Journal of Engineering Geology

---

Introduction
Contaminants can be categorized into organic and inorganic groups. Organic contaminants are carbon based, and their presence in waste forms may be as a single contaminant associated with inorganic contaminants, or a suite of complex mixtures which may be toxic at very low concentrations. Organics of greatest environmental concern are usually refined petroleum products, chlorinated and non-chlorinated solvents, manufactured biocides, organic sledges and substances from manufacturing processes. Most contamination due to organics are associated with accidental spills and leaks, originating from equipment cleaning, maintenance, storage tanks, residue from used containers and outdated material (Yong and Mulligan, 2004). Transport and fate of organic contaminants are important. Organic contamination migrations are due to advection (by fluid flow through soil) and diffusion, but other forms of transport e.g. infiltration may also contribute to migration (Environment Agency, 2002). The response of the soil to a contaminant depends upon the type of soil and the nature of the contaminant. The sensitivity of soil to contaminants depends upon the type of soil (such as particle size, mineral structure, bonding characteristics between particles and ion exchange capacity) and the nature of contaminants. Fang (1997) defined a sensitivity index (ranging from 0 to 1) to different types of soil. Sensitivity of sand and gravel (0.01 to 0.1) is much lower than clay particles (0.6-0.9). There are a number of techniques for remediation of contaminated land. These include physical (washing, flushing, thermal, vacuum extraction, solvent extraction), chemical (stabilization and solidification) and bioremediation techniques. However, the applicability and feasibility of different methods for remediation are dependent on many factors such as soil characteristics (soil type, degree of compaction and saturation), site geology, depth of contamination, extent of contaminant in lateral direction, topography, surface and ground water and the type and amount of contaminants. Thermal treatment and using surfactants are the most popular methods for remediating the soil contaminated with petroleum compounds. In this research remediation of a soil contaminated with different percentages of gasoline was studied through physical techniques in laboratory. The applied physical techniques were thermal technique and use of two different kinds of surfactants. The obtained results were compared with each other and discussion was performed.
Material and methods
Soil, gasoline and surfactant are the basic materials that were used in this work. The soil that was used in this testing program was a clayey soil. Two different types of ionic and nonionic surfactant, namely Tween 80 and SDS, were used in this work for remediating soil, contaminated with gasoline. Contaminated soil was prepared by adding 5 and 10 % weight (to air dried soil) of gasoline. 6 kg air dried soil was selected and the desired amount of gasoline was weighted, then it was sprayed on the soil and thoroughly mixed by hand for about 2 hours. The prepared mixture was kept inside a covered container for a week in order to come to equilibrium with the soil. For thermal remediation the contaminated soil with a specific percent of gasoline was kept inside a constant convection oven at 50, 100, and 150^oC for about one week to desorb the contaminating compound. Tween 80 and SDS were used for remediation of the contaminated soil. The amount of used Tween 80 was 25% weight of contaminating compound and selection of SDS amount was based on 50% weight of contaminating matter. The samples for the main tests were prepared by static compaction according to the optimum water content and maximum dry unit weight that were obtained from standard compaction tests. Atterberg limits, grain size distribution, compaction and unconfined compression tests were performed on samples of natural, contaminated and remediated soil according to the ASTM standard.
Results and discussion
The results of Atterberg limits (LL, PL and PI) for the contaminated soil (with 5 and 10 % gasoline) indicated that the values of them are increased with increasing the percent of gasoline. These values are nearly the same as natural soil after remediation with thermal method and surfactants. The grain size distribution curves were determined for the natural soil, contaminated soil with 5% and10% gasoline and soil remediated by thermal and surfactant techniques. The results showed that by using thermal technique the percent of clay is decreased and the percent of sand and particularly silt is increased by increasing temperature. The results of grain size distribution for the soils remediated by SDS and Tween 80 showed that the percent of clay is reduced but the percent of silt and sand are increased. Comparing the results of the two surfactants shows that the effect of Tween 80 in reduction of the percent of clay is more than SDS. The results showed that after thermal treatment, the maximum dry unit weight decreases and the optimum water content increases. For the contaminated soil with gasoline a reduction in maximum dry unit weight is observed compared with natural soil. The effect of SDS and Tween 80 on soil remediation is reduction in maximum dry unit weight and optimum water content. The results of compression strength showed that adding gasoline to soil causes a reduction in final strength and this reduction is a function of gasoline percent. The results also indicated that the strength of remediated soil by thermal or surfactant techniques, is reached nearly to the strength of natural soil. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) tests were performed on the samples in order to observe the microstructure of the samples in different conditions (natural and contaminated with different percent of gasoline). The results of SEM showed that the structure of soil is changed by contamination to gasoline. It can be said that the gasoline causes reduction in the thickness of DDL because of low dielectric constant and hence a flocculated structure is formed. In the flocculated structure due to attractive forces, the fine particles paste to each other and form coarse particles. Therefore, variations in the Atterberg limits and compaction parameters can be resulted from forming new structure by adding gasoline. These results of compression strength are not in agreement with the theory of diffuse double layer (DDL). The reduction in dielectric constant would cause a flocculated structure in soil and the strength of the contaminated soil should be increased in comparison with the natural soil. It can be said the viscosity of gasoline cause reduction in the strength of contaminated soil.
Conclusion
In this experimental work a cohesive soil was contaminated with 5% and 10% of gasoline. The experimental tests showed that the properties of contaminated soil are different from natural soil and the change in the properties is a function of gasoline percent. The contaminated soil, was remediated by thermal treatment and also using two surfactants. The results also showed that using surfactants is more effective than using thermal method in soil remediation, and can treat the soil nearly to its original condition.
-Base on the SEM analysis results, adding gasoline to the soil, will change the soil micro structure to a flocculated one.  
-The gradation curves show that adding gasoline to the soil will change the gradation from finer to coarser.
- Contamination to gasoline will change the compaction parameters of the soil, and will reduce the soil final strength significantly.
- The results show that using thermal method and surfactants is effective in remediating the soil, but it is more effective to use surfactants. 
References
Yong, R.N., Mulligan,. “Natural attenuation of the contaminants in soil”, CRC press, Boca Raton, FL (2004).
Fang, M.Y. “Introduction to Environmental Geotechnology”, CRC Press,FL.USA, (1997).

---

Introduction
In regard to consumptions of oil materials by human, soil contamination causes worriness in environment and geotechnics areas in previous years, such that studying of soils lead to soil refine, soil bearing capacity and soil changing by infiltration of contamination. The rates of problems on environment are different and it depends on soil types and its structure, organic materials values, soil permeability, climate and type of contamination. In viewpoint of geotechnics, many investigations have been done on various contaminated soils that their result leads to optimum application of those as road construction and decrease of costs. In this research, with adding of different percentages of gasoil into the soil, engineering properties of contaminated soils were investigated and its effect on the erodibility of soils was studied. Regarding to the Hamedan oil storages complex extension and lateral installations, the study of contaminated soils are essential. Also, because the location of that complex is at urban area, the environmental risk of leaking of oil materials is available. Thus, the goal of this research is to investigate the erodibility of contaminated soils at the studied area.     
Material and methods
Hamedan oil storages complex is located about 17.7 km far from Hamedan city. In order to study engineering geological properties and erodibility of three layers of soils in studied area, the soil samplings were done from three soil layers. Based on the field and laboratory results, all of three soil layers were classified into SM class and had too much lime (Table 1). Testing program is divided into engineering geological tests and erodibility tests. All of the engineering geological tests on the uncontaminated and contaminated soils were undertaken according to ASTM (2000) (Table 2). In order to prepare the contaminated soils and to determine the maximum absorbable gasoil, the soil samples were contaminated by gasoil and some standard compaction tests were undertaken on the soils. According to the test results, upper and lower layers were saturated by 19% of gasoil and middle layer was saturated by 15% of gasoil. After determination of gasoil saturations percentages for studied soil layers, the 7, 13 and 19 percentages of gasoil were added into the upper and lower layers and the 5, 10 and 15 percentages of gasoil were added into the middle layer. Thus, for engineering geological tests, 9 samples of contaminated soils were prepared.   
Table 1. Soil properties of studied area

Lime percentage	Soil type	PI%	PL%	LL%	Sample	Layer
85.15	SM	8.99	40.65	49.64	L1	Upper
62.16	SM	15.49	32.12	47.61	L2	Middle
88.72	SM	15.46	27.14	42.60	L3	Lower

Table 2. Engineering geological tests according to ASTM (2000)

Standard No.	Test type
ASTM-D422 (2000)	Soil classification
ASTM-D4318-87 (2000)	Atterberg limits
ASTM-D698 (2000)	Standard Compaction
ASTM-D3080 (2000)	ِDirect shear
ASTM-D2166-87 (2000)	Uniaxial Compressive Strength

To prepare the sample for direct shear test, a mould with dimension of 10 cm *10 cm *2 cm was used. Then, the prepared sample was set inside the shear box and vertical stress was applied. All of direct shear tests were done in unconsolidated-undrained condition (UU), in maximum dry unit weight _dmax) and in optimum water content _{( opt})of soil samples.
All of the soil samples for uniaxial compressive strength tests were prepared in maximum dry unit weight and optimum water content. To prepare the soil samples, a split tube mould with 5*10 cm of dimensions was used. Based on that test, the soil samples are set under axial load and failure occurred at the end of the test.
To investigate the effect of gasoil on soil erodibility, first the erodibility tests by using rainfall simulator were done on uncontaminated soils and then, on contaminated soil with different percentages of gasoil. All of soil samples for erodibility test were prepared into the pans with 30*30*15 cm of dimensions and in maximum dry unit weight and optimum water content. The thickness of soil samples were 5 cm and the gravelly drainage layers were 10 cm. The rainfall intensity was equal to rainfall intensity of sampling area (29 mm/hours) and the steepness of soil samples were equals to sampling area steepness (10 to 40 degrees). After catching of runoff and drained water, the eroded soils were weighted and the weight loss of soil samples was calculated.   
Results and discussion
All of the engineering geological tests results are shown in Table 3. With increasing of the gasoil percentages, dry maximum unit weights of all three layers have decrease trends while the optimum water contents have increase trends. Surrounding of the soil grains by gasoil and water causes the easy sliding of grains and more compaction. The Atterberg test results shows that liquid and plasticity limits of soil had increase trend with increasing the gasoil. In the middle layer its trend is more than the others. Because the viscosity of gasoil is more than the water viscosity, the adhesion of contaminated soil would be more than the uncontaminated soil and then, the liquid and plasticity limits of contaminated soils are more than the others. The uniaxial compressive strength results show that the undrained strength of contaminated soils would be decrease with increasing the gasoil content. This behavior is the result of sliding of the contaminated soil grains on each other.
The results of erodibility tests results are shown in Table 4. The erodibility would be increase with increasing the gasoil percentages. Also, it would be increase with steepness dips degrees. In compare to the uncontaminated soils, the maximum weight loss of the contaminated soil is 608.3 kg/m².hr in 15% of gasoil and 40 degrees of steepness in L2 layer. The minimum weight loss of the contaminated soil is 13.33 kg/m².hr in 0% of gasoil and 10 degrees of steepness in L3 layer. Thus, the assessment of gasoil effect on erodibility of soils is very important.
Table 3. Results of the engineering geological tests on the uncontaminated and contaminated soil samples

Layers	Gasoil percentage	Liquid limit (%)	Plasticity limit (%)	Plasticity Index (%)	Maximum  dry unit  weight  (g/cm3)	Optimum water content (%)	Internal friction angle (ɸ)	Cohesion (kPa)	Uniaxial compressive strength (kPa)
L1	0%	49.64	40.65	8.99	1.65	22	4.6	7.4	18.4
	7%	54	40.13	13.87	1.87	10.5	4.04	6.6	8.7
	13%	55.67	43.71	11.95	1.88	8.5	3.26	3.7	7.8
	19%	55	40.65	14.34	1.96	3	2.3	2.75	3.5
L2	0%	47.61	32.12	15.49	1.87	14	6.97	6	9.6
	5%	64	40.39	23.61	2.08	9	5.73	5.5	7
	10%	66	46.63	19.37	2.11	6	5.15	4	6.1
	15%	68	49.09	18.91	2.14	3.5	4	2	1.25
L3	0%	42.6	27.14	15.46	1.62	22.3	2.6	10.7	22.6
	7%	56	39.27	16.72	1.92	9.5	2.41	8.5	10.5
	13%	57.18	41.66	15.51	2.01	6	2.17	7/3	7.8
	19%	63	42	20.99	2.03	3	1.45	6.9	4.4

 
Table 4. Results of the uncontaminated and contaminated soils in different steepness*

Layer	Gasoil percentage	Dip of 10◦	Dip of 20◦	Dip of 30◦	Dip of 40◦
L1	0%	56.4	70.4	73.2	111.06
	7%	149.6	178.8	248.4	202.53
	13%	166.53	227.2	241.6	278.93
	19%	227.86	256.66	419.86	334.66
L2	0%	30.8	102.53	156.53	317.73
	5%	58.66	142.66	151.2	324.8
	10%	74.93	168.66	244.53	365.73
	15%	105.73	283.73	359.86	608.13
L3	0%	13.33	75.06	79.46	86.26
	7%	55.2	98.53	78.13	81.06
	13%	124.13	176.8	145.73	140.06
	19%	196.4	279.46	200.93	210

Conclusion
1. According to the grain size analysis test results, all of three layers of soils around the Hamedan oil storage are SM with too much lime.
2. With increasing the gasoil, liquid and plasticity limits of three soil layers had increase trend. its trend in the middle layer is more than the others.
3. According to the erodibility results of contaminated soils, the weight loss of middle layer was more than the other layers because of the middle soil layer had lower percentages of lime.   
4. The gasoil causes decrease of soil strength and increase of weight losing. Thus, the uniaxial compressive strength and weight losing have reverse correlation.  
5. With increasing of the contamination, the cohesion and internal friction angle of soils would be decrease and then, the erodibility would be increase.
6. Maximum of erosion of contaminated soils was in 15 and 19 percentages of gasoil and it was three times more than that of uncontaminated soils.
7. The critical steepness of uncontaminated soil layers was 40 degrees for all three layers, but it was different for contaminated soils, 
8. Regarding to the location of Hamedan oil storages, the environmental risk of oil leakages and erodibility of contaminated soils are certain.  
./files/site1/files/132/5Extended_Abstracts.pdf

---