4.5 Article

Collapsibility, composition, and microstructure of loess in China

期刊

CANADIAN GEOTECHNICAL JOURNAL
卷 53, 期 4, 页码 673-686

出版社

CANADIAN SCIENCE PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1139/cgj-2015-0285

关键词

collapsibility; loess; microstructure; mineralogy; particle morphology; silt

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [50478096, 51128901]
  2. Louisiana Board of Regents EDA Award
  3. NSF EPSCoR grant from Louisiana Board of Regents
  4. National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The collapse potential, mineralogy, microstructure, and particle morphology of a loess from the Loess Plateau, China, were characterized by double oedometer testing, X-ray diffraction, scanning electron microscopy with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, and image analysis to elucidate the origin of its collapse behavior. Results show that the loess is highly collapsible with a maximum collapse index of 6.7% at a vertical stress of similar to 200 kPa. The deposit contains both nonclay (i.e., quartz, albite, muscovite, and calcite) and clay (i.e., two chlorites) minerals. Microstructural, chemical, and image analyses indicate that interparticle calcite and clay cementation and silt particle morphology render the intact soil a metastable structure. Wetting-induced collapse is attributed to both primary and secondary microstructure features. The former is the abundance of weakly cemented, unsaturated, porous pure clay and clay-silt mixture aggregates whose slaking upon wetting initiates the overall structural collapse, while the latter consists of high porosity, unstable particle contacts, and clay coating on silt particles that act synergistically to augment the collapse. A conceptual microstructural model of a four-tiered hierarchy (i.e., primary clay and silt particles, clay aggregates and clay-coated silt particles, clay-silt mixture aggregates, and cemented aggregate matrix) is proposed to represent its structural characteristics and to account for its high collapsibility.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据