Figure 1.
Macrophotographs of raw slag samples with visible, unburnt fragments of municipal waste.
Figure 1.
Macrophotographs of raw slag samples with visible, unburnt fragments of municipal waste.
Figure 2.
Original setup for gas permeability testing of post-process waste: red line is nitrogen inlet; blue line is nitrogen outlet (B. Dutka).
Figure 2.
Original setup for gas permeability testing of post-process waste: red line is nitrogen inlet; blue line is nitrogen outlet (B. Dutka).
Figure 3.
Cylinders of a medium-size permeameter for filtration coefficient testing (A. Gruchot).
Figure 3.
Cylinders of a medium-size permeameter for filtration coefficient testing (A. Gruchot).
Figure 4.
General view of the ITB-ZW-K2 apparatus for the filtration coefficient measurement (A. Gruchot).
Figure 4.
General view of the ITB-ZW-K2 apparatus for the filtration coefficient measurement (A. Gruchot).
Figure 5.
Cumulative curves and histograms on the basis of grain size analysis from three groups of slag.
Figure 5.
Cumulative curves and histograms on the basis of grain size analysis from three groups of slag.
Figure 6.
Quartz grain with embedded apatite (SP1 sample), thin section, 2P, 200×, transmitted light.
Figure 6.
Quartz grain with embedded apatite (SP1 sample), thin section, 2P, 200×, transmitted light.
Figure 7.
Grain of quartz, melilite, and carbonates (calcite) (SP2 sample), thin section, 2P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 7.
Grain of quartz, melilite, and carbonates (calcite) (SP2 sample), thin section, 2P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 8.
Melilite and quartz grains (SP1 sample), thin section, 2P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 8.
Melilite and quartz grains (SP1 sample), thin section, 2P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 9.
Quartz, calcite, and melilite in the SP2 sample, thin section, 2P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 9.
Quartz, calcite, and melilite in the SP2 sample, thin section, 2P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 10.
Plagioclase—visible multiple twinning and residual zonal structure. SP3 sample, thin section, 2P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 10.
Plagioclase—visible multiple twinning and residual zonal structure. SP3 sample, thin section, 2P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 11.
Microcline (K-feldspar) with visible twinning in two directions. SP3 sample, thin section, 2P, 200×, transmitted light.
Figure 11.
Microcline (K-feldspar) with visible twinning in two directions. SP3 sample, thin section, 2P, 200×, transmitted light.
Figure 12.
Potassium feldspar, double twinned (orthoclase) surrounded by quartz grains. SP2 sample, thin section, 2P, 200×, transmitted light.
Figure 12.
Potassium feldspar, double twinned (orthoclase) surrounded by quartz grains. SP2 sample, thin section, 2P, 200×, transmitted light.
Figure 13.
Potassium feldspar, and quartz, SP2 sample, thin section, 2P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 13.
Potassium feldspar, and quartz, SP2 sample, thin section, 2P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 14.
Glass in SP2 slag and ash sample, thin section, 1P, 200×, transmitted light.
Figure 14.
Glass in SP2 slag and ash sample, thin section, 1P, 200×, transmitted light.
Figure 15.
Glass in SP2 slag and ash sample, thin section, 1P, 200×,transmitted light.
Figure 15.
Glass in SP2 slag and ash sample, thin section, 1P, 200×,transmitted light.
Figure 16.
Glass in SP3 slag and ash sample, thin section, 1P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 16.
Glass in SP3 slag and ash sample, thin section, 1P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 17.
Glass in SP3 slag and ash sample, thin section, 2P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 17.
Glass in SP3 slag and ash sample, thin section, 2P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 18.
Metallic substance, shiny. SP2 sample, macrophotograph of the polished section prepared for microscopic analysis.
Figure 18.
Metallic substance, shiny. SP2 sample, macrophotograph of the polished section prepared for microscopic analysis.
Figure 19.
Metallic substance, shiny. SP2 sample, thin section, 1P, 200×, reflected light.
Figure 19.
Metallic substance, shiny. SP2 sample, thin section, 1P, 200×, reflected light.
Figure 20.
Metallic substance, shiny. SP2 sample, thin section, 1P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 20.
Metallic substance, shiny. SP2 sample, thin section, 1P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 21.
Metallic substance, shiny. SP2 sample, thin section, 2P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 21.
Metallic substance, shiny. SP2 sample, thin section, 2P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 22.
Metallic substance. Unburned fragment of anthropogenic origin. SP2 sample, thin section, 1P, 100×, reflected light.
Figure 22.
Metallic substance. Unburned fragment of anthropogenic origin. SP2 sample, thin section, 1P, 100×, reflected light.
Figure 23.
Metallic substance. Unburned fragment of anthropogenic origin. SP2 sample, thin section, 1P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 23.
Metallic substance. Unburned fragment of anthropogenic origin. SP2 sample, thin section, 1P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 24.
Metallic substance. Unburned fragment of anthropogenic origin. SP2 sample, thin section, 2P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 24.
Metallic substance. Unburned fragment of anthropogenic origin. SP2 sample, thin section, 2P, 100×, transmitted light.
Figure 25.
Metallic substance. Unburned fragment of anthropogenic origin. SP3 sample, thin section, 2P, 100×, reflected light.
Figure 25.
Metallic substance. Unburned fragment of anthropogenic origin. SP3 sample, thin section, 2P, 100×, reflected light.
Figure 26.
Pores visible under a stereomicroscope, SP1 sample, magnification 100×.
Figure 26.
Pores visible under a stereomicroscope, SP1 sample, magnification 100×.
Figure 27.
Closed pores visible under a petrographic microscope, SP1 sample, polished section, 1P, 100×, reflected light.
Figure 27.
Closed pores visible under a petrographic microscope, SP1 sample, polished section, 1P, 100×, reflected light.
Figure 28.
Closed pores visible under a petrographic microscope, polished section, 1P, 100×, reflected light.
Figure 28.
Closed pores visible under a petrographic microscope, polished section, 1P, 100×, reflected light.
Figure 29.
Closed pores visible under a petrographic microscope, polished section, 1P, 100×, reflected light.
Figure 29.
Closed pores visible under a petrographic microscope, polished section, 1P, 100×, reflected light.
Figure 30.
Porosity dependence on the analyzed grain fraction (SP2 sample).
Figure 30.
Porosity dependence on the analyzed grain fraction (SP2 sample).
Figure 31.
Oval, large (about 0.6 mm) pores in the slag, fraction above 4 mm, SP2 sample, magnification 100×, reflected light, section.
Figure 31.
Oval, large (about 0.6 mm) pores in the slag, fraction above 4 mm, SP2 sample, magnification 100×, reflected light, section.
Figure 32.
Oval, small (up to about 0.1 mm) pores in the slag, fraction below 0.63 mm, SP2 sample, magnification 100×, reflected light, section.
Figure 32.
Oval, small (up to about 0.1 mm) pores in the slag, fraction below 0.63 mm, SP2 sample, magnification 100×, reflected light, section.
Figure 33.
Mineral and non-mineral grains, SP2 sample, 0.4–0.25 mm fraction, fine cut, magnification 50×, 1N, transmitted light.
Figure 33.
Mineral and non-mineral grains, SP2 sample, 0.4–0.25 mm fraction, fine cut, magnification 50×, 1N, transmitted light.
Figure 34.
Quartz grains of white–gray colors, SP2 sample, 0.4–0.25 mm fraction, fine cut, magnification 50×, NX, transmitted light.
Figure 34.
Quartz grains of white–gray colors, SP2 sample, 0.4–0.25 mm fraction, fine cut, magnification 50×, NX, transmitted light.
Figure 35.
Total metal content in the studied waste samples.
Figure 35.
Total metal content in the studied waste samples.
Figure 36.
Distribution of metals in particular fractions and susceptibility to release increasing from F4 to F0.
Figure 36.
Distribution of metals in particular fractions and susceptibility to release increasing from F4 to F0.
Figure 37.
Relationship between layer porosity and gas permeability of SP2 slag and ash.
Figure 37.
Relationship between layer porosity and gas permeability of SP2 slag and ash.
Figure 38.
Effect of stress on SP2 gas permeability.
Figure 38.
Effect of stress on SP2 gas permeability.
Figure 39.
Compactability (Proctor) curve of the tested slag and ash sample.
Figure 39.
Compactability (Proctor) curve of the tested slag and ash sample.
Figure 40.
Dependence of the filtration coefficient on compaction.
Figure 40.
Dependence of the filtration coefficient on compaction.
Figure 41.
The dependence of the filtration coefficient on the time of waste storage.
Figure 41.
The dependence of the filtration coefficient on the time of waste storage.
Waste Sample | SP1 | SP2 | SP3 |
---|
Porosity (%) | 9.07 | 12.92 | 12.74 |
Table 2.
Porosity of individual grain fractions (SP2 sample).
Table 2.
Porosity of individual grain fractions (SP2 sample).
Sample fraction (mm) | 4–2.5 | 2.5–1.6 | 1.6–1 | 1–0.63 | 0.63–0.4 | 0.4–0.25 |
Porosity (%) | 19.81 | 9.97 | 11.55 | 11.32 | 5.87 | 4.15 |
Table 3.
Results of densimetric studies of waste with different seasoning times.
Table 3.
Results of densimetric studies of waste with different seasoning times.
Slag and Ash | | | ε, % | Vp, cm3/g |
---|
SP1C | 2.564 | 1.951 | 23.9 | 0.123 |
SP2C | 2.555 | 1.957 | 23.4 | 0.120 |
SP3C | 2.562 | 1.965 | 23.3 | 0.119 |
Table 4.
Influence of the SP2 sample separation on density and porosity.
Table 4.
Influence of the SP2 sample separation on density and porosity.
Sample Fraction (mm) | | | | Vp, cm3/g | | |
---|
2 SP > 6.3 | 2.468 | 1.957 | 20.7 | 0.11 | 20.0 | 0.7 |
2 SP > 4 | 2.521 | 22.4 | 0.14 | 20.0 | 2.4 |
2 SP > 2.5 | 2.527 | 22.6 | 0.16 | 19.8 | 2.8 |
2 SP > 1.0 | 2.595 | 24.6 | 0.21 | 11.6 | 13.0 |
2 SP > 0.63 | 2.564 | 23.7 | 0.18 | 11.3 | 12.4 |
2 SP > 0.25 | 2.585 | 24.3 | 0.20 | 4.2 | 20.1 |
Table 5.
Samples for gas permeability testing.
Table 5.
Samples for gas permeability testing.
Waste Sample | SP2 |
---|
Consolidation force (kg) | 500 | 1000 | 1300 | 2600 | 4000 |
Stress (MPa) | 6.7 | 13.5 | 17.5 | 35.0 | 53.0 |
Layer density (g/cm3) | 1.44 | 1.62 | 1.63 | 1.69 | 1.71 |
Porosity (%) | 43.6 | 36.8 | 36.0 | 33.9 | 33.1 |
Permeability (m2) | 3.8 × 10−13 | 1.4 × 10−13 | 1.5 × 10−13 | 6.0 × 10−14 | 5.8 × 10−15 |
Table 6.
Summary of the filtration coefficient of the tested slag and ash.
Table 6.
Summary of the filtration coefficient of the tested slag and ash.
Density Index | Apparatus | Storage Time |
---|
Without Storage | 3 Months | 6 Months | 11 Months |
---|
Filtration Coefficient, k10 [m/s] |
---|
IS = 0.92 | Medium-dimensional permeameter | 2.20 × 10−6 | | | |
IS = 0.98 | 1.88 × 10−7 | | | |
IS = 0.92 | ITB ZW K2 | 9.79 × 10−6 | 9.37 × 10−6 | 1.31 × 10−5 | 1.78 × 10−5 |
IS = 0.95 | 9.46 × 10−6 | | | |
IS = 0.98 | Water flow was not obtained | | | |