915 resultados para Responsive envelopes
Resumo:
PURPOSE: Stabilisation/solidification (S/S) has emerged as an efficient and cost-effective technology for the treatment of contaminated soils. However, the performance of S/S-treated soils is governed by several intercorrelated variables, which complicates the optimisation of the treatment process design. Therefore, it is desirable to develop process envelopes, which define the range of operating variables that result in acceptable performance. METHODS: In this work, process envelopes were developed for S/S treatment of contaminated soil with a blend of hydrated lime (hlime) and ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS) as the binder (hlime/GGBS = 1:4). A sand contaminated with a mixture of heavy metals and petroleum hydrocarbons was treated with 5%, 10% and 20% binder dosages, at different water contents. The effectiveness of the treatment was assessed using unconfined compressive strength (UCS), permeability, acid neutralisation capacity and contaminant leachability with pH, at set periods. RESULTS: The UCS values obtained after 28 days of treatment were up to ∼800 kPa, which is quite low, and permeability was ∼10(-8) m/s, which is higher than might be required. However, these values might be acceptable in some scenarios. The binder significantly reduced the leachability of cadmium and nickel. With the 20% dosage, both metals met the waste acceptance criteria for inert waste landfill and relevant environmental quality standards. CONCLUSIONS: The results show that greater than 20% dosage would be required to achieve a balance of acceptable mechanical and leaching properties. Overall, the process envelopes for different performance criteria depend on the end-use of the treated material.
Resumo:
Computer modelling approaches have significant potential to enable decision-making about various aspects of responsive manufacturing. In order to understand the system prior to the selection of any responsiveness strategy, multiple process segments of organisations need to be modelled. The article presents a novel systematic approach for creating coherent sets of unified enterprise, simulation and other supporting models that collectively facilitate responsiveness. In this approach, enterprise models are used to explicitly define relatively enduring relationships between (i) production planning and control (PPC) processes, that implement a particular strategy and (ii) process-oriented elements of production systems, that are work loaded by the PPC processes. Coherent simulation models, can in part be derived from the enterprise models, so that they computer execute production system behaviours. In this way, time-based performance outcomes can be simulated; so that the impacts of alternative PPC strategies on the planning and controlling historical or forecasted patterns of workflow, through (current and possible future) production system models, can be analysed. The article describes the unified modelling approach conceived and its application in a furniture industry case study small and medium enterprise (SME). Copyright © 2010 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.
Resumo:
This study was aimed at evaluating the mechanical and pH-dependent leaching performance of a mixed contaminated soil treated with a mixture of Portland cement (CEMI) and pulverised fuel ash (PFA). It also sought to develop operating envelopes, which define the range(s) of operating variables that result in acceptable performance. A real site soil with low contaminant concentrations, spiked with 3000mg/kg each of Cd, Cu, Pb, Ni and Zn, and 10,000mg/kg of diesel, was treated with one part CEMI and four parts PFA (CEMI:PFA=1:4) using different binder and water contents. The performance was assessed over time using unconfined compressive strength (UCS), hydraulic conductivity, acid neutralisation capacity (ANC) and pH-dependent leachability of contaminants. With binder dosages ranging from 5% to 20% and water contents ranging from 14% to 21% dry weight, the 28-day UCS was up to 500kPa and hydraulic conductivity was around 10-8m/s. With leachant pH extremes of 7.2 and 0.85, leachability of the contaminants was in the range: 0.02-3500mg/kg for Cd, 0.35-1550mg/kg for Cu, 0.03-92mg/kg for Pb, 0.01-3300mg/kg for Ni, 0.02-4010mg/kg for Zn, and 7-4884mg/kg for total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPHs), over time. Design charts were produced from the results of the study, which show the water and/or binder proportions that could be used to achieve relevant performance criteria. The charts would be useful for the scale-up and design of stabilisation/solidification (S/S) treatment of similar soil types impacted with the same types of contaminants. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd.
Resumo:
This work initiated the development of operating envelopes for stabilised/solidified contaminated soils. The operating envelopes define the range of operating variables for acceptable performance of the treated soils. The study employed a soil spiked with 3,000 mg/kg each of Cd, Cu, Pb, Ni and Zn, and 10,000 mg/kg of diesel. The binders used for treatment involved Portland cement (CEMI), pulverised fuel ash (PFA), ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS) and hydrated lime (hlime). The specific binder formulations were CEMI, CEMI/PFA = 1:4, CEMI/GGBS = 1:9 and hlime/GGBS = 1:4. The water contents employed ranged from 13 % to 21 % (dry weight), while binder dosages ranged from 5 % to 20 % (w/w). We monitored the stabilised/solidified soils for up to 84 days using different performance tests. The tests include unconfined compressive strength (UCS), hydraulic conductivity, acid neutralisation capacity (ANC) and pH-dependent leachability of contaminants. The water content range resulted in adequate workability of the mixes but had no significant effect on leachability of contaminants. We produced design charts, representing operating envelopes, from the results generated. The charts establish relationships between water content, binder dosage and UCS; and binder dosage, leachant pH and leachability of contaminants. The work also highlights the strengths and weaknesses of the different binder formulations. © 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.