model
was filled with Nevada sand, with relative density of 40%, to a height of 200 mm, asCS
A box model was adopted by Gallagher et al. (2007) to study the feasibility of transport
shown in
in Figure 10.
liquefiable sand. The box was divided into three compartments,
Five injection wells constructed from 19-mm PVC pipes were arranged by pushing them into the sandnamely, a central chamber used for
sand placement and two water reservoirs, located at both sides, for groundwater control [7]. The
deposit. Two extraction wells were set at the other side of the box model. The CS solution was colored
model was filled with Nevada sand, with relative density of 40%, to a height of 200 mm, as shown in
with red food10.
Figure dye,
Five soinjection
that the wells
advancement
constructed of grout could be
from 19-mm PVC visually
pipes wereobserved
arranged on the
by top and sides
pushing them of the
model.into
At the
the sand
samedeposit.
time, the chloride concentration, which is a good indicator
Two extraction wells were set at the other side of the box model. The CS of the CS concentration,
was measured
solution was in order
colored to with
reflect
redthe transport
food dye, so thatof CSthegrout. After CS
advancement of transport
grout could was completed,
be visually the model
observed
was cured
on thefor top14and days.
sidesThen,
of the six block
model. At samples
the same were excavated
time, the chloride and carved into
concentration, which smaller
is a goodsamples
indicator of the CS concentration, was measured in order to reflect
to perform unconfined compression tests with. It was indicated that the unconfined compressive the transport of CS grout. After
CS ranged
strength transport fromwas16 completed,
kPa to 61the kPa, model
which was cured close
is quite for 14todays. Then, six
the results block samples
reported were and
by Gallagher
excavated and carved into smaller samples to perform unconfined compression tests with. It was
Mitchell (2002) [32]. Here, visual observation, chloride concentration measurement, and the unconfined
indicated that the unconfined compressive strength ranged from 16 kPa to 61 kPa, which is quite
compressive strength clarify that fairly uniform CS-sand mixtures were developed, which further
close to the results reported by Gallagher and Mitchell (2002) [32]. Here, visual observation, chloride
demonstrate
concentrationCS
that could transported
measurement, by a low-gradient
and the unconfined compressive stabilizer
strengthdelivery.
clarify thatThese
fairly findings
uniform CS- indicate
that the
sand mixtures were developed, which further demonstrate that CS could transported by a low- with
targeted place could be filled with CS at sufficient concentrations to stabilize the soil, even
physical and chemical
gradient stabilizer deposition,
delivery. These which wasindicate
findings unavoidablethat theduring
targeted the transport
place could beprocess,
filled withwhich
CS atwould
sufficient
typically restrain concentrations
the delivery to of
stabilize
CS. the soil, even with physical and chemical deposition, which was
unavoidable during the transport process, which would typically restrain the delivery of CS.
Figure 10. Photo of box model test [7].

Figure 10. Photo of box model test [7].
3.2. Transport Mechanisms of CS in Liquefiable Sand

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 11 of 31
CS transport, which is a complicated physical process, is determined by several internal and
external factors. Since CS has already been mixed with an electrolyte prior to injection, the transport
3.2. Transport Mechanisms of CS in Liquefiable Sand
of CS is significantly influenced by the time-dependent gelation process and is a more complicated
CS transport, which is a complicated physical process, is determined by several internal and
course than a simple colloid transport. Previous to gelation, CS behaves like a Newtonian fluid. CS
external factors. Since CS has already been mixed with an electrolyte prior to injection, the transport of
transport is quite similar to a simple colloid delivery. When gelation is motivated, CS becomes a non-
CS is significantly influenced by the time-dependent gelation process and is a more complicated course
Newtonian fluid. Viscosity increases continuously and gradually become the dominating factor that
than a simple colloid transport. Previous to gelation, CS behaves like a Newtonian fluid. CS transport
controls thesimilar
is quite transport of CScolloid
to a simple [49,64,65]. OnWhen
delivery. the gelation
other hand, porousCS
is motivated, media
becomeswith higher hydraulic
a non-Newtonian
conductivity presents
fluid. Viscosity larger continuously
increases porosity, whichand is more convenient
gradually become the fordominating
CS delivery thanthat
factor thatcontrols
with lower
porosity (hydraulic
the transport of CSconductivity).
[49,64,65]. On Therefore, viscosity
the other hand, porousand
mediasoilwith
type are the
higher fundamental
hydraulic internal
conductivity
factor that could
presents influence
larger porosity, CS transport.
which is moreMoreover,
convenient some
for CSexternal
deliveryfactors, such
than that withaslower
the injection
porosityrate,
could also haveconductivity).
(hydraulic a significantTherefore,
effect on viscosity
the transport of type
and soil CS. The influencing
are the fundamental mechanisms of soil
internal factor thattype,
could influence CS transport. Moreover, some external factors, such as the
CS viscosity, and injection rate on CS delivery are reviewed and summarized as follows. injection rate, could also
have a significant effect on the transport of CS. The influencing mechanisms of soil type, CS viscosity,
3.2.1and
Soilinjection
Type rate on CS delivery are reviewed and summarized as follows.
Gallagher and Lin (2009) designed a series of column tests to investigate the factors that could
3.2.1. Soil Type
influence CS transport. The column used was made of a PVC pipe, with an internal diameter of 10
cm and aGallagher and Lin (2009) designed a series of column tests to investigate the factors that could
total length of 90 cm. Nevada and Ottawa sand, with hydraulic conductivities of 8.9 × 103
influence3CS transport. The column used was made of a PVC pipe, with an internal diameter of 10 cm
and 220 × 10 cm/s, respectively, were adopted as the porous media to fill in the column. 3The inlet
and a total length of 90 cm. Nevada and Ottawa sand, with hydraulic conductivities of 8.9 × 10 and
water chamber was connected to the bottom end cap to supply steady water flow, as shown in Figure
220 × 103 cm/s, respectively, were adopted as the porous media to fill in the column. The inlet water
11. CS grout was
chamber (pH connected
= 6.8, ionicto strength
the bottom = 0.1
endN) capwas delivered
to supply through
steady the valve
water flow, located
as shown 5 cm11.
in Figure above
the bottom
CS groutcap.
(pHDuring testing,
= 6.8, ionic water
strength and
= 0.1 CS were
N) was transported
delivered through
through the the entire
valve located 5 cmcolumn to the
above the
outlet chamber. Nine sampling ports were set to obtain samples in order to study
bottom cap. During testing, water and CS were transported through the entire column to the outlet the influencing
factors. The results
chamber. show thatports
Nine sampling the traveling
were set totime of the
obtain CS grout
samples through
in order Ottawa
to study sand was factors.
the influencing two orders
of magnitude
The resultslower
showthan
that through the Nevada
the traveling sand.
time of the CS Itgrout
is worth noting
through that sand
Ottawa the hydraulic conductivity
was two orders of
magnitude lower than through the Nevada sand. It is worth noting that the
of Ottawa sand is two orders of magnitude higher than Nevada sand, which indicates that hydraulic conductivity of the
Ottawa sand is two orders of magnitude higher than Nevada sand, which indicates that
hydraulic conductivity of the porous media used is significantly correlated with the delivery rate of the hydraulic
conductivity of the porous media used is significantly correlated with the delivery rate of CS grout.
CS grout.
Figure 11. Schematic and photo of the column test [45].

Figure 11. Schematic and photo of the column test [45].
3.2.2 CS Viscosity
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 12 of 31

3.2.2. CS Viscosity
With the increase of viscosity of the used colloid, the hydraulic conductivity of the porous media
With the increase of viscosity of the used colloid, the hydraulic conductivity of the porous media
decreases synchronously. According to the Kozeny–Carman equation, the hydraulic conductivity of
decreases synchronously. According to the Kozeny–Carman equation, the hydraulic conductivity of the
the porous media is inversely proportional to the viscosity of the permeant, as expressed by the
porous media is inversely proportional to the viscosity of the permeant, as expressed by the following
following equation:
equation:
κγ
κγ
k=k =µ (1)
(1)
μ
where k is the hydraulic conductivity, κ is the intrinsic permeability, γ is the permeant density and
where k is the hydraulic conductivity, κ is the intrinsic permeability, γ is the permeant density and μ
µ is the permeant viscosity [45]. With a double increase of permeant viscosity during the transport,
is the permeant viscosity [45]. With a double increase of permeant viscosity during the transport,
there is a double decrease in the hydraulic conductivity of the porous media, and there is a double
there is a double decrease in the hydraulic conductivity of the porous media, and there is a double
decrease of flow rate under the same hydraulic gradient when substituting Equation (1) into Darcy’s
decrease of flow rate under the same hydraulic gradient when substituting Equation (1) into Darcy’s
law. In summary, although CS can be transported though porous media (loose sand) with deposition
law. In summary, although CS can be transported though porous media (loose sand) with deposition
and release, the viscosity of the permeant must be controlled to be as low as possible to facilitate the
and release, the viscosity of the permeant must be controlled to be as low as possible to facilitate the
transportation of colloids.
transportation of colloids.
Several permeation tests with different pH and ionic strengths have been performed using the
Several permeation tests with different pH and ionic strengths have been performed using the
column shown in Figure 11 to study CS transport mechanisms [45]. In these tests, the column was
column shown in Figure 11 to study CS transport mechanisms [45]. In these tests, the column was
filled with Nevada sand by the pluviation method. It was indicated that the smoothest CS flow could
filled with Nevada sand by the pluviation method. It was indicated that the smoothest CS flow could
be obtained when the pH was 6.5 and the ionic strength was 0.1 N. When pH was lowered to 6.2 or
be obtained when the pH was 6.5 and the ionic strength was 0.1 N. When pH was lowered to 6.2 or
ionic strength was increased to 0.15 N, the CS gelled prematurely, and it was difficult to reach 100%
ionic strength was increased to 0.15 N, the CS gelled prematurely, and it was difficult to reach 100%
coverage of the entire column. It should be noted that pH and ionic strength influences the viscosity,
coverage of the entire column. It should be noted that pH and ionic strength influences the viscosity,
thus influencing the transport of CS. The flow rate of CS remarkably decreases as a result of the increase
thus influencing the transport of CS. The flow rate of CS remarkably decreases as a result of the
of viscosity in the source CS, which is quantitatively shown in Figure 12. Therefore, viscosity is the
increase of viscosity in the source CS, which is quantitatively shown in Figure 12. Therefore, viscosity
dominating factor that controls the flow rate and scope of CS in the column.
is the dominating factor that controls the flow rate and scope of CS in the column.
Figure 12.Relationship
Figure12. Relationshipbetween
betweenflow
flowrate
rateof
ofCS
CSand
andviscosity
viscosity[45].
[45].
3.2.3. Injection Rate
3.2.3 Injection Rate
Conlee (2010) reported that CS has a tendency to sink downwards in a 9 m2 field injection when
Conleerate
the injection (2010) reported
is less thatmL/min/well
than 3700 CS has a tendency to sink downwards
[66]. Hamderi and Gallagherin a(2013)
9 m2 field injection
verified when
the sinking
the injection rate is less than 3700 mL/min/well [66]. Hamderi and Gallagher
behavior of CS using anumerical method. They believe that the maximum transport distance for CS (2013) verified the
sinking behavior of CS using anumerical method. They believe that the maximum transport
ranges from 2.5 m to 4 m due to the higher density of CS solutions compared with pore water [67,68]. distance
forfurther
To CS ranges from 2.5
investigate themsinking
to 4 m behavior
due to theand
higher densitymovement
horizontal of CS solutions comparedthey
of CS grouting, with pore water
developed a
10 m pilot-scale box model [69], as shown in Figure 13. The loose sand layer was placed in the they
[67,68].
3 To further investigate the sinking behavior and horizontal movement of CS grouting, box
developed
model a 10 m
by freely
3 pilot-scale box model [69], as shown in Figure 13. The loose sand layer was placed
pouring sand onto water. Four injection wells and 4 extraction wells were set at the
in the box model by freely
upstream and downstream sides, pouring sand ontoA
respectively. water. Fourhead
constant injection
waterwells
flow and
was 4established,
extraction wells
lastingwere
for
set at the upstream and downstream sides, respectively. A constant head water flow was established,
lasting for 7 days, saturating the sand layers prior to grouting. In low injection rate tests, injection
rates of 65 and 130 mL/min/well were adopted to transport CS into the sand layers. However, CS was
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 13 of 31
7 days, saturating the sand layers prior to grouting. In low injection rate tests, injection rates of 65 and
Appl.mL/min/well
130 Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER
were REVIEWto transport CS into the sand layers. However, CS was mainly present
adopted 13 of 31
at the bottom of the model upon excavation, indicating that the CS sinking behavior is significant.
mainlythe
When present at the
injection ratebottom of the
increases model
above 1900upon excavation,
mL/min/well, indicating
sufficient that thepressure
horizontal CS sinking behavior
forces the CS
is significant.
grouting When the
to horizontally injection
move to the rate increases
targeted above
location. 1900 mL/min/well,
Therefore, the transport ofsufficient
CS is morehorizontal
likely to
pressure
be forces
successful theaCS
with grouting
high to horizontally
injection rate. Since itmove to thefor
is difficult targeted
CS to location.
permeateTherefore, the transport
through porous media
of CS is more likely to be successful with a high injection rate. Since it is difficult
when the viscosity increases up to 4 cP [45], the gel time is expected to be appropriately controlled for CS to permeate to
through porous media when the viscosity increases up to 4 cP [45], the gel time
meet the conditions where viscosity can increase beyond 4 cP to prevent gravitational sinking once the is expected to be
appropriately
target location controlled
is reached.to meet the conditions where viscosity can increase beyond 4 cP to prevent
gravitational sinking once the target location is reached.
Electrical Conductivity Constant Head
Logging System Inlet Reservoir
Upst
ream
s ide
City Injec
wate tion w
r ells
Inlet
Extr
Constant Head actio
Outlet Reservoir wells n
Aggregate layer
Outl
et
City Steel
wate
r Container
D ow
nstre
a
side m
Figure 13. Setup

Figure 13. Setup of
of the
the pilot-scale
pilot-scale model
model test
test to
to investigate
investigate the
the influence
influence of
of injection
injection rate
rate (modified
(modified
after
after Hamderi
Hamderi and
and Gallagher,
Gallagher, 2015)
2015) [69].
[69].
3.3. Advancement for CS Transport
3.3. Advancement for CS Transport
As stated above, CS grouting is conventionally implemented by injecting a stabilizer through
As stated above, CS grouting is conventionally implemented by injecting a stabilizer through a
a vertical injection well and consequent horizontal transport, where the underground water flow is
vertical injection well and consequent horizontal transport, where the underground water flow is
motivated by the extraction well (Figure 1). The gel time of CS should be controlled to be sufficiently
motivated by the extraction well (Figure 1). The gel time of CS should be controlled to be sufficiently
long, such that the CS viscosity stays below 4 cP during delivery. A low viscosity status should be
long, such that the CS viscosity stays below 4 cP during delivery. A low viscosity status should be
sustained to facilitate CS horizontal transport. However, once CS arrives at the targeted location,
sustained to facilitate CS horizontal transport. However, once CS arrives at the targeted location,
sinking and deposition will occur on the condition of low viscosity [66–70]. Therefore, gel time is
sinking and deposition will occur on the condition of low viscosity [66–70]. Therefore, gel time is
difficult to control in the conventional CS grouting method.
difficult to control in the conventional CS grouting method.
To settle this problem, Rasouli et al. (2016) reported a method where the delivering injection
To settle this problem, Rasouli et al. (2016) reported a method where the delivering injection
nozzle to the designated area uses a controlled curved drilling (CCD) machine [37], as shown in
nozzle to the designated area uses a controlled curved drilling (CCD) machine [37], as shown in
Figure 14. The new CCD machine used for CS grouting originates from the curved drilling machine
Figure 14. The new CCD machine used for CS grouting originates from the curved drilling machine
that has been adopted in the oil industry [71,72]. The critical technology of a CCD machine is the
that has been adopted in the oil industry [71,72]. The critical technology of a CCD machine is the
curved drilling rod. To make such a curvature, the drilling head and water jet should firstly advance
curved drilling rod. To make such a curvature, the drilling head and water jet should firstly advance
slantwise. At the location where the bore needs to be curved, the drilling head is inclined downwards
slantwise. At the location where the bore needs to be curved, the drilling head is inclined downwards
and water is injected from the nozzle under a high pressure to push the drilling rod and the earth.
and water is injected from the nozzle under a high pressure to push the drilling rod and the earth. As
As a consequence, an upward pressure is produced and applied on the inclined surface of drill head,
a consequence, an upward pressure is produced and applied on the inclined surface of drill head,
finally creating a curvature along the boring path, as shown in Figure 15. Here, a CCD machine has
finally creating a curvature along the boring path, as shown in Figure 15. Here, a CCD machine has
been adopted to transport CS to reduce the liquefaction potential of runways at Fukuoka
International Airport in a seismic-retrofitting project. By using the CCD method, a CS grout with
short gelation time is required. Post-treatment measurements show that the CCD method could be
applied to inject CS to the loose sand layer to mitigate the liquefaction risk without disturbing the
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 14 of 31
beenSci.
Appl. adopted
2019, 9, xto transport
FOR CS to
PEER REVIEW reduce the liquefaction potential of runways at Fukuoka International
14 of 31
Airport in a seismic-retrofitting project. By using the CCD method, a CS grout with short gelation time
is required.
surface of thePost-treatment
runways. In measurements showgrouting
addition, the new that the CCD method
method couldcould be applied
transport CS totothe
inject CS to
desired
the loosedirectly,
location sand layer to mitigate
avoiding the liquefaction
unnecessary attachmentrisk without
and disturbing
deposition duringthe
thesurface ofprocess.
delivery the runways.
In addition, the new grouting method could transport CS to the desired location directly, avoiding
surface of the runways. In addition, the new grouting method could transport CS to the desired
unnecessary attachment and deposition during the delivery process.
location directly, avoiding unnecessary attachment and deposition during the delivery process.
Figure 14. Controlled curved drilling (CCD) machine with the permeation grouting method (PGM)
[37].
Figure 14. Controlled curved drilling (CCD) machine with the permeation grouting method (PGM) [37].
Figure 14. Controlled curved drilling (CCD) machine with the permeation grouting method (PGM)
[37].
Figure
Figure15. Mechanismfor
15.Mechanism formaking
makingaacurvature
curvature[37].
[37].
3.4.Evaluation
3.4. EvaluationMethod
Methodfor
forCS
CSGrouting
GroutingQuality
Quality
Figure 15. Mechanism for making a curvature [37].
After the
After the injection
injection and and transport
transportof of CS
CS inin the
the liquefiable
liquefiable layer,
layer, thethe stabilizer
stabilizer should
should reach
reach thethe
desired location
desired location where where improvement
improvement isis needed.needed. However,
However, since since thethe transport
transport of of CS
CS isis not
not always
always
3.4. Evaluation Method for CS Grouting Quality
controllable, it is necessary to conduct a post-operation investigation
controllable, it is necessary to conduct a post-operation investigation to check the grouting quality. to check the grouting quality.
After the
Several investigationinjection
investigation methods and transport
methods have have beenof CS in
been reported the
reported inliquefiable
in previous layer,
previous literaturethe stabilizer
literature to to evaluateshould
evaluate the reach
the grouting the
grouting
Several
desired location
quality, and
and these where
these are improvement
are detailed
detailed in in the is needed.
the sections
sections below.
below.However, since the transport of CS is not always
quality,
controllable, it is necessary to conduct a post-operation investigation to check the grouting quality.
3.4.1.Colored
3.4.1
Several Colored Tracer
Tracer
investigation Chemical
Chemical
methods have been reported in previous literature to evaluate the grouting
quality, and these
Colored tracerare detailedcan
chemicals in the sections
begrouted
groutedand below.
and transported with withCS CSto toprovide
provideaavisualvisualobservation
observation
Colored tracer chemicals can be transported
method
method
3.4.1 to indicate
to
Colored the
the location
Tracer Chemical locationwhere
wherethe thestabilizer
stabilizerhashasarrived
arrived at.at.Generally,
Generally, redredfoodfoodcoloring
coloringandandthe
methyl red indicator are selected as the tracer materials here [7,37,40,45].
the methyl red indicator are selected as the tracer materials here [7,37,40,45]. Red food coloring is Red food coloring is mostly
Colored tracer chemicals can be grouted and transported with CS to provide a visual observation
adopted
mostly in the column
adopted test andtest
in the column centrifuge model test
and centrifuge to reflect
model test tothe grouting
reflect quality. The
the grouting emerging
quality. The
method to indicate the location where the stabilizer has arrived at. Generally, red food coloring and
grout in the
emerging model
grout is very
in the model light in color
is very lightwhen initially
in color whencompared with the source
initially compared with the grout, duegrout,
source to dilution
due
the methyl red indicator are selected as the tracer materials here [7,37,40,45]. Red food coloring is
viadilution
to pore water.
via poreAs the grouting
water. As the process
groutingcontinues,
processnew CS grout
continues, arrives
new at thearrives
CS grout location, at and the grout
the location,
mostly adopted in the column test and centrifuge model test to reflect the grouting quality. The
becomes
and darker.
the grout At last,darker.
becomes the groutAt is observed
last, the grout to present the same
is observed color as
to present thethe source
same colorgrout, indicating
as the source
emerging grout in the model is very light in color when initially compared with the source grout, due
that the
grout, observedthat
indicating point theisobserved
filled withpoint
CS atisafilled
full concentration.
with CS at a full The concentration.
methyl red indicator The methylwas usedred
to dilution via pore water. As the grouting process continues, new CS grout arrives at the location,
in the grouting
indicator was used project
in theatgrouting
Fukuokaproject
International
at FukuokaAirport. The working
International mechanism
Airport. The working of themechanism
methyl red
and the grout becomes darker. At last, the grout is observed to present the same color as the source
indicator
of the methylis thatreditindicator
could present
is thatas red in present
it could color if astheredsoilinwas
color treated
if the with CS treated
soil was on the condition
with CS on of
grout, indicating that the observed point is filled with CS at a full concentration. The methyl red
acidic
the groundofwater.
condition acidicThe CS grout
ground water.used
The in CSthis
groutproject
usedhad a pH
in this of 3.5,
project hadleading
a pH of to 3.5,
the leading
soil becoming
to the
indicator was used in the grouting project at Fukuoka International Airport. The working mechanism
soil becoming weakly acidic. Therefore, the methyl indicator will become red at the location where
of the methyl red indicator is that it could present as red in color if the soil was treated with CS on
CS treatment has occurred. Soon afterwards, samples can be extracted from the treated layer for
the condition of acidic ground water. The CS grout used in this project had a pH of 3.5, leading to the
visual observation, as shown in Figure 16.
soil becoming weakly acidic. Therefore, the methyl indicator will become red at the location where
CS treatment has occurred. Soon afterwards, samples can be extracted from the treated layer for
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 15 of 31
weakly acidic. Therefore, the methyl indicator will become red at the location where CS treatment has
occurred. Soon afterwards, samples can be extracted from the treated layer for visual observation,
as shown
Appl. in Figure
Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR16.
PEER REVIEW 15 of 31
Figure16.
Figure 16.Checking
Checkinggrout
groutquality
qualityusing
usingthe
themethyl
methylred
redindicator
indicator[37].
[37].
3.4.2.
3.4.2 Silica Content
Silica Content
Silica
Silicacontent
contentisisaadirect
directindicator
indicatorof ofCS.
CS.Gallagher
Gallagherand andLinLin(2009)
(2009)proposed
proposedthat thatthe
thesilica
silicacontent
content
of the pore fluid can be measured by burning a given volume of fluid at 200 ◦ C for 2–3 days [45].
of the pore fluid can be measured by burning a given volume of fluid at 200 °C for 2–3 days [45]. The
The weight
weight of material
of the the material remaining
remaining afterafter
burningburning is considered
is considered as silica-containing
as silica-containing material
material and canandbe
can be used to calculate the silica content in the pore solution. However, some
used to calculate the silica content in the pore solution. However, some electrolyte solutions, such as electrolyte solutions,
such
NaClasor NaCl
CaCl or2,CaCl
may2 , added
may addedin thein solution
the solution to motivate
to motivate thethegelation
gelationprocess.
process. Thus,
Thus, the
the remaining
remaining
material after burning also contains some other chemicals. Although
material after burning also contains some other chemicals. Although Gallagher and Lin Gallagher and Lin (2009) believed
(2009)
that the weights of the dissolved solids in the solution could be neglected
believed that the weights of the dissolved solids in the solution could be neglected when compared when compared with the
weight
with the ofweight
the silica, thesilica,
of the burning method method
the burning may overestimate the silica
may overestimate thecontent in the pore
silica content in thefluid, thus
pore fluid,
overestimating the grouting quality.
thus overestimating the grouting quality.
To
Toavoid
avoidoverestimation,
overestimation,Rasouli
Rasoulietetal.al.(2016)
(2016)suggested
suggestedthat thatthe
thesilica
silicacontent
contentcan canbebemeasured
measured
by
by atomic absorption spectrometry (ABS) [37]. In this method, 100 mL of potassium hydroxidewith
atomic absorption spectrometry (ABS) [37]. In this method, 100 mL of potassium hydroxide with
aaconcentration
concentrationof of20%
20%isisadded
addedfor forevery
every50 50ggofofimproved
improvedsoil soilsample.
sample.Then,
Then,thethemixture
mixtureisisheated
heated
in ◦ C for 30 min. Afterwards, 20 mL of supernatant liquid is collected to measure the
inananoven
ovenatat120120 °C for 30 min. Afterwards, 20 mL of supernatant liquid is collected to measure the
silica
silica content via the ABS
content via the ABS method.
method. Here,Here,ititwas
wasshown
shownthat thatthetheunconfined
unconfinedcompression
compressionstrength
strength of
of the improved soil almost linearly increased with the silica content
the improved soil almost linearly increased with the silica content measured by the ABS methodmeasured by the ABS method for
for
thethe soils
soils at the
at the samesame sampling
sampling site,site, indicating
indicating thatthat
ABSABSis anisappropriate
an appropriate approach
approach to evaluate
to evaluate silica
silica content.
content.
3.4.3 Chloride
3.4.3. Chloride Ion
IonConcentration
Concentration
Chlorideion
Chloride ion concentration
concentration is much
is much easiereasier to obtain
to obtain than CSthan CS concentration.
concentration. An equipped
An ion meter ion meter
equipped
with with
chloride chloride
probes probes
can be usedcan be used
to detect theto detect concentration.
chloride the chloride concentration.
Meanwhile, the Meanwhile,
coverage the
of
CS grout can be evaluated by measuring chloride ion concentrations in the pore fluid. It has beenIt
coverage of CS grout can be evaluated by measuring chloride ion concentrations in the pore fluid.
has been
verified verified
that that the normalized
the normalized CS concentration
CS concentration is to
is proportional proportional to the
the normalized normalized
chloride chloride
concentration,
concentration,
as shown in Figure as shown in The
17 [45]. Figure 17 [45]. The
normalized normalizedrefers
concentration concentration refers to the calculated
to the concentration concentration
by
calculated
dividing thebysample
dividing the sample to
concentration concentration to the source
the source solution solution This
concentration. concentration. This result
result indicates that
indicatesconcentration
chloride that chlorideisconcentration is a precise
a precise indicator for CSindicator for CS Cl
concentration. − concentration
concentration. Cl−has
concentration
been adoptedhas
been
to adopted
monitor to monitor
CS transport CScoverage
and transportinand coverage
other in works
previous other previous
[7]. works [7].
3.4.4. Unconfined Compression Strength

A rudimentary unconfined compression strength was adopted by many researchers to evaluate
the grouting quality and degree of stabilization achieved [7,14,37,45]. It has been widely acknowledged
that the unconfined compression strength is positively correlated with the cyclic strength for both
liquefiable and improved soils. Since the unconfined compression test is easier to operate and handle,
it has been adopted as an index indicator test to reflect the cyclic strength of the targeted soil specimen
and further evaluate the coverage of CS grout. In addition, when larger particles exist in soil
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 16 of 31
samples, the unconfined compression strength is difficult to obtain with an unconfined test. In this
instance, an unconsolidated undrained (UU) triaxial test can be used to obtain the Mohr’s stress circle.
Then, the shear strength can be deduced from the failure line and finally the unconfined compression
strength can be calculated by multiplying the shear strength by 2 [37].
2
R = 0.99
Figure 17. Relationship between chloride ions and silica concentration [45].
Figure 17. Relationship between chloride ions and silica concentration [45].
In summary, four methods, including the colored tracer chemical method, the silica content
3.4.4 Unconfined
method, the chloride Compression Strengthmethod, and the unconfined compression strength method,
concentration
were proposed in the previous literature to evaluate the coverage of CS grout and to make judgements
A rudimentary unconfined compression strength was adopted by many researchers to evaluate
concerning
the grouting grouting quality.
quality andThedegree
coloredoftracer chemical method
stabilization achievedis the most simpleItand
[7,14,45,37]. hasdirect
beenmethod,
widely
byacknowledged
which visual judgement can be conducted by color variation in the grouting process.
that the unconfined compression strength is positively correlated with the cyclic However,
CS concentration
strength for bothand groutingand
liquefiable quality at a given
improved soils.place cannot
Since be evaluated
the unconfined quantitatively
compression with
test is thisto
easier
method. The unconfined compression strength method can be applied to evaluate the grouting
operate and handle, it has been adopted as an index indicator test to reflect the cyclic strength of the quality
properly
targetedand quantitatively,
soil specimen and however,
furtherthe mechanical
evaluate the test, whichofis CS
coverage more complicated
grout. than the
In addition, physical
when larger
index test, needs to be performed here. Silica content and chloride concentration
particles exist in soil samples, the unconfined compression strength is difficult to obtain with an can be measured
quantitatively
unconfined test.by aInsimple physical an
this instance, index test, and theyundrained
unconsolidated are perfect(UU)
indicators of test
triaxial CS coverage.
can be used Therefore,
to obtain
the silica
the content
Mohr’s method
stress circle.and chloride
Then, concentration
the shear strength can method have been
be deduced from mostly adopted
the failure lineinand
experiments
finally the
and practices compression
unconfined to judge grouting quality.
strength can be calculated by multiplying the shear strength by 2 [37].
In summary,
4. Liquefaction four methods,
Mitigation includingSilica
Using Colloidal the colored
Grout tracer chemical method, the silica content
method, the chloride concentration method, and the unconfined compression strength method, were
proposed
4.1. DynamicinProperties
the previous literature
of CS-Soil to evaluate the coverage of CS grout and to make judgements
Mixture
concerning grouting quality. The colored tracer chemical method is the most simple and direct
CS is an excellent additive for liquefiable loose sand to improve its liquefaction mitigation ability.
method, by which visual judgement can be conducted by color variation in the grouting process.
When CS is properly grouted, cementation occurs between sand particles due to the presence of CS,
However, CS concentration and grouting quality at a given place cannot be evaluated quantitatively
and thus, loose sand layers tend to have a stronger cyclic resistance, avoiding liquefaction during
with this method. The unconfined compression strength method can be applied to evaluate the
an earthquake event. Clough et al. (1989) investigated the influence of cementation on the dynamic
grouting quality properly and quantitatively, however, the mechanical test, which is more
properties of liquefiable sands. They believed that loose, cemented sand tend to have a similar behavior
complicated than the physical index test, needs to be performed here. Silica content and chloride
to dense, uncemented sands. Moreover, liquefaction resistance increases as the degree of cementation
concentration can be measured quantitatively by a simple physical index test, and they are perfect
increases [73]. Towhata and Kabashima (2001) performed a triaxial test on a 5 wt % CS-grouted sand
indicators of CS coverage. Therefore, the silica content method and chloride concentration method
sample and found that the non-deformability of a loose sand sample at 40% relative density is similar
have been mostly adopted in experiments and practices to judge grouting quality.
to that of the same kind of sand sample at 75% relative density after being mixed with 5% CS [74].
Rodriguez and Izarraras
4. Liquefaction Mitigationstudied
Usingthe reduction
Colloidal of liquefaction
Silica Grout risk for loose sand treated with CS.
They pointed out that grouting with 15 wt % CS would significantly improve the dynamic resistance
against liquefaction
4.1. Dynamic [75]. of CS-Soil Mixture
Properties
CS is an excellent additive for liquefiable loose sand to improve its liquefaction mitigation
ability. When CS is properly grouted, cementation occurs between sand particles due to the presence
of CS, and thus, loose sand layers tend to have a stronger cyclic resistance, avoiding liquefaction
during an earthquake event. Clough et al. (1989) investigated the influence of cementation on the
degree of cementation increases [73]. Towhata and Kabashima (2001) performed a triaxial test on a 5
wt % CS-grouted sand sample and found that the non-deformability of a loose sand sample at 40%
relative density is similar to that of the same kind of sand sample at 75% relative density after being
mixed with 5% CS [74]. Rodriguez and Izarraras studied the reduction of liquefaction risk for
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15
loose
17 of 31
sand treated with CS. They pointed out that grouting with 15 wt % CS would significantly improve
the dynamic resistance against liquefaction [75].
To
Toevaluate
evaluatethe theliquefaction
liquefactionresistance
resistancequantitatively,
quantitatively,Gallagher
Gallagherand andMitchell
Mitchell(2002)
(2002)performed
performed
triaxial
triaxial tests on pure Monterey sand and Monterey sand treated with CS [32]. The axial strainduring
tests on pure Monterey sand and Monterey sand treated with CS [32]. The axial strain during
the
thetests
testswas
wasrecorded
recordedand andisisshown
shownininFigure
Figure18.
18.Although
Althoughvery verylittle
littlestrain
strainwaswasobserved
observedprior
priortoto
liquefaction
liquefactionfor forthe
theuntreated
untreatedsample,
sample,large
largestrains
strainsoccurred
occurredrapidly
rapidlyonce
onceliquefaction
liquefactionwaswasmotivated.
motivated.
The sample, tested at a cyclic stress ratio CSR of 0.27, could only suffer 13 cycles before
The sample, tested at a cyclic stress ratio CSR of 0.27, could only suffer 13 cycles before it thoroughly it thoroughly
collapsed.
collapsed. Furthermore, 5% 5% double
doubleamplitude
amplitudeaxial
axialstrain
strainwas
was produced
produced in in
12 12 cycles.
cycles. However,
However, the
the sample
sample treated
treated with
with 1010wtwt%%CS CSexperienced
experiencedmuch much less
less strain during
during cyclic
cyclic loading.
loading. TheThetreated
treated
sample
samplerequired
required276 276cycles
cyclestotoreach
reach5%5%strain.
strain.Since
Sinceaamagnitude
magnitude7.5 7.5earthquake
earthquakewas wasdeduced
deducedtoto
generate
generate1515 uniform
uniform stress cycles
stress [76],[76],
cycles the 10%
the CS-treated samplesample
10% CS-treated could becould
expected to have a sufficient
be expected to have a
ability to resist liquefaction in such an earthquake event.
sufficient ability to resist liquefaction in such an earthquake event.
(a) Untreated sample
(b) 10% CS-treated sample

Figure18.
Figure 18.Axial
Axialstrain
strainduring
duringcyclic
cyclicloading
loadingfor
forboth
boththe
theuntreated
untreatedand
andtreated
treatedsamples
samples[32].
[32].
Apartfrom
Apart fromthethetriaxial
triaxialtest,
test,other
otherlaboratory
laboratoryelement
elementtests,
tests,such
suchas
asthe
thecyclic
cyclictorsional
torsionalshear
sheartest,
test,
resonantcolumn
resonant columntest,
test,and
andcyclic
cyclicsimple
simpleshear
sheartest,
test,were
werealso
alsoperformed
performedtotoinvestigate
investigatethe
thedynamic
dynamic
propertiesofofthe
properties theCS-soil
CS-soilmixture.
mixture.AnnAnnundrained
undrainedhollow
hollowcylinder
cylindertorsional
torsionalshear
sheartest
testwas
wasperformed
performed
byKodaka
by Kodakaetetal.al.(2005)
(2005)ononboth
bothCS-treated
CS-treatedand
anduntreated
untreatedsoil
soilsamples
samples[77].
[77].For
Forthe
theuntreated
untreatedsample,
sample,
the cyclic stress ratio was set to be 0.23, and large strains occurred rapidly with a few additional cycles
after arriving at phase transformation line. However, the CS-treated sample had a cyclic stress ratio
of 0.60 and presented much less shear strain during the cyclic loading process (Figure 19). In fact,
collapse and liquefaction did not occur in the whole cyclic loading process for the treated sample.
the cyclic stress ratio was set to be 0.23, and large strains occurred rapidly with a few additional cycles
afterSci.
Appl. arriving
2020, 10,at
15phase transformation line. However, the CS-treated sample had a cyclic stress 18ratio
of 31
of 0.60 and presented much less shear strain during the cyclic loading process (Figure 19). In fact,
collapse and liquefaction did not occur in the whole cyclic loading process for the treated sample.
Spencer
Spencer et et al.
al. (2008)
(2008) conducted
conducted resonant
resonant column
column tests
tests on
on pure
pure Nevada
Nevada sand
sand and
and Nevada
Nevada sand
sand treated
treated
with
with two different concentrations of CS [41]. They found that the CS-sand mixtures had aa slightly
two different concentrations of CS [41]. They found that the CS-sand mixtures had slightly
higher
higher shear
shear modulus
modulus than
than the
the untreated
untreated sample.
sample. Besides,
Besides, an
an increase
increase of
of 66 MPa
MPa in
in the
the shear
shear modulus
modulus
was observed for the sample treated with a 5% concentration of CS after a curing
was observed for the sample treated with a 5% concentration of CS after a curing period of period of 28
28 days.
days.
However, the grouting of CS had little effect on the damping ratio for Nevada
However, the grouting of CS had little effect on the damping ratio for Nevada sand. sand.
Dr = 40%
σ m′ 0 = 50kPa
τ / σ m′ 0 = 0.600
Dr = 40%
σ m′ 0 = 50kPa
τ / σ m′ 0 = 0.230
(a) Untreated sample (b) Treated sample
Figure 19. Shear

Figure Shearstrain
strainofofthe untreated
the and
untreated treated
and soilsoil
treated samples in aninundrained
samples cycliccyclic
an undrained torsional shear
torsional
test [77].
shear test [77].
In
In addition,
addition, Díaz-Rodríguez
Díaz-Rodríguez et et al.
al. (2008) investigated
investigated the dynamic
dynamic behaviors
behaviors of of sand
sand samples
samples
grouted
grouted withwith CS in moremore detail
detail through a simple shear test [17]. The required cycles to reach a 5%
double
double amplitude
amplitude (DA)(DA) shear strain were recorded recorded for for both
both the
the untreated
untreated and and CS-treated
CS-treated samples
samples at at
40% and 60% relative density (Figure 20). It is remarkable that the CS-treated
40% and 60% relative density (Figure 20). It is remarkable that the CS-treated samples need more samples need more cycles
to reachto5%
cycles DA 5%
reach strain
DAthan the than
strain untreated samples under
the untreated samples different
undereffective
differentvertical stresses,
effective which
vertical was
stresses,
the casewas
which for both of the
the case forsamples
both ofwith 40% and with
the samples 60% relative
40% anddensities.
60% relativeFurthermore,
densities.the required cycles
Furthermore, the
to reach liquefaction
required cycles to reachincreased significantly
liquefaction increased withsignificantly
the increasewith of CStheconcentration.
increase of CS Taking a 5% DA
concentration.
shear
Taking strain
a 5%asDA theshear
label strain
of onset
as of
theliquefaction,
label of onset when the CS concentration
of liquefaction, when theranges from 0% to ranges
CS concentration 14.5%,
the
from 0% to 14.5%, the required cycles to initiate liquefaction remarkably increase from 2 to 17 atofa
required cycles to initiate liquefaction remarkably increase from 2 to 17 at a cyclic stress ratio
0.41,
cyclicasstress
shown in Figure
ratio of 0.41,21.
as shown in Figure 21.
Several
Several kinds
kinds ofof laboratory
laboratory element
element tests
tests have
have indicated
indicated thatthat grouting
grouting CS CS can obviously improve
improve
the
the liquefaction resistance of loose sandy samples. CS gel forms in the gelation
of loose sandy samples. CS gel forms in the gelation process and tends process and tendsto
to bond
bond sandsand particles
particles together,which
together, whichimprove
improvethe thestrength
strengthofof the the soil
soil structure
structure and inhibits the the
generation
generation of of excess
excess pore
pore water
water pressure
pressure during
during thethe cyclic
cyclic loading
loading process.
process. In the CS-treated ground ground
improvement
improvementtechnique,
technique,CS CSconcentration
concentration is aisdominant
a dominant factor that that
factor influences the strengthening
influences the strengthening effect.
The higher
effect. the CSthe
The higher concentration is, the is,
CS concentration stronger the liquefaction
the stronger resistance
the liquefaction of theoftreated
resistance layers
the treated will
layers
be.
willIn general,
be. the investigated
In general, the investigatedCS concentration
CS concentration in liquefaction
in liquefaction mitigation
mitigationvaries from
varies from5%5%to 20%
to 20%in
practical
in practicalscenarios.
scenarios.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 19 of 31
σ v′0 = 88.2kPa
σ v′0 = 58.8kPa
σ v′0 = 29.4kPa
(a) Sample at 40% relative density
σ v′0 = 88.2kPa
σ v′0 = 58.8kPa
σ v′0 = 29.4kPa
(b) Sample at 60% relative density
Figure
Figure20.
20.Comparison
Comparisonof
ofcyclic
cyclicresistance
resistancefor
foruntreated
untreatedand
andCS-treated
CS-treated sand
sand [17].
[17].
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 20 of 31
σ v0′ =29.4kPa
Figure 21. Shear

Figure21. Shear strains
strains for
for treated
treatedsamples
samplesat
atvarious
variousCS
CSconcentrations
concentrations[17].
[17].
4.2. Centrifuge Model Behaviors of CS-Grouted Soil

4.2. Centrifuge Model Behaviors of CS-Grouted Soil
Laboratory element experiments have indicated that CS-grouted soil has a sufficient ability to
Laboratory element experiments have indicated that CS-grouted soil has a sufficient ability to
restrain DA strain and inhibit pore pressure generation, and, as such, it can mitigate liquefaction risk.
restrain DA strain and inhibit pore pressure generation, and, as such, it can mitigate liquefaction risk.
However, the element test can only indicate the material properties of CS-soil mixtures. The structural
However, the element test can only indicate the material properties of CS-soil mixtures. The
behavior still needs to be investigated through model tests.
structural behavior still needs to be investigated through model tests.
Taboada (1995) reported that significantly lower strains (~0.5–1%) were observed for the treated
Taboada (1995) reported that significantly lower strains (~0.5–1%) were observed for the treated
centrifuge models compared with the strains (~3–6%) of untreated model in the same kind of test [78].
centrifuge models compared with the strains (~3–6%) of untreated model in the same kind of test
Another centrifuge experiment was performed to verify the enhancing effect of CS grout to mitigate
[78]. Another centrifuge experiment was performed to verify the enhancing effect of CS grout to
liquefaction risk for loose sand [7]. A laminar box composed of a stack of aluminum rings was used to
mitigate liquefaction risk for loose sand [7]. A laminar box composed of a stack of aluminum rings
provide a flexible-wall container. Grout supply ports were set at the bottom of the container to provide
was used to provide a flexible-wall container. Grout supply ports were set at the bottom of the
CS under a vacuum. The sand drain was pluviated around the grouting ports to permit the grouting
container to provide CS under a vacuum. The sand drain was pluviated around the grouting ports to
material to permeate evenly into the sand, as shown in Figure 22. The CS was delivered through the
permit the grouting material to permeate evenly into the sand, as shown in Figure 22. The CS was
soil with a saturation period of 13 h. Then, a firm, resonating gel formed after 56 h of gelling and a
delivered through the soil with a saturation period of 13 h. Then, a firm, resonating gel formed after
240 h curing time. The prepared model was motivated by two shaking events, with 20 cycles of a 2 Hz
56 h of gelling and a 240 h curing time. The prepared model was motivated by two shaking events,
sinusoidal input for each. The uniform peak accelerations were 0.2 g and 0.25 g, respectively. Lateral
with 20 cycles of a 2 Hz sinusoidal input for each. The uniform peak accelerations were 0.2 g and 0.25
displacement and vertical settlement were measured by the linear variable differential transformers
g, respectively. Lateral displacement and vertical settlement were measured by the linear variable
(LVDTs) mounted on the container rings at various depths. It was found that shear strains of 0.5% and
differential transformers (LVDTs) mounted on the container rings at various depths. It was found
1% were observed during the first and second shake. Furthermore, only 30 mm settlement (0.3% strain)
that shear strains of 0.5% and 1% were observed during the first and second shake. Furthermore, only
and 10 mm settlement (0.1% strain) were measured during the first and second episodes of shaking,
30 mm settlement (0.3% strain) and 10 mm settlement (0.1% strain) were measured during the first
respectively. The results demonstrate that the treated soil layer did not liquify during both shaking
and second episodes of shaking, respectively. The results demonstrate that the treated soil layer did
events, which provides evidence of the contribution of CS in mitigating liquefaction risk.
not liquify during both shaking events, which provides evidence of the contribution of CS in
mitigating liquefaction risk.
Appl.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 10,
Sci. 2020, 9, x15
FOR PEER REVIEW 21 of 31
21 31
(a)
(b)
Figure 22.
Figure 22. Model
Model set
set for
for grouting:
grouting: (a)
(a) Schematic
Schematic for
for CS
CS grouting
grouting in
in laminar
laminar box;
box; (b)
(b) photograph
photograph of
of CS
CS
grouting[7].
grouting [7].
Conlee et
Conlee et al.
al. (2012)
(2012) performed
performed aa well-designed
well-designed centrifuge
centrifuge test test to discuss the effect of of CS
CS
concentration on the magnitude of cyclic shear strain for CS-treated models [40]. In the test, the
concentration on the magnitude of cyclic shear strain for CS-treated models [40]. In the test, the container
container
was mainlywas mainly constructed
constructed with a 4.8with a 4.8 liquefiable
m-thick m-thick liquefiable
loose sand loose sand
layer andlayer
twoand two slopes
slopes made up made
of
up ofthat
loam loamsloped 3◦ towards
that sloped 3° towards a 3 m-wide
a 3 m-wide centralcentral channel.
channel. In test In test slope
1, one 1, onewasslope was grouted
grouted with 9% with
by
9% by weight
weight CS (labelled
CS (labelled CS-9),the
CS-9), while while thewas
other other
leftwas left untreated.
untreated. In test 2,Inthetesttwo2, the twowere
slopes slopes were
treated
treated
with 4%with
and 4%
5% and 5% CS, labelled
CS, labelled CS-4 and CS-4 andrespectively.
CS-5, CS-5, respectively. Eight shaking
Eight shaking events events were applied
were applied to the
to the model,
model, with a centrifugal
with a centrifugal acceleration
acceleration of 15 g. Immediately
of 15 g. Immediately after test after testdeformations
1, large 1, large deformations
occurred
occurred
at at the untreated
the untreated side due toside
thedue to the liquefaction
liquefaction of the loose ofsand
the loose
layer,sand layer,
and the and loam
upper the upper
slopeloam
was
slope was submerged
submerged in water.the
in water. However, However,
treated the
sidetreated
remainside remain
intact, as canintact, as can
be seen be seen
in Figure 23.in Figure 23.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 22 of 31
23. Model
FigureFigure surface
23. Model for for
surface testtest
1 (a) prior
1 (a) priortotothe
theshaking eventsand
shaking events and(b)
(b) after
after thethe shaking
shaking events
events [40]. [40].
Figure 23. Model surface for test 1 (a) prior to the shaking events and (b) after the shaking events [40].
In addition, theythey
In addition, alsoalso
calculated
calculatedthe theshear
shear strains at different
strains at differentdepths
depths byby double
double integration
integration
acceleration in
acceleration time
in timetotoobtain
obtain the
the transient
transient displacement,
displacement, and and
then then differentiating
differentiating
In addition, they also calculated the shear strains at different depths by double integration in space. Itinwas
space.
It was observed
observed that the
that maximum
the shear
maximum strain
shear γ in
strain
max
acceleration in time to obtain the transient displacement, theγ untreated
max in side reached up to 1% in shake 3,
and then differentiating in space. It was in
the untreated side reached up while
to 1%
shake γ max was only 0.3% and 0.6% for CS-9 and CS-5, respectively. Similar reductions can be observed in
observed γmax
3, whilethat thewas only 0.3%
maximum shearand
strain0.6%
γmaxfor CS-9
in the and CS-5,
untreated siderespectively.
reached up toSimilar
1% in shakereductions
3, while can
γshakes
be observed 4inand
max was only
5 (Figure
shakes
0.3% 4 and
and 24).
0.6%5 forThis
CS-9experiment
(Figure 24). CS-5,
and demonstrates
Thisrespectively.
experimentSimilarthat surface
demonstrates settlement
reductions that be and
cansurface lateral
settlement
observed in
spreading can be effectively controlled with CS treatment. CS grouting offers significant advantages
and shakes 4 and 5 (Figure
lateral spreading can be24). This experiment
effectively controlleddemonstrates that surface
with CS treatment. settlement
CS grouting andsignificant
offers lateral
for liquefiable sand layers overlain by existing structures that may be otherwise be difficult to treat
spreading
advantages forcan be effectively
liquefiable sand controlled with CS
layers overlain bytreatment. CS grouting
existing structures thatoffers
maysignificant
be otherwise advantages
be difficult
by other methods. The results of the centrifuge model test are in agreement with those of the
for
to treat liquefiable
by other sand
methods. layers
Theoverlain
results by
of existing
the structures
centrifuge that
model may
test be
are otherwise
in agreement be difficult
with to treat
those of the
laboratory element test in demonstrating the mitigation effect of CS-grouted soil in terms of reducing
by
laboratoryother methods.
element The results of the centrifuge model test are in agreement with
test in demonstrating the mitigation effect of CS-grouted soil in terms of reducing those of the
liquefaction risk.
laboratory element test in demonstrating the mitigation effect of CS-grouted soil in terms of reducing
liquefaction risk.
liquefaction risk.
Figure 24. Cyclic stress ratio CSR against shear strain at the midpoint of liquefiable layer for the
untreated, CS-9, and CS-5 samples [40].
Figure 24. Cyclic stress ratio CSR against shear strain at the midpoint of liquefiable layer for the
untreated, CS-9, and CS-5 samples [40].
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 23 of 31

4.3. Field Tests for Soils Grouted with CS
Since the performance of CS in soil improvement and liquefaction mitigation has been verified
4.3. Field Tests for Soils Grouted with CS
by a series of element and model tests, it was also justified by a field test conducted by Gallagher et
al. (2007)Since theThe
[33]. performance
test site ofhere
CS inwas
soil within
improvement and liquefaction
a Canadian mitigation
liquefaction has been verified
experiment by in
site located
a series of element and model tests, it was also justified by a field test conducted by Gallagher et al.
Richmond, British Columbia. The soil stratigraphic sequence at the test site is characterized by a sand
(2007) [33]. The test site here was within a Canadian liquefaction experiment site located in Richmond,
and silty sand layer at the surface, overlain over a layer of silt and sandy silt, following a 10 m
British Columbia. The soil stratigraphic sequence at the test site is characterized by a sand and silty
liquefiable layer of sand to silty sand, buried at a depth of 5–15 m [79]. At the treated area, eight
sand layer at the surface, overlain over a layer of silt and sandy silt, following a 10 m liquefiable layer
injection
of sandwells were
to silty spaced
sand, buriedequally around
at a depth them
of 5–15 perimeter of treated
[79]. At the a 9 m-diameter
area, eightcircle, with
injection an extraction
wells were
wellspaced
at the equally
center. around
Two injection
the perimeter of a 9 m-diameter circle, with an extraction well at theinto
stages were used for the injection well to permeate CS the soil
center.
layers
Two buried at depths
injection of 6.5–7.5
stages were used for mthe
and 7.5–8.5well
injection m, to
respectively.
permeate CSAn intoinjection well buried
the soil layers is designed to inject
at depths
more ofthan 7000
6.5–7.5 L of7.5–8.5
m and CS at am,concentration
respectively. An of injection
7%. As awell
matter of fact, since
is designed some
to inject moremalfunctions
than 7000 L ofoccurred
CS
at a the
during concentration of 7%. As
injection process, a matter
only 45,000of L
fact, since some
of diluted CS malfunctions
suspensions occurred during
were finally the injection
injected in the field
test.process,
After theonly grouting
45,000 L of injection
diluted CS was
suspensions were finally
completed, injectedof
two decks in the field test.
Pentolite Afterexplosives
50/50 the grouting were
injection was completed, two decks of Pentolite 50/50 explosives were installed at
installed at each injection well to create blast-induced liquefaction. At the untreated area adjacent each injection well to
to create blast-induced liquefaction. At the untreated area adjacent to the treated one, eight similar
the treated one, eight similar wells were excavated as blast holes to accommodate explosives, as
wells were excavated as blast holes to accommodate explosives, as shown in Figure 25. Six survey
shown in Figure 25. Six survey lines extended from the center, and a total of 14 settlement
lines extended from the center, and a total of 14 settlement measurements were taken along each ray.
measurements were taken along each ray.
Figure 25. Site layout for full-scale test (modified after Gallagher et al., 2007) [33].
Figure 25. Site layout for full-scale test (modified after Gallagher et al., 2007) [33].
Excess pore pressure was monitored in the treated area. The excess pore pressure ratio Ru was
Excess pore
adopted pressure
to indicate the was monitored
evolutive law ofin the water
pore treated area. The
pressure. It excess
was shownpore that
pressure ratio R1,u was
Ru reached
adopted
even into the
indicate
treatedthe evolutive
area, law
indicating theof pore water
grouted pressure.
layer can It wastoshown
be considered that Ru here.
have liquified reached 1, even in
However,
the treated
the settlement measurements indicate that a maximum settlement of 0.5 m was recorded in the untreated the
area, indicating the grouted layer can be considered to have liquified here. However,
settlement measurements
area, while the maximumindicate
settlementthat a maximum
reduced settlement
to 0.3 m in the treatedof 0.5(Figure
area m was26).recorded
Moreover, inGallagher
the untreated
area, while the maximum settlement reduced to 0.3 m in the treated area (Figure 26).and
et al. (2007) deduced that the 0.3 m deformation mainly occurred in the untreated layer, the
Moreover,
reduction
Gallagher et in
al.settlement should be
(2007) deduced attributed
that the 0.3tomthe grouted layermainly
deformation (at depths of 6.5–8.5inm).
occurred theThey believedlayer,
untreated
that the majority of settlement would be prevented if the entire layer was grouted.
and the reduction in settlement should be attributed to the grouted layer (at depths of 6.5–8.5 m).
They believed that the majority of settlement would be prevented if the entire layer was grouted.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 24 of 31
Figure
Figure 26. Elevation profile
26. Elevation profile prior
prior to
to and
and after
after blasting
blasting in
in full-scale
full-scale test
test [33].
[33].
Conlee (2010) then performed another field test to investigate the mitigation effect of CS grouting on
Conlee (2010) then performed another field test to investigate the mitigation effect of CS grouting
liquefaction damage [66]. In this field experiment, CS was grouted and transported to treat a 1.5 m-thick,
on liquefaction damage [66]. In this field experiment, CS was grouted and transported to treat a 1.5
poorly graded sand layer, with an area of 9.3 m2 . In the preliminary test layout, two kinds of grouting
m-thick, poorly graded sand layer, with an area of 9.3 m2. In the preliminary test layout, two kinds
techniques, including mandrel injection and the well/packer injection method, were planned to be
of grouting techniques, including mandrel injection and the well/packer injection method, were
adopted to permeate CS to the targeted area. Furthermore, a TRex mobile shaker was intended to
planned to be adopted to permeate CS to the targeted area. Furthermore, a TRex mobile shaker was
be used to induce liquefaction, and the targeted area was set hexagonally to match the shaker pad
intended to be used to induce liquefaction, and the targeted area was set hexagonally to match the
of the TRex shaker [66,80]. However, two dominant difficulties were presented in the field. First of
shaker pad of the TRex shaker [66,80]. However, two dominant difficulties were presented in the
all, the mandrel injection method proved to be unsuccessful in practice. Secondly, the measured pore
field. First of all, the mandrel injection method proved to be unsuccessful in practice. Secondly, the
pressure response indicated no significant increases in pore water pressure in vibro-seismic shaking
measured pore pressure response indicated no significant increases in pore water pressure in vibro-
when using TRex shaker. Thus, it is uncertain whether the TRex shaker will produce remarkable shear
seismic shaking when using TRex shaker. Thus, it is uncertain whether the TRex shaker will produce
strains and initiate liquefaction at greater depths. Therefore, the packer injection method was finally
remarkable shear strains and initiate liquefaction at greater depths. Therefore, the packer injection
adopted, and mandrel replaced TRex mobile shaker to induce liquefaction. The mandrel was equipped
method was finally adopted, and mandrel replaced TRex mobile shaker to induce liquefaction. The
with a vibratory hammer to supply the excitation. For each ground motion, the vibratory hammer was
mandrel was equipped with a vibratory hammer to supply the excitation. For each ground motion,
employed as the steel mandrel and was driven into the ground to a maximum depth of 6 m. As the
the vibratory hammer was employed as the steel mandrel and was driven into the ground to a
mandrel is driven to produce a combination of compression waves and shear waves, complex shearing
maximum depth of 6 m. As the mandrel is driven to produce a combination of compression waves
in deeper soil deposits is initiated, and liquefaction can be achieved in larger depths.
and shear waves, complex shearing in deeper soil deposits is initiated, and liquefaction can be
Shear strain was measured by liquefaction sensors in both the horizontal (X-Y) and vertical
achieved in larger depths.
(Y-Z and X-Z) planes. Each liquefaction sensor consisted of 3 accelerometers that formed a triangular
Shear strain was measured by liquefaction sensors in both the horizontal (X-Y) and vertical (Y-
array. For each accelerometer, motions were recorded in the X, Y, and Z axes. In this way, shear strains
Z and X-Z) planes. Each liquefaction sensor consisted of 3 accelerometers that formed a triangular
were obtained in X-Y, Y-Z, and X-Z directions. The shear strains, which predominantly occurred in
array. For each accelerometer, motions were recorded in the X, Y, and Z axes. In this way, shear
the X-Y and Y-Z axes in the untreated area, reached 0.05% in both directions. Even the shear strain
strains were obtained in X-Y, Y-Z, and X-Z directions. The shear strains, which predominantly
in the X-Z direction increased beyond 0.01% in the original area. However, after being grouted with
occurred in the X-Y and Y-Z axes in the untreated area, reached 0.05% in both directions. Even the
CS, the shear strains measured in the treated area reduced significantly in all three of these directions.
shear strain in the X-Z direction increased beyond 0.01% in the original area. However, after being
Except for the shear strain in the X-Y direction at 12 s, which arrived at 0.025%, the others remained
grouted with CS, the shear strains measured in the treated area reduced significantly in all three of
below 0.01% throughout the whole experiment process. The results indicate that permeation of CS
these directions. Except for the shear strain in the X-Y direction at 12 s, which arrived at 0.025%, the
others remained below 0.01% throughout the whole experiment process. The results indicate that
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 25 of 31
gel will aid in decreasing the shear strain occurred during cyclic loading and improving liquefaction
resistance for liquefiable ground.
The experimental element tests, centrifuge tests, and field tests performed in the literature have
shown that CS has potential application in improving ground conditions and mitigating liquefaction
in an earthquake event. By grouting CS, both the settlement and shear strain during the cyclic loading
process decrease, and the generation of pore water pressure is inhibited. However, some problems
still exist in the grouting process. The field test conducted by Gallagher et al. (2007) [33], for example,
suffered some grouting failures in three injection holes. These failures lead to a significant reduction in
the injected CS volume compared to the other holes. Post-treatment analysis showed that the failure
could be attributed to the gelation of CS grouted in other boreholes and the return of grout around the
annulus. Nevertheless, the treated area still produced less settlement in a blast-induced liquefaction,
indicating the remarkable effect of CS in mitigating liquefaction.
5. Prospect of Colloidal Silica as a Grouting Material
5.1. Other Applications for CS in Civil Engineering

CS is a kind of promising nanomaterial and has various potential applications in other branches
of civil engineering. Apart from ground improvement and liquefaction mitigation, CS has been
investigated by some researchers to be used for controlling water production and fluid flow in the
petroleum industry, reducing permeability and fixing contaminants in environmental engineering,
and preventing water ingress in underground and tunneling construction.
Jurinak and Summers (1991) used CS in a practical reservoir fluid-flow control system for
workovers at an oilfield [81]. Eleven wells were treated with CS for water injection profile modification,
water production control, and remedial casing repair. The results show that CS treatment works well
in water production control and remedial casing repair. Zones that have been previously hydraulically
fractured can be perfectly treated using CS. Moreover, CS has also been verified to be suitable as
a permeation grout for barrier systems in contaminated sites [82–85]. Moridis et al. (1995) used CS when
injecting in a heterogeneous unsaturated sand layer at 10–14 feet in depth. It was shown that CS could
effectively permeate through this porous media and form a fairly uniform plume. A post-treatment
test showed a four order of magnitude permeability reduction for the treated layers. Thus, CS is
a potential material that can remarkably decrease hydraulic conductivity and, therefore, can be adopted
for use in contaminant barrier systems [82]. Manchester et al. (2001) injected CS gel into large sand
tanks to determine in situ hydraulic conductivity. Consequently, a permeation test indicated that by
grouting CS, a core approximately 60 cm in diameter was produced, with a remarkable reduction in
saturated hydraulic conductivity [85]. Besides, the soil-water characteristic curves of grouted soils
further verified the use of CS as a grouting material to isolate activated soils in the vadose zone.
In addition, CS can also be adopted as grouting agent to permeate through hard rocks in
tunneling and underground engineering. Geotechnical procedures were adopted to analyze silica
soil’s mechanical behaviors over time and in different storage conditions, representing different
environments encountered in tunnels [86,87]. It was shown that the initial strength of silica soil
increases faster at high temperatures or low humidity, indicating sufficient strength can be obtained
in this instance to withstand most grouting conditions. Moreover, when sufficiently confined, silica
soil is ductile. These properties indicate that it can suffer loading and unloading cycles in fairly large
deformations. Meanwhile, a hydraulic conductivity between 10−10 and 10−11 m/s was observed for
silica soil, which implies that silica soil is a kind of low permeation material and is a suitable material
to be grouted in hard rocks in tunneling practice.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 26 of 31
5.2. Advantages of CS as a Grouting Material
5.2.1. Low Disturbance

Among ground improvement techniques, dynamic compaction, vibro-compaction and explosive
compaction have been widely adopted to densify soil layers. However, all of these compaction methods
produce great disturbances to the surrounding areas and are not applicable to solely the constrained or
developed area. Except for the compaction methods, the grouting method is another common practice
to improve ground liquefaction resistance. In all grouting materials, a cement-based material is mostly
used. Nevertheless, the particle size of cement averages at 20 microns, which greatly restricts its
permeation properties. Cement particles can only transport through voids three to five times larger than
their own particle size [15]. Besides, cement has a relatively high initial viscosity, so cement is usually
injected under pressure or is adopted to form grout columns, rather than distribution through the
entire ground. In addition, grouting cement has a remarkable impact to the surrounding environment.
Since conventional methods show great disturbance, grouting CS is an effective method and presents
significant advantages over cement. CS has a very low initial viscosity which is very close to pure water
once mixed with an electrolyte. The low initial viscosity provides excellent flowability to the grouting
materials. Additionally, the particle size of CS ranges from 7–20 nm in general, which is much finer
than cement particles. Thus, CS can achieve transport through the entire targeted scope in the porous
media under a low pressure. Therefore, grouting CS for ground improvement is feasible for both
undeveloped and constrained areas, as it only has low levels of disturbance to the surrounding area.
5.2.2. Environmentally Friendly

The production of cement is an energy-intensive process which consumes massive amounts
of coal, discharging many harmful gases in the production process [88]. The chemical grouting
materials, such as acrylamide, polyurethane, and epoxy, have better penetrability when compared to
cement-based grouting materials, but they are expensive and may cause pollution to underground
waterways if handled improperly [89]. The poisoning incident of Fukuoka in 1974, for example, was
caused by acrylamide grouting materials for ground improvement. Since then, Japan’s Ministry of
Construction has set rules that allow only soluble silica to be adopted as a chemical grouting material
to improve liquefaction resistance [90]. CS is a kind of nanomaterial and a derivative of soluble silica.
It is nontoxic, chemically and biologically inert, and environmentally friendly. When added to soil
as a grouting material, CS will not cause pollution, which is known on a basis of learned knowledge.
Environmental scientists have also noted that great attention should be paid to the behaviors and
application of nanomaterials, with CS included. Thus, CS is a practically potential grouting material
due to its environmental-friendly feature.
5.2.3. Low Cost

The price/performance ratios of CS and some other chemical solutions have been analyzed in
detail. [15,44]. Although the unit price of CS is relatively high, only a spot of CS is effective for
liquefaction mitigation. Each cubic meter of treated soil consumes CS that costs 59 USD when CS
concentration is controlled to be 5% [15]. However, the treatment costs are about 180, 325, and 500 USD
per cubic meter of grouted soil for sodium silica, acrylamide, and epoxy respectively. Thus, CS is
such an economical material that its treatment cost is less than one third of the cost of the traditional
chemical solutions.
Meanwhile, with the booming advancement of nanotechnology practices worldwide, the price of
nanomaterials is expected to largely decrease [91]. For instance, the price of carbon nanotubes has
significantly fallen from 150 USD per gram in 2000 to 50 USD per gram in 2010. Thus, it can be deduced
that CS, as a kind of nanomaterial, will become much cheaper than its current price in the future.
As noted by Huang and Wang (2016), although the application of CS for ground improvement and
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 27 of 31
liquefaction mitigation is still in experimental study stage, it will finally be successful for commercial
use, due to the advantages of CS in terms of both the environmental and cost aspects [15].
6. Conclusions
With the astonishing development of nanotechnology, nanomaterials are beginning to extensively
be adopted in civil engineering, due to their apparent advantages of being cost-effective, with low
disturbance, and being environmentally friendly. Colloidal silica (CS), which has been shown to
have the ability of mitigating liquefaction, is a kind of such nanomaterial with high cost performance.
This paper has reviewed this innovative technique by using CS for ground improvement and
liquefaction mitigation. Specially, the critical factors that can significantly influence CS transport
and the CS strengthening effect were discussed in detail. Based on the conclusions drawn from the
previous literature, it was summarized in this paper that the CS concentration and curing time are the
two dominant factors that determine the ground improvement effect. Moreover, the fact that CS can
greatly mitigate liquefaction for loose sand layers is widely recognized. However, this CS-based soil
liquefaction mitigation technique still faces certain challenges associated with control of the gelling time,
the CS injection success rate, CS delivery with minimum deposition, and so on. It is of great concern
to further develop the approaches to transport CS to the targeted location as precisely as possible
with minimum deposition. To settle this issue, ongoing studies should focus on both the gelation
properties and the permeation ability of CS in porous media. Although a CS-based soil stabilization
technique was put forward after 2000 and is still in the preliminary study and application process,
we are pleased to find that this innovative technique was adopted to treat the runways at Fukuoka
International Airport in 2016. It is promising that by settling the current challenges, the CS-based
liquefaction mitigation technique will ripen gradually and can be expected to be widely adopted in
future anti-seismic projects.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, G.L. and M.Z.; methodology, M.Z. and G.L.; formal analysis, M.Z. and
C.Z.; investigation, M.Z., W.G. and C.Z.; writing-original manuscript preparation, M.Z. and G.L.; writing-review
and editing, M.Z., G.L., W.G. and Q.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by National Science Foundation of China, grant number 51408491 and 51878560.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Reddy, A.S.; Srinivasan, R. Analysis of Soil Liquefaction: Niigata Earthquake. J. Soil Mech. Found. Div. 1967,
93, 83–108.
2. Ross, G.A.; Seed, H.B.; Migliaccio, R.R. Bridge Foundation Behavior in Alaska Earthquake. J. Soil Mech.
Found. Div. 1969, 95, 1007–1036.
3. Singh, S.K.; Suarez, G. Review of the Seismicity of Mexico with Emphasis on the September 1985; Michoacan
Earthquakes, Instituto de Geofísica, UNAM: Mexico City, Mexico, 1986.
4. Elgamal, A.W.; Zeghal, M.; Parra, E. Liquefaction of reclaimed island in Kobe, Japan. J. Geotech. Eng. 1996,
122, 39–49. [CrossRef]
5. Juang, C.H.; Li, D.K. Assessment of liquefaction hazards in Charleston quadrangle, South Carolina. Eng. Geol.
2007, 92, 59–72. [CrossRef]
6. Huang, Y.; Yu, M. Review of soil liquefaction characteristics during major earthquakes of the twenty-first
century. Nat. Hazards 2013, 65, 2375–2384. [CrossRef]
7. Gallagher, P.M.; Pamuk, A.; Abdoun, T. Stabilization of Liquefiable Soils Using Colloidal Silica Grout. J. Mater.
Civ. Eng. 2007, 19, 33–40. [CrossRef]
8. Ishihara, K.; Yasuda, S.; Nagase, H. Soil characteristics and ground damage. Soils Found. 1996, 36, 109–118.
[CrossRef]
9. Dobry, R.; Abdoun, T. Post-Triggering Response of Liquefied Sand in the Free Field and Near Foundations.
Geotech. Spec. Publ. 1998, 75, 270–300.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 28 of 31
10. Dappolonia, E.; Miller, C.E.; Ware, T.M. Sand Compaction by Vibroflotation. Trans. Am. Soc. Civil Eng. 1955,
120, 154–168.
11. Menard, L.; Broise, Y. Theoretical and practical aspect of dynamic consolidation. Geotechnique 1975, 25, 3–18.
[CrossRef]
12. Mayne, P.W.; Jones, J.S.; Dumas, J.C. Ground Response to Dynamic Compaction. J. Geotech. Eng. 1984, 110,
757–774. [CrossRef]
13. Welsh, J.P. In situ testing for ground modification techniques. In Use of In Situ Tests in Geotechnical Engineering;
ASCE: Reston, VA, USA, 1986; pp. 322–335.
14. Mollamahmutoglu, M.; Yilmaz, Y. Pre-and post-cyclic loading strength of silica-grouted sand. Proc. Inst. Civ.
Eng. Geotech. Eng. 2010, 163, 343–348. [CrossRef]
15. Huang, Y.; Wang, L. Experimental studies on nanomaterials for soil improvement: A review. Environ. Earth Sci.
2016, 75, 497. [CrossRef]
16. Tsuchida, H. Prediction and remedial measures against liquefaction of sandy soil. In Annual Seminar of Port
and Harbour Research Institute; International Association of Ports and Harbors: Tokyo, Japan, 1970; Volume 3,
pp. 1–33.
17. Díaz-Rodríguez, J.A.; Antonio-Izarraras, V.M.; Bandini, P.; López-Molina, J.A. Cyclic strength of a natural
liquefiable sand stabilized with colloidal silica grout. Can. Geotech. J. 2008, 45, 1345–1355. [CrossRef]
18. Yonekura, R.; Miwa, M. Fundamental properties of sodium silicate based grout. In Proceedings of the 11th
Southeast Asia Geotechnical Conference, Singapore, 4–8 May 1993; Volume 439.
19. Persoff, P.; Apps, J.; Moridis, G.; Whang, J.M. Effect of dilution and contaminants on sand grouted with
colloidal silica. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 1999, 125, 461–469. [CrossRef]
20. Kodaka, T.; Ohno, Y.; Takyu, T. Cyclic shear characteristics of treated sand with colloidal silica grout.
In Proceedings of the International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Osaka,
Japan, 12–16 September 2005; Aa Balkema Publishers: Amstelredam, The Netherlands, 2005; Volume 16, p. 401.
21. Tong, Z.; Bischoff, M.; Nies, L.; Applegate, B.; Turco, R.F. Impact of fullerene (C60) on a soil microbial
community. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2007, 41, 2985–2991. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
22. Johansen, A.; Pedersen, A.L.; Jensen, K.A.; Karlson, U.; Hansen, B.M.; Scott-Fordsmand, J.J.; Winding, A.
Effects of C60 fullerene nanoparticles on soil bacteria and protozoans. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. Int. J. 2008, 27,
1895–1903. [CrossRef]
23. El Mohtar, C.S.; Bobet, A.; Santagata, M.C.; Drnevich, V.P.; Johnston, C.T. Liquefaction mitigation using
bentonite suspensions. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2012, 139, 1369–1380. [CrossRef]
24. Arabania, M.; Haghib, A.K.; Moradic, Y. Evaluation of mechanical properties improvement of clayey sand by
using carbon nanotubes. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Nanostructures (ICNS4),
Kish Island, Iran, 12–14 March 2012; pp. 1567–1569.
25. Huang, Y.; Wang, L. Laboratory investigation of liquefaction mitigation in silty sand using nanoparticles.
Eng. Geol. 2016, 204, 23–32. [CrossRef]
26. Feynman, R.P. There’s plenty of room at the bottom. Calif. Inst. Technol. Eng. Sci. Mag. 1960, 23, 22–36.
27. Luo, H.L.; Hsiao, D.H.; Lin, D.F.; Lin, C.K. Cohesive soil stabilized using sewage sludge ash/cement and
nano aluminum oxide. Int. J. Transp. Sci. Technol. 2012, 1, 83–99. [CrossRef]
28. Niroumand, H.; Zain, M.F.M.; Alhosseini, S.N. The influence of nano-clays on compressive strength of earth
bricks as sustainable materials. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2013, 89, 862–865. [CrossRef]
29. Taha, M.R.; Taha, O.M. Crack control of landfill liner and cap materials using nano-alumina powder.
Coupled Phenom. Environ. Geotech. 2013, 215, 459–463.
30. Zhang, G.; Germaine, J.T.; Whittle, A.J.; Ladd, C.C. Index properties of a highly weathered old alluvium.
Geotechnique 2004, 54, 441–451. [CrossRef]
31. Bahmani, S.H.; Huat, B.B.; Asadi, A.; Farzadnia, N. Stabilization of residual soil using SiO2 nanoparticles
and cement. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 64, 350–359. [CrossRef]
32. Gallagher, P.M.; Mitchell, J.K. Influence of colloidal silica grout on liquefaction potential and cyclic undrained
behavior of loose sand. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 2002, 22, 1017–1026. [CrossRef]
33. Gallagher, P.M.; Conlee, C.T.; Rollins, K.M. Full-scale field testing of colloidal silica grouting for mitigation of
liquefaction risk. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2007, 133, 186–196. [CrossRef]
34. Liao, H.J.; Huang, C.C.; Chao, B.S. Liquefaction resistance of a colloid silica grouted sand. In Grouting and
Ground Treatment; ASCE: Reston, VA, USA, 2003; pp. 1305–1313.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 29 of 31
35. Kakavand, A.; Dabiri, R. Experimental study of applying colloidal nano Silica in improving sand-silt mixtures.
Int. J. Nano Dimens. 2018, 9, 357–373.
36. Agapoulaki, G.I.; Papadimitriou, A.G. Rheological Properties of Colloidal Silica Grout for Passive Stabilization
Against Liquefaction. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2018, 30, 04018251. [CrossRef]
37. Rasouli, R.; Hayashi, K.; Zen, K. Controlled permeation grouting method for mitigation of liquefaction.
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2016, 142, 04016052. [CrossRef]
38. Iler, R.K. The Chemistry of Silica: Solubility, Polymerization, Colloid and Surface Properties; Wiley: New York, NY,
USA, 1979.
39. Whang, J.M. Section 9—Chemical-based barrier materials. In Assessment of Barrier Containment Technologies
for Environmental Remediation Applications; Rumer, R.R., Mitchell, J.K., Eds.; NTIS: Springfield, VA, USA, 1995;
pp. 211–247.
40. Conlee, C.T.; Gallagher, P.M.; Boulanger, R.W.; Kamai, R. Centrifuge modeling for liquefaction mitigation
using colloidal silica stabilizer. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2012, 138, 1334–1345. [CrossRef]
41. DuPont. Ludox Colloidal Silica: Properties, Uses, Storage, and Handling, Production Information; DuPont:
Wilmington, NC, USA, 1997.
42. Gallagher, P.M. Passive Site Remediation for Mitigation of Liquefaction Risk. Ph.D. Thesis, Virginia Tech,
Blacksburg, VA, USA, 2000.
43. Spencer, L.; Rix, G.J.; Gallagher, P. Colloidal silica gel and sand mixture dynamic properties. In Geotechnical
Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics IV; ASCE: Reston, VA, USA, 2008; pp. 1–10.
44. Bao, X.; Jin, Z.; Cui, H.; Chen, X.; Xie, X. Soil liquefaction mitigation in geotechnical engineering: An overview
of recently developed methods. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 2019, 120, 273–291. [CrossRef]
45. Gallagher, P.M.; Lin, Y. Colloidal silica transport through liquefiable porous media. J. Geotech. Geoenviron.
Eng. 2009, 135, 1702–1712. [CrossRef]
46. Otterstedt, J.-E.; Greenwood, P. Some important, fairly new uses of colloidal silica/silica soil. In Fundamentals
and Applications; Chapter 57 in Colloidal silica; Bergna, H., Roberts, W.O., Eds.; Taylor & Francis: Abingdon
upon Thames, UK, 2005.
47. Koch, A.J. Model Testing of Passive Site Stabilization. Ph.D. Thesis, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA,
USA, 2002.
48. Lin, Y. Colloidal Silica Transport Mechanisms for Passive Site Stabilization of Liquefiable Soils. Ph.D. Thesis,
Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2006.
49. Persoff, P.; Moridis, G.J.; Apps, J.A.; Pruess, K. Evaluation tests for colloidal silica for use in grouting
applications. Geotech. Test. J. 1998, 21, 264–269.
50. Wong, C.; Pedrotti, M.; El Mountassir, G.; Lunn, R.J. A study on the mechanical interaction between soil and
colloidal silica gel for ground improvement. Eng. Geol. 2018, 243, 84–100. [CrossRef]
51. Pedrotti, M.; Wong, C.; El Mountassir, G.; Lunn, R.J. An analytical model for the control of silica grout
penetration in natural groundwater systems. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 2017, 70, 105–113. [CrossRef]
52. Aldaood, A.; Bouasker, M.; Al-Mukhtar, M. Impact of freeze–thaw cycles on mechanical behaviour of lime
stabilized gypseous soils. Cold Reg. Sci. Technol. 2014, 99, 38–45. [CrossRef]
53. Hotineanu, A.; Bouasker, M.; Aldaood, A.; Al-Mukhtar, M. Effect of freeze–thaw cycling on the mechanical
properties of lime-stabilized expansive clays. Cold Reg. Sci. Technol. 2015, 119, 151–157. [CrossRef]
54. Seyedi, S.; Mirkazemi, S.; Baziar, M. Application of nanomaterial to stabilize a weak soil. In Proceedings
of the Seventh International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering, Chicago, IL, USA,
29 April–4 May 2013.
55. Majeed, Z.H.; Taha, M.R. Effect of nanomaterial treatment on geotechnical properties of a Penang soft soil.
J. Asian Sci. Res. 2012, 2, 587.
56. Ghasabkolaei, N.; Choobbasti, A.J.; Roshan, N.; Ghasemi, S.E. Geotechnical properties of the soils modified
with nanomaterials: A comprehensive review. Arch. Civil Mech. Eng. 2017, 17, 639–650. [CrossRef]
57. Noll, M.R.; Bartlett, C.; Dochat, T.M. In situ permeability reduction and chemical fixation using colloidal
silica. In Proceedings of the Sixth National Outdoor Action Conference on Aquifer Restoration, Ground
Water Monitoring, and Geophysical Method, State College, PA, USA, 11–13 May 1992; National Ground
Water Association: Westerville, OH, USA, 1992.
58. Changizi, F.; Haddad, A. Strength properties of soft clay treated with mixture of nano-SiO2 and recycled
polyester fiber. J. Rock Mech. Geotech. Eng. 2015, 7, 367–378. [CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 30 of 31
59. Ryan, J.N.; Elimelech, M.; Ard, R.A.; Harvey, R.W.; Johnson, P.R. Bacteriophage PRD1 and silica colloid
transport and recovery in an iron oxide-coated sand aquifer. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1999, 33, 63–73. [CrossRef]
60. Higgo, J.J.W.; Williams, G.M.; Harrison, I.; Warwick, P.; Gardiner, M.P.; Longworth, G. Colloid transport
in a glacial sand aquifer. Laboratory and field studies. In Colloids in the Aquatic Environment; Elsevier:
Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1993; pp. 179–200.
61. Saiers, J.E.; Hornberger, G.M.; Harvey, C. Colloidal silica transport through structured, heterogeneous porous
media. J. Hydrol. 1994, 163, 271–288. [CrossRef]
62. Ryan, J.N.; Elimelech, M. Colloid mobilization and transport in groundwater. Colloids Surf. A Physicochem.
Eng. Asp. 1996, 107, 1–56. [CrossRef]
63. Johnson, P.R.; Sun, N.; Elimelech, M. Colloid transport in geochemically heterogeneous porous media:
Modeling and measurements. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1996, 30, 3284–3293. [CrossRef]
64. Gallagher, P.M.; Koch, A.J. Model testing of passive site stabilization: A new grouting technique. In Grouting
and Ground Treatment; American Society of Civil Engineers: Preston, VA, USA, 2003; pp. 1478–1489.
65. Gallagher, P.M.; Finsterle, S. Physical and numerical model of colloidal silica injection for passive site
stabilization. Vadose Zone J. 2004, 3, 917–925. [CrossRef]
66. Conlee, C.T. Dynamic Properties of Colloidal Silica Soils Using Centrifuge Model Tests and a Full-Scale
Field Test. Ph.D. Thesis, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2010.
67. Hamderi, M.; Gallagher, P.M. An optimization study on the delivery distance of colloidal silica. Sci. Res.
Essays 2013, 8, 1314–1323.
68. Hamderi, M.; Gallagher, P.M.; Lin, Y. Numerical model for colloidal silica injected column tests. Vadose Zone J.
2014, 13, vzj2013.07.0138. [CrossRef]
69. Hamderi, M.; Gallagher, P.M. Pilot-scale modeling of colloidal silica delivery to liquefiable sands. Soils Found.
2015, 55, 143–153. [CrossRef]
70. Zen, K.; Hayashi, K.; Yamazaki, H.; Hirasawa, M. Variations of liquefaction strength induced by the
different injection processes in the permeation grouting method. In Proceedings of the XV Danube-European
Conference on Geotechnical Engineering, Vienna, Austria, 9–11 September 2014.
71. Burton, M.B. Method and Apparatus for Lateral Drilling in Oil and Gas Wells. U.S. Patent No. 4699224,
13 October 1987.
72. Karlsson, H.; Jacques, G.E.; Hatten, J.L.; Aslakson, J.K. Method and Apparatus for Horizontal Drilling.
U.S. Patent No. 5148875, 22 September 1992.
73. Clough, G.W.; Iwabuchi, J.; Rad, N.S.; Kuppusamy, T. Influence of cementation on liquefaction of sands.
J. Geotech. Eng. 1989, 115, 1102–1117. [CrossRef]
74. Towhata, I.; Kabashima, Y. Mitigation of seismically-induced deformation of loose sandy foundation
by uniform permeation grouting. In Proceedings of the Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering Satellite
Conference, XVth International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Istanbul,
Turkey, 27–31 August 2001; pp. 313–318.
75. Seed, H.B. Ground Motions and Soil Liquefaction during Earthquakes; Earthquake Engineering Research Insititue:
Oakland, CA, USA, 1982.
76. Díaz-Rodríguez, J.A.; Antonio-Izarraras, V.M. Mitigation of liquefaction risk using colloidal silica.
In Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 1–6
August 2004; pp. 1–6.
77. Kodaka, T.; Oka, F.; Ohno, Y.; Takyu, T.; Yamasaki, N. Modeling of cyclic deformation and strength
characteristics of silica treated sand. In Geomechanics: Testing, Modeling, and Simulation; ASCE: Reston, VA,
USA, 2005; pp. 205–216.
78. Taboada, V.M. Centrifuge Modeling of Earthquake-Induced Lateral Spreading in Sand Using a Laminar Box.
Ph.D. Thesis, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, USA, 1995.
79. Rollins, K.M.; Anderson, J.K.; McCain, A.K.; Goughnour, R.R. Vertical composite drains for mitigating
liquefaction hazard. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Offshore and Polar Engineering
Conference, Honolulu, HI, USA, 25–30 May 2003; International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers:
Mountain View, CA, USA, 2003.
80. Nenad, G. Using Large Mobile Shakers for Non-Destructive Infrastructure Testing. Available
online: https://www.designsafe-ci.org/community/news/2018/november/using-large-mobile-shakers-non-
destructive-infrastructure-tests/ (accessed on 4 November 2019).
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 31 of 31
81. Jurinak, J.J.; Summers, L.E. Oilfield applications of colloidal silica gel. Spe Prod. Eng. 1991, 6, 406–412.
[CrossRef]
82. Moridis, G.J.; Persoff, P.; Apps, J.A.; Myer, L.; Pruess, K.; Yen, P. A Field Test of Permeation Grouting in
Heterogeneous Soils Using a New Generation of Barrier Liquids; Lawrence Berkeley Lab.: Berkeley, CA, USA, 1995.
83. Moridis, G.; Apps, J.; Persoff, P.; Myer, L.; Muller, S.; Pruess, K.; Yen, P. A Field Test of a Waste Containment
Technology Using a New Generation of Injectable Barrier Liquids; Lawrence Berkeley National Lab.: Berkeley, CA,
USA, 1996.
84. Moridis, G.J.; James, A.; Oldenburg, C. Development of a Design Package for a Viscous Barrier at the Savannah
River Site; Lawrence Berkeley National Lab.: Berkeley, CA, USA, 1996.
85. Manchester, K.; Zaluski, M.; North-Abbott, M.; Trudnowski, J.; Bickford, J.; Wraith, J. Grout selection and
characterization in support of the colloidal silica barrier deployment at Brookhaven National Laboratory.
In Proceedings of the 2001 International Contain. and Remedies Technology Conference and Exhibition,
Orlando, FL, USA, 10–13 June 2001.
86. Butrón, C. Mechanical Behaviour of Silica Sol-Laboratory Studies Under Controlled Stress Conditions During the
First Five Months of Hardening Process; Department of Civil an Environmental Engineering, Division of
GeoEngineering, Chalmers University of Technology: Goteborg, Sweden, 2005.
87. Butrón, C.; Axelsson, M.; Gustafson, G. Silica sol for rock grouting: Laboratory testing of strength, fracture
behaviour and hydraulic conductivity. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 2009, 24, 603–607. [CrossRef]
88. Shafigh, P.; Mahmud, H.B.; Jumaat, M.Z.; Zargar, M. Agricultural wastes as aggregate in concrete mixtures—A
review. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 53, 110–117. [CrossRef]
89. Vik, E.A.; Sverdrup, L.; Kelley, A.; Storhaug, R.; Beitnes, A.; Boge, K.; Grepstad, G.K.; Tveiten, V. Experiences
from environmental risk management of chemical grouting agents used during construction of the
Romeriksporten tunnel. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 2000, 15, 369–378. [CrossRef]
90. Gong, X. The Manual of Ground Treatment; China Architecture Publishing House: Beijing, China, 2008.
91. Holman, M. Nanomaterial forecast: Vols and Applications. In ICON Nanomaterial Environmental Health and
Safety Research Needs Assessment; Lux Research: Amsterdam, The Netherland, 2007.
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Applsci 10 00015

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Applsci 10 00015

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

applied

Keywords: liquefaction mitigation; colloidal silica; transport mechanism; grouting material

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15; doi:10.3390/app10010015 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Figure 1. Concept for passive site stabilization [7,32].

Figure 5. Gel state classification and description [49].

(a) (b) (c)

2.3. Mechanical Properties of CS-Soil Mixtures

The results demonstrate

Figure 10. Photo of box model test [7].

Figure 10. Photo of box model test [7].

3.2. Transport Mechanisms of CS in Liquefiable Sand

Figure 11. Schematic and photo of the column test [45].

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 31

Figure 13. Setup

3.4.4. Unconfined Compression Strength

(a) Untreated sample

(b) 10% CS-treated sample

(a) Untreated sample (b) Treated sample

Figure 19. Shear

(a) Sample at 40% relative density

(b) Sample at 60% relative density

Figure 21. Shear

4.2. Centrifuge Model Behaviors of CS-Grouted Soil

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 15 23 of 31

5. Prospect of Colloidal Silica as a Grouting Material

5.1. Other Applications for CS in Civil Engineering

5.2. Advantages of CS as a Grouting Material

5.2.1. Low Disturbance

5.2.2. Environmentally Friendly

5.2.3. Low Cost

You might also like