This study investigates the feasibility of using bentonite coated gravel (BCG) as a liner material for waste landfills. BCG has proven to be a very effective capping material/method for the remediation of contaminated sediments in aquatic environments. The concept of BCG is similar to that of peanuts/almonds covered with chocolate; each aggregate particle has been covered with the clayey material. Laboratory tests were aimed at evaluating regulated and non-regulated factors for liner materials, i.e., permeability and strength. Tests included X-ray diffraction, methylene blue absorption, compaction, free swelling, permeability, 1D consolidation, triaxial compression and cone penetration. The compactive efforts used for this study were the reduced Proctor, standard Proctor, intermediate Proctor, modified Proctor and super modified Proctor. The compactive energy corresponding to each effort, respectively, is as follows: 355.5, 592.3, 1196.3, 2693.3, and 5386.4 kJ/m(3). Results revealed that even though aggregate content represents 70% of the weight of the material, hydraulic conductivities as low as 6 x 10(-10)cm/s can be achieved when proper compactive efforts are used. Compressibility is very low for this material even at low (or no) compactive efforts. Results also demonstrated how higher compactive efforts can lower the permeability of BCG; however, over-compaction creates fractures in the aggregate core of BCG that could increase permeability. Moreover, higher compactive efforts create higher swelling pressures that could compromise the performance of a barrier constructed using BCG. As a result of this study, moderate compactive efforts, i.e., intermediate Proctor or modified Proctor, are recommended for constructing a BCG barrier. Using moderate compactive efforts, very low hydraulic conductivities, good workability and good trafficability are easily attainable.
[1]
A. Al-Rawas,et al.
Assessment of crushed shales for use as compacted landfill liners
,
2005
.
[2]
M. F. Attom.
The effect of compactive energy level on some soil properties
,
1997
.
[3]
Craig H. Benson,et al.
HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY AND SWELLING OF NONPREHYDRATED GCLS PERMEATED WITH SINGLE-SPECIES SALT SOLUTIONS
,
2001
.
[4]
Craig H. Benson,et al.
Water Content-Density Criteria for Compacted Soil Liners
,
1990
.
[5]
Craig H. Benson,et al.
Evaluating the hydraulic conductivity of GCLs permeated with non-standard liquids
,
2000
.
[6]
Hsin-Yu Shan,et al.
Effect of hydrating liquid on the hydraulic properties of geosynthetic clay liners
,
2002
.
[7]
D. E. Daniel,et al.
Influence of Clods on the Hydraulic Conductivity of Compacted Clay
,
1990
.
[8]
David E. Daniel,et al.
EFFECT OF GRAVEL ON HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY OF COMPACTED SOIL LINERS
,
1993
.
[9]
Craig H. Benson,et al.
Estimating Hydraulic Conductivity of Compacted Clay Liners
,
1994
.
[10]
Vinod K. Garga,et al.
Compaction Characteristics of River Terrace Gravel
,
1985
.
[11]
R. Brachman,et al.
Barrier Systems for Waste Disposal Facilities
,
2004
.
[12]
Craig H. Benson,et al.
Soil-Water Characteristic Curves for Compacted Clays
,
1997
.
[13]
James K. Mitchell,et al.
Permeability of Compacted Clay
,
1965
.
[14]
Amalendu Bagchi,et al.
Design of Landfills and Integrated Solid Waste Management
,
2004
.
[15]
T. Edil,et al.
A review of aqueous-phase VOC transport in modern landfill liners.
,
2003,
Waste management.