Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Compares biological treatment methods for optimizing clay bio-brick performance, indicating pre-mixing is superior.
To optimise the utilisation of cementation solution and reinforcement effects in clay bio-bricks, this study compared four biological treatment methods: surface alternate infiltration bacterial suspension, surface first infiltration bacterial suspension, surface infiltration combined mixing, and pre-mixing. The performance of these methods was evaluated based on three key metrics: compressive strength, calcium carbonate content, and cementation solution utilisation efficiency. The pre-mixing method exhibited the highest measured compressive strength under the tested conditions. In addition, pre-mixing achieved the highest calcium carbonate content, reached 9.91%. It indicates that pre-mixing promotes a more uniform bacterial distribution within the bio-bricks and maximises utilisation of the cementation solution, reaching 69.6%. In contrast, the surface alternate infiltration method demonstrated the weakest performance, producing only of the calcium carbonate content at 6.93%, with minimal reinforcement and the lowest utilisation rate of only 47.9%. This deficiency was attributed to rapid surface crystal formation, which blocked solution penetration into the interior. Furthermore, compressive strength was greatest when the cementation solution concentration was 0.5 mol/L. Both macroscopic and microscopic analyses indicate that the mechanical performance of clay bio-bricks is closely linked to calcium carbonate content, underscoring the importance of optimising bacterial distribution and solution efficiency.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: