在对秦岭西部铅锌矿区调研发现，采矿形成大量的矿渣固体废物堆积在沟道中，在降雨、地表径流等浸润环境，以及矿床的赋存环境及与其他矿体共生而呈现的酸性环境下，可能会起矿渣物理化学性质的变化，进而影响矿渣固有特性的变化，浸润后的浸出液还会由于重金属释放而产生矿山环境地质问题。本文以秦岭西部铅锌矿区废弃矿渣为研究对象，在分析矿渣基本理化性质的基础上，开展不同酸性浸润环境条件下，铅锌矿渣表观特征及重金属释放随酸浸时间及浸润液酸碱度的变化研究，并结合矿渣试样浸润后的孔隙结构特征，阐释矿渣水（酸）-岩作用变化过程。根据试验研究，取得以下主要成果：

（1）通过对研究区矿渣及地表水测定分析，得到野外矿渣的矿物成分主要为白云石、伊利石和石英；野外矿渣的初始孔隙结构为典型的介孔特征；地表水中五种重金属元素浓度从大到小依次为Zn、Pb、Cu、Cd、Cr。

（2）将2种不同粒径的铅锌矿渣（32mm

（3）在7种不同pH酸性环境中，浸润液pH值以4为界限，酸性环境及酸蚀作用引起离子的活跃程度差距显著，表现为初始pH为1、2、3浸润液pH值和电导率随时间先减小而后增加，初始pH为4、5、6及去离子水浸润液pH值和电导率随时间增加；其活跃程度通过重金属离子释放量的变化也能证明，为初始酸性pH为1、2、3条件，5种重金属释放量大，初始酸性pH≥4环境下，5种重金属释放量较为平稳；且初始pH值越低，重金属释放量随浸润时间增加逐渐越高，重金属元素释放量排序大致表现为：Zn>Pb>Cu>Cd>Cr。

（4）矿渣酸浸后的表观特征和浸润液理化性质的改变是矿渣表面溶蚀的结果，酸性越强，矿渣表面溶蚀越显著，且随着浸泡时间的延长，溶蚀进一步扩大，使得矿渣表面硬度降低，矿渣孔隙微观结构发生变化，并伴有金属析出、迁移。

关 键 词 ：铅锌矿渣；酸性环境；孔隙特征；重金属释放；酸蚀机理

研究类型：应用基础研究

In a study of lead-zinc mining areas in the western Qinling Mountains, it was found that mining formed a large amount of slag solid waste piled up in the trench, which may cause changes in the physical and chemical properties of the slag under the leaching environment such as rainfall, surface runoff, and the acidic environment presented by the deposit's fugitive environment and symbiosis with other ore bodies, thus affecting changes in the inherent properties of the slag, and the leachate after leaching may also produce mine environmental problems due to the release of heavy metals. Geological problems. In this paper, based on the analysis of the basic physicochemical properties of the slag, we investigated the changes of the apparent characteristics and heavy metal release of lead-zinc slag with acid leaching time and pH of the leachate under different acidic leaching conditions, and interpreted the process of water (acid)-rock interaction of the slag in combination with the pore structure characteristics of the slag specimens after leaching. Based on the experimental study, the following main results were obtained:

(1) The mineral composition of field slag was mainly dolomite, illite and quartz through the determination and analysis of slag and surface water in the study area; the initial pore structure of field slag was a typical mesoporous feature; the concentrations of five heavy metals in surface water were Zn, Pb, Cu, Cd and Cr in descending order.

(2) After infiltration of two different particle sizes of lead-zinc slag (32mm

(3) In 7 different pH acidic environments, the pH of the infiltrate was 4 as the limit, and the acidic environment and acid etching caused a significant difference in the active degree of ions, as shown by the initial pH of 1, 2, 3 infiltrate pH and conductivity decreased with time and then increased, the initial pH of 4, 5, 6 and deionized water infiltrate pH and conductivity increased with time; its active degree of heavy metal ion release through the The changes in the amount of heavy metal ions released can also be proved by the changes in the initial acidic pH of 1, 2, 3 conditions, five kinds of heavy metal release is large, the initial acidic pH ≥ 4 environment, five kinds of heavy metal release is more stable; and the lower the initial pH value, heavy metal release with the increase in infiltration time gradually higher, the release of heavy metal elements in the order of roughly: Zn>Pb>Cu>Cd>Cr.

(4) The apparent characteristics of the slag after acid leaching and the changes in the physicochemical properties of the infiltrate are the result of slag surface dissolution, the stronger the acidity, the more significant the slag surface dissolution, and with the prolongation of the soaking time, the dissolution further expands, making the slag surface hardness decreases, and the slag pore microstructure changes, accompanied by metal precipitation and migration.

Key words: Lead-zinc slag; Acidic environment; Apparent characteristics; Heavy metal release; Acid corrosion mechanism

Thesis      ：Applied Basic Research

[1] 薛喜成. 秦岭典型矿山泥石流发育规律及环境效应研究[D].西安: 西安科技大学,2008.

[2] 杨敏. 影响小秦岭金矿区矿渣型泥石流形成的主要因素研究[D].西安: 长安大学,2010.

[3] 王京,施泽明,林清. 重金属元素的淋滤模拟实验[C]. //中国矿物岩石地球化学学会第十五届学术年会论文集. 2015:1-2.

[4] 刘玥. 凤县铅锌矿区地质环境质量评价研究[D]. 西安: 西安科技大学,2009.

[5] Gong C., Ma L., Cheng H., et al. Characterization of the particle size fraction associated heavy metals in tropical arable soils from Hainan Island, China[J]. Ecology & Environmental Sciences, 2014, 139(139):109-114.

[6] 郑刘根,丁帅帅,刘丛丛,等.不同类型煤矸石中环境敏感性微量元素淋滤特性[J].中南大学学报(自然科学版), 2016,47(2):703-710.

[7] Tang, Quan, Li, et al. Characterization of heavy metals in coal gangue-reclaimed soils from a coal mining area[J]. Journal of Geochemical Exploration,2018,186:1-11.

[8] Jiang L G, Liang B, Xue Q , et al. Characterization of phosphorus leaching from phosphate waste rock in the Xiangxi River watershed, Three Gorges Reservoir, China[J]. Chemosphere, 2016, 150(May):130-138.

[9] Humsa T Z, Srivastava R K. Impact of Rare Earth Mining and Processing on Soil and Water Environment at Chavara, Kollam, Kerala: A Case Study[J]. Procedia Earth and Planetary Science, 2015,11:566-581.

[10] Liu P, Pei W, Yang L , et al. Modeling kinetics of heavy metal release from field-contaminated soils: Roles of soil adsorbents and binding sites[J]. Chemical Geology, 2018,506:187-196.

[11] Cao J , Xie C , Hou Z .Ecological evaluation of heavy metal pollution in the soil of Pb-Zn mines[J]. Ecotoxicology, 2022,31(2):259-270.

[12] Yang H , Dong C , Zhang H , et al. Characteristics and Source Analysis of Soil Heavy Metal Pollution in a Mining Area [J]. Journal of Geoscience and Environment Protection, 2022,(3):159-176.

[13] 佚名.陕西安康市蒿坪河环境风险隐患突出重点环境治理工作推进迟缓[J].中国环境监察,2022,(1):32-33.

[14] 黄迁辉,赵彦新.义马市张家南坡南侧废弃矿渣堆环境治理恢复研究[J].中国资源综合利用,2021,39(11):148-150.

[15] 胡平. 废弃矿山地质环境恢复治理的思路——以信阳市光山县某矿区为例[J].中国资源综合利用, 2020,38(5):105-107.

[16] 杨庭硕. 农业遗产的当代创新:葛类作物栽培传统在废矿渣堆积场生态修复中的可行性探索[J]. 贵州民族研究, 2020,41(12):102-108.

[17] 郭萍, 夏栋. 宜昌市矿区矿渣废弃地边坡植被恢复的物种推荐与搭配探讨[J].中国水土保持, 2018,(2):9-10.

[18] 方晰,田大伦,谢荣秀.湘潭锰矿矿渣废弃地植被修复前的土壤诊断[J].生态学报,2006,26(5):1494-1501.

[19] 董亚辉,戴全厚,邓伊晗等.不同植物对铅锌矿废弃地矿渣抗侵蚀性的影响[J].水土保持通报,2013,33(5):64-68.

[20] 闫福丽. 酸对岩石矿物的溶蚀机理及粘弹性表活剂酸化液体系研究[D].西安: 陕西科技大学,2022.

[21] 王鹏鹏. 酸性干湿循环作用下岩溶区灰岩溶蚀特性及三轴试验研究[D].桂林: 桂林理工大学,2022.

[22] 田洪义,王华,司景钊.酸性溶液作用下砂岩损伤时效特性机制分析[J].隧道建设(中英文),2022,42(2):244-252.

[23] 熊冬霞. 尾矿酸化对尾矿砂影响及尾矿坝流固耦合分析研究[D].衡阳: 南华大学,2017.

[24] Ni G , Li S , Rahman S , et al. Effect of nitric acid on the pore structure and fractal characteristics of coal based on the low-temperature nitrogen adsorption method[J]. Powder Technology, 2020, 367:506-516.

[25] 程晓茜, 田继军, 王海超,等. H2S水溶液对低阶煤孔隙结构影响的实验研究[J].煤炭学报, 2020,45(4):1436-1444

[26] 贾男. 基于低温氮吸附法的酸化煤样孔隙分形特征研究[J].煤矿安全,2021,52(1):53-57.

[27] 李全中. 多组分酸对不同煤阶煤增透机理研究[D].焦作: 河南理工大学,2014.

[28] 陈刘瑜, 李希建, 沈仲辉,等. 酸化作用对页岩微观结构及其物性的影响[J].煤田地质与勘探,2020,48(3):100-107.

[29] 魏宇辰. 化学溶液作用下铁矿渣内污染物释放规律与微观结构演化[D].武汉: 武汉轻工大学,2019.

[30] 蓝崇钰,束文圣,张志权.酸性淋溶对铅锌尾矿金属行为的影响及植物毒性[J].中国环境科学,1996,(6):62-66.

[31] 李航, 叶霖, 肖唐付,等. 云南金顶超大型铅锌矿区镉的地球化学特征及其环境效应[J]. 矿物学报, 2007,27(2):225-232.

[32] 钱玲,李冰,陈希等.黄金尾砂重金属淋溶释放规律[J].东南大学学报(自然科学版),2020,50(6):1084-1089.

[33] 濮阳雪华,邓汝英,王春春等.德兴铜矿尾砂重金属在模拟降雨下的淋溶特征[J].环境工程,2019,37(5):61-65.

[34] 江文才. 黑色页岩顺层氧化—酸蚀实验模拟研究[D].成都: 西南交通大学,2018.

[35] 许江, 吴慧, 程立朝,等. 酸性条件下砂岩剪切破坏特性试验研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2012,31(S2):3897-3903.

[36] 汤连生, 王思敬. 岩石水化学损伤的机理及量化方法探讨[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2002,21(3):314-319.

[37] 崔强,冯夏庭,薛强,等. 化学腐蚀下砂岩孔隙结构变化的机制研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2008,27(6):1209-1216.

[38] 冯夏庭, 王川婴, 陈四利. 受环境侵蚀的岩石细观破裂过程试验与实时观测[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2002,21(7):935-939.

[39] 陈四利, 冯夏庭, 李邵军. 岩石单轴抗压强度与破裂特征的化学腐蚀效应[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2003,22(4):547-551.

[40] 王泳嘉, 冯夏庭. 化学环境侵蚀下的岩石破裂特性—第二部分:时间分形分析[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2000,19(5):551-556.

[41] 陈四利,冯夏庭,李邵军. 化学腐蚀对黄河小浪底砂岩力学特性的影响[J]. 岩土力学,2002,23(3):284-287+296.

[42] 陈四利,冯夏庭,周辉. 化学腐蚀下砂岩三轴压缩力学效应的试验[J]. 东北大学学报,2003,24(3):292-295.

[43] 汤连生, 王思敬. 水-岩化学作用对岩体变形破坏力学效应研究进展[J]. 地球科学进展,1999,14(5):433-439.

[44] 汤连生, 王思敬. 岩石水化学损伤的机理及量化方法探讨[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2002,21(3):314-319.

[45] 汤连生 .水-岩土反应的力学与环境效应研究 [J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2000,19(5):681-682.

[46] 汤连生, 周萃英. 渗透与水化学作用之受力岩体的破坏机理[J]. 中山大学学报(自然科学版),1996,35(6):96-101.

[47] 汤连生, 张鹏程, 王思敬. 水-岩化学作用之岩石断裂力学效应的试验研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2002,21(6):822-827.

[48] 汤连生, 张鹏程, 王思敬. 水-岩化学作用的岩石宏观力学效应的试验研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2002,21(4):526-531.

[49] A. J , Hutchinson, and, et al. Stone degradation due to wet deposition of pollutants[J]. Corrosion Science, 1993,34(11):1881-1898.

[50] 马涛, 丁梧秀, 王鸿毅,等. 酸性水化学溶液侵蚀下不同矿物成分含量灰岩溶解特性及力学特性研究[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2021,43(8):1550-1557.

[51] 姚华彦, 冯夏庭, 崔强,等. 化学溶液及其水压作用下单裂纹灰岩破裂的细观试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2009,30(1):59-66+78.

[52] 孙治国,鲁海涛.水-岩化学腐蚀损伤作用下红砂岩蠕变特性试验研究[J].金属矿山,2021(4):83-89.

[53] 苗胜军, 蔡美峰, 冀东,等. 酸性化学溶液作用下花岗岩力学特性与参数损伤效应[J]. 煤炭学报, 2016,41(4):829-835.

[54] Ljungberg J , B Öhlander. The geochemical dynamics of oxidising mine tailings at Laver, northern Sweden[J]. Journal of Geochemical Exploration, 2001, 74(1):57-72.

[55] Opekunova M. , Opekunov A Y , Somov V , et al. Transformation of metals migration and biogeochemical cycling under the influence of copper mining production (the Southern Urals)[J]. Catena, 2020, 189:104512.

[56] Hai L , Li G , Dong Y , et al. Effect of pH on the release of heavy metals from stone coal waste rocks[J]. International Journal of Mineral Processing, 2017, 165:1-7.

[57] Lee P K , Kang M J , Jo H Y , et al. Sequential extraction and leaching characteristics of heavy metals in abandoned tungsten mine tailings sediments[J]. Environmental Earth Sciences, 2012, 66(7):1909-1923.

[58] 周珊珊.四川汉源铅锌矿区环境地球化学特征[D].成都: 成都理工大学,2014.

[59] Holmström H.,Ljungberg J.,Öhlander B.. Role of carbonates in mitigation of metal release from mining waste. Evidence from humidity cells tests[J]. Environmental Geology,1999,37(4):267-280.

[60] 陈璐. 铅锌尾矿及其周边土壤重金属形态分布与浸出特征研究[D].乌鲁木齐: 新疆大学,2016.

[61] 李小虎.大型金属矿山环境污染及防治研究——以甘肃金川和白银为例[D].兰州: 兰州大学,2007.

[62] 张斯宇,何绪文,李焱等.铅锌矿区土壤重金属的淋溶试验研究[J].矿业科学学报,2018,3(4):406-416.

[63] 李晓涵. 环境因子对铅锌冶炼废渣中重金属释放及生物效应的影响[D].贵州: 贵州大学,2020.

[64] 吴春宇. 某铅锌矿区矿渣和土壤中重金属浸出特性及生物毒性[D].南京: 南京农业大学,2015.

[65] 阳安迪,肖细元,郭朝晖,等.模拟酸雨下铅锌冶炼废渣重金属的静态释放特征[J].中国环境科学,2021,41(12):5755-5763.

[66] 王兰,刘方,王俭等.铅锌矿渣酸性淋溶下重金属释放特征及其对植物幼苗生长的影响[J].生态学杂志,2010,29(6):1121-1126.

[67] 董志浩. 煤炭地下气化覆岩高温损伤与评估研究[D].徐州: 中国矿业大学,2020.

[68] 杨庆贤.实际气体的多分子层吸附[J].化学物理学报,1991,4(6):458-463.

[69] Barrett E P , Joyner L G , Halenda P P . The Determination of Pore Volume and Area Distributions in Porous Substances. I. Computations from Nitrogen Isotherms[J]. J.am.chem.soc, 1951,73(1):373-380.

[70] GB/T 50344—2019中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部建筑结构检测技术标准[S].北京:北京中国建筑工业出版社,2019.

[71] GB/T 17394.4—2014中国国家标准化管理委员会金属材料里氏硬度试验第4部分：硬度值换算表[S]. 北京:中国标准出版社,2014

[72] Sing K , Everett D H , Haul R , et al. Reporting Physisorption Data for Gas/Solid Systems[J]. Pure and Applied Chemistry, 1985, 57(4):603-619.

[73] Sing, Kenneth S W , Neimark, et al. Physisorption of gases, with special reference to the evaluation of surface area and pore size distribution (IUPAC Technical Report)[J]. Pure and Applied Chemistry, 2015, 87(9/10):1051-1069.

[74] 曹庆一,钱雅慧,杨柳.煤中重金属元素的溶出潜力及其影响因素[J].地球科学与环境学报,2023,45(2):437-444.

[75] 熊爱华. 酸腐蚀砂岩的宏细观物理力学性能及其溶解动力学分析[D].西安: 西安建筑科技大学,2021.

[76] 何宏平, 郭九皋, 谢先德. 可膨胀性层状粘土矿物对铜离子吸附机理的模拟研究[J].环境科学, 2000, 21(4):47-51.

[77] 何宏平, 郭九皋, 朱建喜,等.蒙脱石、高岭石、伊利石对重金属离子吸附容量的实验研究[J].岩石矿物学杂志,2001,20(4):573-578.

[78] 姜腾达. 粘土矿物对水中Pb2+、Cu2+、Cd2+的吸附及机理研究[D].长沙: 中南大学, 2014.

[79] Guo Y G, Huang P, Zhang W G, et al. Leaching of heavy metals from Dexing copper mine tailings pond[J]. Transactions of Nonferrous Metals Society of China (English Edition), 2013,23(10):3068-3075.

[80] 袁丽,刘阳生.铅锌尾矿中重金属在模拟酸雨淋溶下的浸出规律[J].环境工程,2012,30(S2):586-590+292.

[81] 向发云,吴永贵,王俭,等.模拟不同pH值的雨水对炼锌废渣浸出毒性的影响[J].贵州大学学报(自然科学版),2010,27(3):134-139.

[82] 杨永明, 鞠杨, 刘红彬,等. 孔隙结构特征及其对岩石力学性能的影响[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2009,28(10):2031-2038.

[83] 董武书. 干湿循环及化学溶蚀作用下灰岩的劣化机理研究[D].昆明: 昆明理工大学,2021.

[84] 马登辉. 水岩作用对岩石物理力学特性劣化机制研究[D].合肥: 合肥工业大学,2020.

[85] 黄叶宁. 水岩作用下灰岩溶解机理及表面形貌演化研究[D].宜昌: 三峡大学,2019.

[86] 徐飞凡. 酸碱侵蚀和干湿循环耦合作用下砂岩物理力学性能劣化规律研究[D]. 淮南:安徽理工大学,2021.

[87] 凌斯祥,巫锡勇,孙春卫,等.水岩化学作用对黑色页岩的化学损伤及力学劣化试验研究[J].实验力学,2016,31(4):511-524.