Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

New Perspectives on Bentonite Hydration and Shear Strength of GCL-Sand Interfaces Based on Particle Shape Characterizations

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Interface friction in GCL-sand interfaces is primarily controlled by the shape characteristics of the sand grains and the surface texture of the GCL. Friction at the GCL-sand interface is also affected by the hydration of bentonite present in the GCL, which alters the interaction mechanisms of sand and GCL. The present study involves the use of image analysis for the characterization of sand particles and identification of changes in surface characteristics of GCL coupled with the effects of bentonite hydration on interface shear response. River sand and manufactured sand of similar gradation were used in the study. Based on the shape quantifications, manufactured sand particles are relatively elongated and rough compared to natural sand particles. Interface shear tests were carried out on these sands interfaced with the woven geosynthetic surface of the GCL for normal stresses in the range of 7–100 kPa. Initial water content in the sand layer was varied to understand the hydration and swelling effects of bentonite. Results showed improved interaction with manufactured sand, enabling effective particle-asperities interlocking, due to their shape. In addition, the use of manufactured sand resulted in less hydration of the bentonite layer, resulting in better interface shear strength. Hydration-related surface changes to the GCL specimens investigated through image analysis corroborated the effects of particle shape on the interface shear response.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Robbins MC, Lu H, Swift AHP (1995) Investigation of the suitability of a geosynthetic clay liner system for the El Paso solar pond. In: Proc 1995 Annu Conf Am Sol Energy Soc, pp 63–68

  2. Guyonnet D, Touze-Foltz N, Norotte V et al (2009) Performance-based indicators for controlling geosynthetic clay liners in landfill applications. Geotext Geomembr 27:321–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2009.02.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Fox PJ, Stark TD (2015) State-of-the-art report: GCL shear strength and its measurement—ten-year update. Geosynth Int 22:3–47. https://doi.org/10.1680/gein.14.00030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Gilbert RB, Fernandez F, Horsfield DW (1997) Closure to “shear strength of reinforced geosynthetic clay liner” by Robert B. Gilbert, Federico Fernandez, and David W Horsfield. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 123:1179–1180. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1090-0241(1997)123:12(1179)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ghazizadeh S, Bareither CA (2020) Temperature effects on internal shear behavior in reinforced GCLs. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 146:04019124. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)gt.1943-5606.0002193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Thielmann SS, Fox PJ, Athanassopoulos C (2016) Shear strength of GMX/GCL composite liner under high normal stress. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 142:04016005. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)gt.1943-5606.0001457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chiu P, Fox PJ (2004) Internal and interface shear strengths of unreinforced and needle-punched geosynthetic clay liners. Geosynth Int 11:176–199. https://doi.org/10.1680/gein.11.3.152.44482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Li MH, Gilbert RB (2006) Mechanism of post-peak strength reduction for textured geomembrane-nonwoven geotextile interfaces. Geosynth Int 13:206–209. https://doi.org/10.1680/gein.2006.13.5.206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Mccartney JS, Zornberg JG (2009) Internal and interface shear strength of geosynthetic clay liners. Geosynthetic Clay Liners for Waste Containment Facilities, pp 143–168

  10. Daniel BDE, Koerner RM, Bonaparte R et al (1998) Slope stability of geosynthetic clay liner test plots. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 124:628–637

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Athanassopoulos C, Fox PJ, Ross JD (2010) Cyclic shear test of a geosynthetic clay liner for a secondary containment application. Geosynth Int 17:107–111. https://doi.org/10.1680/gein.2010.17.2.107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Fox PJ, De Battista DJ, Mast DG (2000) Hydraulic performance of geosynthetic clay liners under gravel cover soils. Geotext Geomembr 18:179–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-1144(99)00026-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bacas BM, Cañizal J, Konietzky H (2015) Shear strength behavior of geotextile/geomembrane interfaces. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 7:638–645. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2015.08.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Müller-Vonmoos M, Løken T (1989) The shearing behaviour of clays. Appl Clay Sci 4:125–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-1317(89)90004-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Eid HT (2011) Shear strength of geosynthetic composite systems for design of landfill liner and cover slopes. Geotext Geomembr 29:335–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2010.11.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Rowe RK, Orsini C (2003) Effect of GCL and subgrade type on internal erosion in GCLs under high gradients. Geotext Geomembr 21:1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-1144(02)00036-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Bareither CA, Soleimanian M, Ghazizadeh S (2018) Direct shear testing of GCLs at elevated temperature and in a non-standard solution. Geosynth Int 25:350–368. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgein.18.00014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Seo MW, Park JB, Park IJ (2011) Evaluation of interface shear strength between geosynthetics under wet condition. Soils Found 47:845–856. https://doi.org/10.3208/sandf.47.845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. McCartney JS, Zornberg JG, Swan RH (2009) Analysis of a large database of GCL-geomembrane interface shear strength results. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 135:209–223. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1090-0241(2009)135:2(209)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Afzali-Nejad A, Lashkari A, Shourijeh PT (2017) Influence of particle shape on the shear strength and dilation of sand-woven geotextile interfaces. Geotext Geomembr 45:54–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2016.07.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kong D-J, Wu H-N, Chai J-C, Arulrajah A (2017) State-of-the-art review of geosynthetic clay liners. Sustainability 9:2110. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9112110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Sochan A, Zieliński P, Bieganowski A (2015) Selection of shape parameters that differentiate sand grains, based on the automatic analysis of two-dimensional images. Sediment Geol 327:14–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sedgeo.2015.07.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Dove JE, Bents DD, Wang J, Gao B (2006) Particle-scale surface interactions of non-dilative interface systems. Geotext Geomembr 24:156–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2006.01.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Rowe RK, Brachman RWI, Hosney MS (2017) Insight into hydraulic conductivity testing of geosynthetic clay liners (GCLs) exhumed after 5 and 7 years in a cover. Can Geotech J 54:1118–1138. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2016-0473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Vangla P, Latha GM (2015) Influence of particle size on the friction and interfacial shear strength of sands of similar morphology. Int J Geosynth Gr Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-014-0008-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Vangla P, Gali ML (2016) Shear behavior of sand-smooth geomembrane interfaces through micro-topographical analysis. Geotext Geomembr 44:592–603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. McCartney JS, Zornberg JG, Swan R (2002) Internal and interface shear strength of geosynthetic clay liners (GCLs). Geotech Research Rep

  28. Eid HT, Stark TD (1997) Shear behavior of AN unreinforced geosynthetic clay liner. Geosynth Int 4:645–659. https://doi.org/10.1680/gein.4.01029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Suzuki M, Koyama A, Kochi Y, Urabe T (2017) Interface shear strength between geosynthetic clay liner and covering soil on the embankment of an irrigation pond and stability evaluation of its widened sections. Soils Found 57:301–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2017.03.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Seiphoori A, Laloui L, Ferrari A et al (2016) Water retention and swelling behaviour of granular bentonites for application in Geosynthetic Clay Liner (GCL) systems. Soils Found 56:449–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2016.04.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Beddoe RA, Take WA, Rowe RK (2011) Water-retention behavior of geosynthetic clay liners. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 137:1028–1038. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)gt.1943-5606.0000526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Acikel AS, Gates WP, Singh RM et al (2018) Insufficient initial hydration of GCLs from some subgrades: factors and causes. Geotext Geomembr 46:770–781. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2018.06.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Stark TD (1997) Effect of swell pressure on GCL cover stability. ASTM Spec Tech Publ 1308:30–44. https://doi.org/10.1520/stp11792s

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Wadell H (1932) Volume, shape, and roundness of rock particles. J Geol 40(5):443–451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Wadell H (1935) Volume, shape, and roundness of quartz particles. J Geol 43(3):250–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Cho G, Dodds J, Santamarina JC (2006) Particle shape effects on packing density, stiffness and strength: natural and crushed sands. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 132:591–602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Zheng J, Hryciw RD (2015) Traditional soil particle sphericity, roundness and surface roughness by computational geometry. Géotechnique 65(6):494–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Vangla P, Latha GM (2016) Effect of particle size of sand and surface asperities of reinforcement on their interface shear behaviour. Geotext Geomembr 44:254–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Pillai A, Latha GM (2022) Role of particle shape on the shear strength of sand-GCL interfaces under dry and wet conditions. Geotext Geomembr 50:252–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors thank M/s Maccaferri Environmental Solutions Pvt. Ltd. for supplying the GCLs required for the present study, free of cost. The testing facilities in the Geotechnical Engineering lab of the Indian Institute of Science used for this study were partially supported by DST-FIST and DRIP grants of the Civil Engineering Department.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, 560012, India

    Anjali G. Pillai & Madhavi Latha Gali

Authors
  1. Anjali G. Pillai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Madhavi Latha Gali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Madhavi Latha Gali.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pillai, A.G., Gali, M.L. New Perspectives on Bentonite Hydration and Shear Strength of GCL-Sand Interfaces Based on Particle Shape Characterizations. Int. J. of Geosynth. and Ground Eng. 8, 25 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-022-00366-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-022-00366-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation