Geosynthetics - October/November 2011

OCTOBER/NOVEMBER OCTO OC TOBE TO BER/ BE R NO R/ NOVE V MB VE M ER 2011 201 011 1 VOLUME VO OLU UME M 2 29 9 NU NUMB NUMBER MB BER ER 5

An inside look

Building the new New Orleans levees with geosynthetics Lining a SoCal reservoir On the Waterfront (in Toronto) SUSTAINABILITY SERIES

Geo installs reduce CO2 emissions Installing geomembranes in cold weather

Subscribe at www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com

1011GS_Cv1.indd 1

10/5/11 2:10 PM

1011GS_Cv2-p13.indd Cv2

10/5/11 2:15 PM

Services Inc.

DEM ECH

®

WELDING AND TESTING EQUIPMENT for the serious geosynthetics installer!

0WFS Units Sold!

Pro-Wedge VM-20 Wedge Welder

T-0100/A Tensiometer

Pro-Wedge 3XL Model 500-0100/3XL/A Wedge Welder

Pro-XM Model 605-0100XM/A Extrusion Welder

Services Inc.

DEM ECH BUILT BETTER! ®

Demtech’s 10,000+ sq. ft. state-of-the-art facility includes an on-site machine shop and an extensive parts warehouse for quick service on new order, equipment refurbishing, and repairs. For more information on Demtech’s offerings, visit www.demtech.com.

%&.5&$)4FSWJDFT *ODti%FNPw%BWF.D-BVSZt8&-% tEFNPEBWF!EFNUFDIDPN

1011GS_Cv2-p13.indd 1

10/5/11 2:15 PM

Water for a sustainable future

{ Environmental Passive Integrated Chamber } RESPONSIBLE WATER MANAGEMENT Our total system approach expands beyond traditional stormwater systems, which historically only store and/or treat stormwater pollutants. The Firestone Environmental Passive Integrated Chamber (EPIC Chamber™) is an onsite water management and reuse system designed to collect, filter, retain and distribute water below ground at its source. 8EEN SPACE 8 THLETIC FIELDS 8II TION 8P IOTS 8TO TEOFF

| www.firestonesp.com/ifai8 | info@firestonesp.com


10/5/11 2:15 PM

OCTOBER/NOVEMBER 2011 VOLUME 29 NUMBER 5

14 ON THE COVER This aerial photo, taken in September 2010 when construction was under way, shows the enormity of the levees in LPV 109—320–360 feet wide from toe to toe and climbing to elevations of +18 to +25 feet.

On Site

20

14 The role of geosynthetics in the new New Orleans levees By Angelle Bergeron PROJECT SHOWCASE: WATER

20 Emergency water supply: The Upper Chiquita Reservoir By Steve Roades

26 On the waterfront in Toronto By Adam Regn Arvidson SUSTAINABILITY: AN ONGOING SERIES

26

34 Reduced CO2 emissions and energy consumption with geosynthetic installations By Boyd Ramsey and Chris Eichelberger

38 Highlights from the Techline’s Q-and-A

www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com


3

10/5/11 2:15 PM

In Situ 6 Editorial Are you an innovator?

8 From Our Readers Geo-Frontiers was a geo-success!

12 On the web 61 Calendar 63 Advertiser Index

59

Final Inspection

52 Panorama Geo news and notes from around the world

55 Geosynthetic Materials Association Highlights from GMA’s Lobby Day

57 Geosynthetic Institute GSI’s 2011–2012 fellowships

59 Fabricated Geomembrane Institute Cold weather installations

64 | GeoAmericas 2012— Lima, Peru

42 | IN THE LAB European experience in pullout tests By Daniele Cazzuffi, Lidia Sarah Calvarano, Giuseppe Cardile, Nicola Moraci, and Piergiorgio Recalcati

4

COMING NEXT ISSUE The annual Specifier’s Guide from Geosynthetics magazine

Geosynthetics ISSN #0882 4983, Vol. 29, Number 5 is published bimonthly by Industrial Fabrics Association International, 1801 County Road B W, Roseville, MN 55113-4061. Periodicals Postage Paid at Minneapolis, MN and at additional mailing offices. Postmaster: send address changes to Geosynthetics, County Road B W, Roseville, MN 55113-4061. Return Undeliverable Canadian Addresses to Station A, PO Box 54, Windsor, ON N9A 6J5. Orders and changes contact: Haley Hopperstad, Circulation Promotions Specialist, Geosynthetics , 1801 County Road B W, Roseville, MN 551134061 Phone 800 225 4324 or +1 651 222 2508, fax +1 651 631 9334 e-mail: [email protected]. 1-year USA $59, Canada and Mexico $69, all other countries $99, payable in U.S. funds (includes air mail postage). Reprints: call +1 651 225 6917, mjmoore@ifai. com. Back Issues: call 800 225 4324, www.ifai.com/bookstore.

Geosynthetics | October November 2011


10/5/11 2:15 PM

TM

Whatever your geosynthetic need, Thrace-LINQ has it covered. Applications drainage erosion control filtration protection reinforcement separation

Fabric types wovens nonwovens medium strengths monofilaments

YOUR application. OUR geosynthetics. Excellent products to do the job. The service to do it right.™

At Thrace-LINQ, we believe our experience, manufacturing capacity and personal service make us the right choice for your geosynthetic needs. Call us today, or visit our online Product Finder™, to see how we’ve got the options covered.

The Foundation to Build On™ WOVENS


NONWOVENS

MEDIUM STRENGTHS

MONOFILAMENTS

www.thracelinq.com [email protected] 800.445.4675 843.873.5800

10/5/11 2:16 PM

EDITORIAL

Are you an innovator?

I Ron Bygness Editor +1 651 225 6988 [email protected]

f so, then the Industrial Fabrics Foundation (IFF) wants to hear from you—this is a call for entries. The IFF began its Innovation Award program in 2010 as a way to recognize and celebrate noteworthy achievements from the entire industrial fabrics community. Awards are intended to honor products, applications, and services that have made or will make a difference in today’s competitive marketplace. IFF entries are judged by a panel of industry experts and winners receive a $5,000 prize. Chameleon International (Oak Ridge, N.C.) was the inaugural recipient of the 2010 IFF Innovation Award for its product ChroMyx, a line of waterproof, temperature-sensitive, color-changing engineered materials: www.specialtyfabricsreview.com/articles/1110_c1_innovation_winner.html I am proud to tell you that a geosynthetics company is the winner of the 2011 IFF Innovation Award, officially announced at the IFAI Expo Americas on Oct. 25 (just after this issue of Geosynthetics went to press). For complete information about this geo company and its innovative, award-winning new product, go to the November issue of Specialty Fabrics Review: www.specialtyfabricsreview.com For consideration, IFF Award entries must have been produced since 2008 and be currently available to the market. Entries also cannot have been submitted for an award at any other show. The entry fee is $200 and the deadline for entering next year’s IFF Innovation Award is July 15, 2012. For more information and an entry form for the IFF Award: www.indfabfnd.com.

EDITORIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE* Melody A. Adams | Shaw Environmental Inc., USA Andrew Aho | GMA, USA Sam R. Allen | TRI/Environmental, USA Richard J. Bathurst | Royal Military College, Canada Malek Bouazza | Monash University, Australia Daniele A. Cazzuffi | CESI S.p.A., Italy Oscar R. Couttolenc | GMA, Mexico Ronald K. Frobel | R.K. Frobel & Associates, USA Stephan M. Gale | Gale-Tec Engineering Inc., USA Han-Yong Jeon | INHA University, Korea Robert M. Koerner | The Geosynthetic Institute, USA Robert E. Mackey | S2L Inc., USA Kent von Maubeuge | NAUE GmbH, Germany Jacek Mlynarek | SAGEOS, Canada Dhani Narejo | Caro Engineering LLC, USA Jim Olsta | CETCO, USA Ian D. Peggs | I-Corp International, USA Robert Phaneuf | N.Y. state DEC, USA Greg N. Richardson | RSG & Associates Inc., USA Marco A. Sánchez | ML Ingeniería, Mexico Mark E. Smith | RRD International Corp., USA L. David Suits | NAGS, USA Richard Thiel | Thiel Engineering, USA Gary L. Willibey | ESP/SKAPS Industries, USA Aigen Zhao | Syntec Corp., USA * Editorial Advisory Committee members write and review selected papers, case histories, and technical editorial copy in areas of expertise. Advisors do not review every submission. Statements of fact and opinion are the author’s responsibility alone, and do not imply the viewpoints of Geosynthetics, its Editorial Advisory Committee, editors, or the association. PUBLISHER

Mary Hennessy | [email protected] ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER

Susan R. Niemi | [email protected] EDITOR

Ron Bygness | [email protected] ART DIRECTOR

Cathleen Rose ASSISTANT SALES MANAGER

Elizabeth Welsh ADVERTISING SALES

Vivian Cowan, Julia Heath, Sarah Hyland, Paul Montag, Mary Mullowney, Sandy Tapp, 800 225 4324 ADVERTISING ACCOUNT COORDINATOR

Shelly Arman | [email protected] CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING SALES/AD DESIGN

>> Geosynthetics and Specialty Fabrics Review are two of the six magazines published by the Industrial Fabrics Association International (IFAI). The others are: Fabric Architecture, Fabric Graphics, InTents, and Marine Fabricator; www.ifai.com.

Elizabeth Kaestner | [email protected] CIRCULATION MANAGER

Mary Moore | [email protected] CIRCULATION PROMOTIONS SPECIALIST

Haley Hopperstad | [email protected]

INDUSTRIAL FABRICS ASSOCIATION INTERNATIONAL

1801 County Road B W. Roseville, MN 55113-4061, USA +1 651 222 2508 | 800 225 4324 (U.S. and Canada only) | Fax +1 651 631 9334 | www.ifai.com The official publication of the Geosynthetic Materials Association The official publication of the North American Geosynthetics Society

Geosynthetics is an international, bimonthly publication for civil engineers, contractors and government agencies in need of expert information on geosynthetic engineering solutions. Geosynthetics presents articles from field professionals for innovative, exemplary practice. 6

© 2011 Industrial Fabrics Association International. All rights reserved.



10/5/11 2:16 PM


10/5/11 2:16 PM

FROM OUR READERS Contact us at www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com Facilitating interaction between engineers and contractors Editor’s Note: Bob Koerner wrote about the Geosynthetics Institute’s second Inspector Certification Program in the August/September 2011 issue of Geosynthetics and he responds to this query. To read the original article, search Inspector at: www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com

Question Comment on any article in Geosynthetics at: www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com

From: Chet Soydemir To: Ron W. Bygness Subject: GSI News

OR

Dear Editor of Geosynthetics:

Send a letter to the editor at: [email protected]

I read with great interest the “GSI News” section prepared by Dr. Robert Koerner in the August/September 2011 issue of Geosynthetics (“GSI’s second Inspector Certification Program,” pp. 57–58). It is indeed illuminating that 64% of the “failure mechanisms” observed in the failed MSE walls, berms, and slopes is “water related” (i.e., “internal” and “external” water), which comprises nearly two-thirds of all “failures.” In other words, if I may suggest “failure” is associated with “inadequate drainage.” I first learned this phenomenon from Prof. Arthur Casagrande in 1958. If I may also suggest that most often the design of MSE walls, berms, and slopes is performed by the contractor’s technical staff who assumes drained conditions in the design to stay competitive. I strongly believe that drainage is more so a design issue than a construction issue, and it should be implemented by the project’s geotechnical engineer. Thus, I think that even though the planned “second GSI Inspector Certification Program” is sound and useful, the more critical issue is to facilitate the interaction between the geotechnical engineer and the contractor in every (small or big) MSE project in dealing with the drainage elements.

Chet Soydemir, Ph.D., P.E. Senior Geotechnical Consultant, Environmental Compliance Services Inc. ,Woburn, Mass. >> For more information, search GSI at: www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com

GSI responds Dr. Soydemir has written a wonderful letter that fits perfectly into our perspective of the issue. We only wish that GSI could facilitate (make that “force”) the interaction between the geotechnical design engineer and the owner/contractor/project manager. [Unfortunately], that is beyond our means and capabilities.

Comments and letters can contain opinions of individuals who are writing and do not necessarily reflect the views of Geosynthetics magazine or the Industrial Fabrics Association International. 8

What we can do (albeit, somewhat less directly) is to have qualified field inspectors who can: (1) transmit design oversights to the geotechnical design engineer and (2) to report contractors’ inadequate performances to the owner/contractor/project manager. Our hope at this point, since the program is just beginning, is to have stakeholders in the technology recommend and implement the use of these certified field inspectors of MSE walls, berms, and slopes. We encourage the readers of Geosynthetics magazine to do so and to distribute the information to others as well.

Bob and George Koerner, Geosynthetic Institute



10/5/11 2:16 PM


10/5/11 2:16 PM

FROM OUR READERS Contact us at www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com

Geo-Frontiers 2011: A Geo-Success! Editor’s Note: North American Geosynthetics Society president, Dean Sandri, originally wrote about Geo-Frontiers 2011 for IGS News. He, and IGS News, agreed to the revised printing of his commentary via this letter to the editor. To the editor: If you were there, you know it was a geo-success!

A highlight for many attending the conference was the student involvement and especially the talent exhibited by tomorrow’s engineers.

Kudos to organizers Industrial Fabrics Association International (IFAI), Geosynthetic Materials Association (GMA), Geo-Institute (G-I) of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), and the North American Geosynthetics Society (NAGS). They put together a fabulous conference—Geo-Frontiers 2011— that was enjoyed by nearly 2,000 attendees and more than 140 exhibitors. Through the course of the three days, 500 papers were delivered, six educational short courses were provided, the Mercer, Peck, Seed, and Terzaghi lectures were presented, numerous organizational, corporate, industry, and personal meetings were hosted, and several programs/receptions/gatherings/competitions were shoehorned in-between. If all of that wasn’t enough to absorb, the Geosynthetic Research Institute held GRI–24, “Optimizing Sustainability Using Geosynthetics,” which added another 20 papers and another track of activities to the week. The technical paper sessions were moderated by industry icons and covered wide-ranging geo-subjects, including various interesting aspects of expansive soil, energy foundations, earth structures, barrier materials/protection liners, pavements, railroads, embankments, geo-education, soil modeling, geotextile tubes, landslides, deep foundations, site characterization, waste, seismic hazard mitigation, tunneling, and nearly anything else imaginable having to do with geosynthetics and soil.

University of Illinois students participated in the annual GeoChallenge during GeoFrontiers last March in Dallas.

To complement the papers, a poster session was also organized, which hosted a slew of excellent offerings on all areas of the geo world. If you were there, you found a track to attend or a poster display that was loaded with lots of good information to apply directly to your area of interest! A highlight for many attending the conference was the student involvement and especially the talent exhibited by tomorrow’s engineers. The winner of the NAGS-sponsored student paper competition was Azadeh Hoor from Queen’s University for her paper, “Application of Thermal Insulation in Landfill Liners.” Ben Leshchinsky of Columbia University was first runner-up for his paper, “Enhancing Ballast Performance Using Geocell Confinement.” The winners of the GI-sponsored “Geo Challenge”— aka, see-how-little-reinforcement-can-be-usedto-build-an-MSE-wall-with-beach-sand-and-craftpaper-and-then-load-it-to-failure competition were Rensselaer Poly, followed in second place by Cal Poly–San Luis Obispo, with the University of Arkansas in third place. Rensselaer students used only 7 grams of craftpaper reinforcement to build their structure, which successfully sustained the incredible target 50lbs vertical surcharge along with a 25-lb cantilever load. It was uplifting and inspiring to

10



10/5/11 2:16 PM

witness the enthusiasm of the youth participating in the activities in Dallas! On a more serious note, Norbert Morgenstern teed up the technical week with the H. Bolton Seed Lecture, which was a practical-based presentation that related to engineering involvement in the oil sands of Alberta, Canada, titled “Risk and Reward: Geotechnical Engineering and the Alberta Oil Sands.” For those involved in subgrade structures, tunneling, and seismic aspects of geotechnical engineering, Antonio Bobet delivered his “slant” during the Monday morning Peck Lecture, titled “Seismic Design of Underground Structures: Lessons from the Failure of the Daikai Station.” On Tuesday afternoon, Kenneth Stokoe provided insight on the subject of “Seismic Measurements and Geotechnical Engineering” as he delivered the Terzaghi Lecture. Lastly, on Wednesday morning, just five days after the devastating earthquake and tsunami that occurred in Japan on Friday, March 11, Junichi Koseki from Japan delivered his Mercer Lecture, “Use of Geosynthetics to Improve Seismic Performance of Earth Structures,” to a rousing ovation. Not to be forgotten were the various sponsors for this successful conference. The sponsorships by manufacturers enabled food and drinks at reduced or no cost to the attendees, which helped to reduce out-of-pocket expenses while away from home. Food and drink at breaks, lunches in the exhibit hall, lunch at the Hero and Awards Luncheon, and hors d’oeuvres at the Welcome Reception were all top notch.

Bustling action on the exhibit hall floor during the Geo-Frontiers Welcome Reception.

Several industry organizations held their annual or biennial meetings while in Dallas. The NAGS annual meeting included announcement of its new board of directors: Dean Sandri–president, Bob Mackey–president-elect, Dave Elton–immediate past president, Corey Bobba–treasurer; and vice presidents Marolo Alfaro, Richard Brackman, Jay McKelvey, and Dhani Narejo. As with many conferences, numerous side meetings, gatherings, parties, reunions, business and personal get-togethers, and deals were planned, developed, and just plain happened!

>> For more information, search events at: www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com

For me, the week provided an opportunity to add to my technical knowledge base, see what products are being introduced and developed, catch up on where the geotechnology is heading, re-establish friendships that have been lost, visit with business colleagues to discuss the activities of the day, week, and year, jest with friendly competitors, strengthen relationships with many of the industry professionals that I only see at these conferences, and solidify the relationships with many of those I haven’t seen for years or those I just met during the week. Lastly, and not to be forgotten, the conference provided a venue to fondly remember those not fortunate enough to attend Geo-Frontiers 2011 or who have passed away after dedicating a career to geosynthetics and were truly innovators of the geo-frontier and have provided us all the opportunity to work in this exciting and dynamic industry.

Dean Sandri Anchor Wall Systems, President–North American Geosynthetics Society (NAGS) Source: IGS News, Vol. 27 #2 2011, published with permission G Photos by Mark Skalny Photography



11

10/5/11 2:16 PM

ON THE WEB

geosyntheticsmagazine.com GEO BLOG ➦GMA LOBBY DAY Read about the priorities presented by members of the Geosynthetic Materials Association (GMA) in Washington, D.C.

➦A TENNESSEE TWO-STEP GMA and Geosynthetics magazine took a quick trip to the Volunteer State for site visits and a stop at WasteCon.

SUPPORTING ROLE Geofoam plays a supporting role in academic and civic projects. SEARCH: geofoam

➦ASCE’S REPORT INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE U.S. ECONOMY ASCE releases first-ever report on how the U.S. economy and family budgets will fare if America fails to fund surface transportation improvements.

Raven opens new technology and product development center Raven Industries’ Engineered Films Division (EFD)—manufacturer of geomembrane liners and covers—opened its new Technology Solutions Center at the company’s Sioux Falls, S.D. headquarters. SEARCH: raven

NOW ONLINE! The role of webinars in geosynthetics education Webinars are becoming quite popular educational vehicles for myriad topics in geosynthetics. SEARCH: webinars

GMA unveils revamped website The Geosynthetic Materials Association (GMA) redesigned and updated its website. TAKE A LOOK AT: www.gmanow.com

12

Specifier’s Guide product-data charts

MARK YOUR CALENDAR Geosynthetics 2013 conference is set. Geosynthetics 2013—organized by IFAI—is April 1-4, 2013, in Long Beach, Calif. www.geosynthetics2013.com



10/5/11 2:16 PM

NEW

G E O C E L LS

The proven way to save time and money on construction projects. TO U G H OV E R T I M E For more than 25 years, Typar® Geotextiles have been used in paved and unpaved roads and surfaces, drainages, waste handling systems, erosion control and landfills to separate and reinforce, while filtering soil particles and letting water pass freely. Now we’ve moved into another dimension with new Typar® Geocells, a cellular confinement system excellent for sediment and erosion control, flood control and soil stabilization. All Typar Geotextiles: • Are manufactured of long-lasting, continuous filament, polypropylene nonwoven for superior uniformity. • Reduce construction time through durability and ease of installation. • Reduce maintenance costs through proven performance and toughness over time. • Offer excellent tensile strength and tear and puncture resistance. • Come in a variety of widths, lengths, weights and styles to suit your needs. Tough Over Time, Typar Geotextiles help preserve the original design and the design life of the system. Typar Geotextiles meet the requirements of AASHTO M288 specifications.

For more info, call 800-441-2760 or visit www.TyparGeotextiles.com

Typar® is a registered trademark of Fiberweb, Inc.


10/5/11 2:16 PM

This aerial photo, taken in September 2010 when construction was under way, shows the enormity of the levees in LPV 109—320–360 feet wide from toe to toe and climbing to elevations of +18 to +25 feet.

14


1011GS_p14-33.indd 14

10/5/11 2:16 PM

The role of geosynthetics in the new New Orleans levees By Angelle Bergeron

Introduction

G

eosynthetic materials are playing a critical role in providing New Orleans with its best flood protections ever. “We couldn’t have delivered this work by 2011 without geosynthetics,” said Richard Varuso, deputy chief of the geotechnical branch of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ New Orleans District (USACE/NOD). “Geosynthetics save construction time.” When Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans in August 2005, the storm surge caused widespread overtopping and some critical failures of the city’s flood protection levees. As a result, Congress authorized $14.6 billion and charged the Corps of Engineers with bringing the Greater New Orleans Hurricane and Storm Damage Risk Reduction System to 100year levels of protection by June 2011 (see HSDRRS map on page 16). New Orleans’ hurricane protections had been cobbled together ever since Hurricane Betsy battered the city in 1965. Trickles of civil works funding, subsidence, improper maintenance, politics, and even limited understanding of levee conditions resulted in New Orleans having what many have referred to as a “system” in name only.

PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS LEVEE REACH LPV 109 UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS/NEW ORLEANS DISTRICT GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN

URS Corp., San Francisco CONTRACTOR

Archer Western, Atlanta WICK DRAIN

Colbonddrain CX1000

Post-Katrina Post-Katrina forensic analysis by the Interagency Performance Evaluation Task Force (IPET) informed updated design standards. Armed with those new design standards and a fully funded program, the Corps embarked on a mission to give New Orleans its first comprehensive protection system, and one that provides greater risk reduction than ever before. The new system has bigger and more complex components, including taller, more robust earthen levees, better-designed concrete floodwalls, drainage pump stations, and huge surge barriers. To deliver the tremendous amount of improvements in the tight time frame, the Corps, and its contractors and engineering consultants, employed new designs, contracting, and updated engineering, construction methods, and materials. Geosynthetics have been used liberally throughout the 350-mile perimeter system. The Corps buried geotextile tubes in sand to harden dunes and protect coastal beaches. Geotextile fabric is woven into miles of earthen levees to increase strength. Wick drains have been installed to achieve rapid soil consolidation in foundations of structures and in earthen levees. In one project,

WICK DRAIN INSTALLATION

U.S. Wick Drain, Leland, N.C. GEOTEXTILES

WinFab 2196, Willacoochee Industrial Fabrics, Willacoochee, Ga. Comtrac 300, Huesker Inc., Germany and Charlotte, N.C. FX–1200 PET, Carthage Mills, Cincinnati GEOMEMBRANE

840–T LLDPE, Solmax International, Varennes, P.Q., Canada

Angelle Bergeron is a freelance writer based in New Orleans. Photos by Angelle Bergeron (pages 18 and 19-top) Photos courtesy of U.S. Wick Drain (page 19-middle and bottom) Images courtesy of USACE (Pages 14, 16, 17)


1011GS_p14-33.indd 15

15

10/5/11 2:16 PM

Geosynthetics in the new New Orleans levees

a dramatic combination of multiple geofabrics and wick drains were used to gain soil consolidation in just 60 days in a reach of levees that range from +18ft to +25ft in height and are 320–360ft wide.

HSDRRS Projects Utilizing Geotextile Reinforcement for Levees

The Corps and geosynthetics It’s not as if the Corps had never used geosynthetic materials before. “The first use of woven fabric as embankment reinforcement was 1975,” said Brian Baillie, an engineering manager for Huesker Inc.’s U.S. division. Since that time, the Corps has routinely used geosynthetics for “internal stabilization to help with failure planes and uniform settlement,” he said. The Corps’ New Orleans District has been using geosynthetic materials to build earthen levees since the 1980s, said Walter Baumy, chief of the USACE/ NOD engineering division. “We use geos

to add tensile capacity to weak planes in soft soils. Using geos can mean a smaller footprint for the levee. That means less impact to infrastructure, less environmental impact, ability to work within existing rights of way, and less quantity of material. That results in substantial cost and time savings. That also means we can start construction sooner because it impacts surroundings less. Environmentals go quicker and less borrow material is needed to actually build that levee.” Within the 350 miles of enhanced or newly constructed levees, “There are more jobs with geos than without,” Baumy said. Prior to Katrina, geotextile fabrics were routinely considered for large levees, Varuso said. “If that levee was so big that there would be too much environmental impact, or right-of-way problems, then we would look at the use of geo.” That process has not changed since Katrina, Varuso added: “The difference,

The new New Orleans levee system

EGIS Map ID No. 11-004a

16


1011GS_p14-33.indd 16

10/5/11 2:16 PM

after Katrina, is that the levees we are building are so much higher. Now that I’m going 20ft or more tall, and the footprints are getting so big, we are getting a larger benefit using geos.”

LPV 109 A 7.54-mile reach of levee in eastern New Orleans, known as LPV 109, includes probably the most fascinating concentration of geosynthetics—9 million linear feet of wick drains and 1 million yards of geotextiles—of any project in the system. Geotechnical design engineers from San Francisco-based URS Corp. designed the layers of rock, sand blankets, geotextiles, and wick drains that evacuated moisture and helped the earthen levee gain strength and achieve desired consolidation within an unprecedented 45-60 days. “We were able to get 2,000 pounds-per-inch strength from those fabrics,” Varuso said. The levee was built with a base of geotextile separator fabric, topped with a +2ft to +3ft elevation sand blanket. Wick drains—more accurately known as prefabricated vertical drains (PVD)— were installed next, then more separation fabric, an 8in.-thick layer of gravel, more separation fabric, and clay. U.S. Wick Drain of Leland, N.C., used five stitchers—wick drain installing rigs— to punch almost 300,000 holes for the 9 million feet of PVD, said Mark Palmatier, owner and president. “Usually, machines can get about 20,000ft in a 12-hour day, but we had production days where we put in 100,000ft per day,” Palmatier said. “We were averaging about 80,000ft per day, with 65,000 being probably our lowest day.” The specialty contractor began May 2010 and finished in October 2010. At the time, LPV 109 was the largest project for square footage and amount of wick holes ever done on a job in America, Palmatier said. (Now U.S. Wick Drain has moved on to an even larger job in Virginia. http://geosyntheticsmagazine.

This cross section shows the complicated, overlapping layers of fabrics, sand, rock and earthen material, interspersed with wick drains—all the components that went into the building of levee LPV 109.

com/articles/062411_wick_drains.html.) Palmatier said that success on the $2.5 million New Orleans levee project put the company in position to pursue the $6 million Virginia job.

Three geotextiles LPV 109 also called for three different types of geotextiles, said Andres Ramos, Archer Western’s assistant project manager. The separator geotextile that was placed right on top of the stone layer is a high-strength, woven polyester fabric that Ramos described as “like a filter fabric, maybe a little sturdier.” The contractor placed nearly 1.5 million yds² of this material, which was sold in 300ft-long bolts, 12ft wide. The rolls of separator fabric were light enough that two men could manage them. Contractor Archer Western also used a thicker, high-strength, woven, polyester fabric made in Germany. “We placed that right on top of the stone, along the centerline of the levee,” Ramos said. “We used 231,341 square yards. The bolts were 16 feet by 328 feet.” A third geotextile, also a woven polyester, was placed at elevation +7ft. This geofabric also came in bolts of 16ft × 328ft and Archer Western used 315,303 square yards of it.

How do wick drains work? See sidebar on page 28.


1011GS_p14-33.indd 17

17

10/5/11 2:16 PM

Geosynthetics in the new New Orleans levees

TOP: Contractor Archer Western attached a spreader bar to a skid steer to roll out the geotextile separator fabric for the base of the levee. MIDDLE: Once the separator fabric was in place, it was topped with a +2- to +3-ft elevation sand blanket. BOTTOM: The pieces of separator fabric were overlapped and stitched together like a huge quilt, then topped with sand.

18

For the heavier fabrics, design specs called for placement of 16ft × 80ft panels. “It was really difficult to cut, so we went through a lot of razor blades,” Ramos said. Because these rolls weighed about 600lbs apiece, the contractor attached a spreader bar to a skid steer to place the fabric. “We would slide the bar down the core of it, pick it up, and two guys would hold one end while the skid steer would back up,” he said. But a standard roll core is thick cardboard. “When you try to lift it up with a fork lift, it breaks, and trying to insert a spreader bar is nearly impossible,” Ramos said. “If I had to do it over again, I would order an upgraded core of PVC or steel. The cardboard cores appear to save money up front, but it [can] slow you down.”

Use of geosynthetics URS had anticipated achieving soil consolidation and strength gain in 60-90 days. But by June 2011, instrumentation readings indicated the requisite 3-4ft of settlement was achieved in only 45-60 days. “We expect to get another 1 to 1.5ft of settlement in the next nine years, which means we’ll still have the required flood protection height in 10 years,” said John Volk, URS’ lead geotechnical engineer for LPV 109. Other than the huge amount of wick drain, no single element of the LPV 109 project was far afield from anything geosynthetics have proven to accomplish in many other projects throughout New Orleans and elsewhere. “They used a combination of well-known technologies to accomplish the goal,” said Baillie, the Huesker engineering manager. However, the project did call attention to the benefits of geosynthetics in embankment structures. Additionally, projects in New Orleans demonstrated to the Corps the increased capabilities and strengths of geosynthetics. “These high-strength geosynthetics weren’t around in the ’60s (when the


1011GS_p14-33.indd 18

10/5/11 2:17 PM

original hurricane system was being constructed),” Baillie said. “They didn’t gain popularity until the ’70s or ’80s, and those were typically lightweight, nonwoven materials. And today, due to research and development, there is more design guidance available to engineers who want to include these materials.” USACE’s Varuso agrees that the material of yesteryear could not deliver the 2,000 pounds-per-inch strength that was achieved at LPV 109. “Manufacturing of these products is becoming state of the art and they are advancing the technology almost on a monthly basis,” he said. “Geos are becoming more popular and better understood in the geotech community.” Further, at about $3,700 per linear foot, the cost of delivering LPV 109 with fabrics and wick drains was considerably less than other processes used to build huge levees in New Orleans fast, such as deep soil mixing ($12,000) and concrete T-walls ($10,000–$15,000), Volk said. Geosynthetics are being considered as the Corps explores options to raise a 32-mile stretch of non-federal levees in New Orleans’ Plaquemines Parish. “We are trying to make sure Plaquemines is getting the biggest bang for their buck, so we are going to implement as many techniques as possible,” Varuso said. Other Corps districts from across the country have visited New Orleans to see the materials and methods deployed there during the past five years, Baumy said. “We’ve learned a lot over the years. Designs and specifications have improved. Using materials like [geosynthetics] is becoming common knowledge.” Applying that knowledge moving forward will help the Corps and the geosynthetics industry reduce risk for the people of New Orleans and elsewhere around the world. G

Five stitchers were used to punch in nearly 300,000 prefabricated vertical (“wick”) drain holes, installing a total of 9 million linear feet of drain.


1011GS_p14-33.indd 19

19

10/5/11 2:17 PM

PROJECT SHOWCASE

Emergency water supply: The Upper Chiquita Reservoir By Steve Roades

Introduction

T

>> For more, search reservoir at www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com

20

he recently completed Upper Chiquita Reservoir in Southern California was built to provide the region with substantial new water reserves to meet customer demand during disruptions of water deliveries. These interruptions can be unanticipated—for example, the 1999 break in a primary supply pipeline—or planned, such as a shutdown of the filtration plant in Yorba Linda. One of the hallmarks of the Upper Chiquita Reservoir’s design is its depth—almost 160ft. It is one of the deepest reservoirs in the United States. The site’s steep slopes angle about 150ft to an 8ft-wide bench, then taper another 150ft down to what is actually a small floor. This diamond-shaped footprint is set into the western slope of California’s Chiquita Canyon near Rancho Santa Margarita in southeastern Orange County. The terrain has created a natural seat for a reservoir. Furthermore, the geology of the location is stable and in excellent proximity to regional pipelines. For the Santa Margarita Water District (SMWD), Chiquita Canyon proved to be an ideal location for the district’s newest reservoir, which is focused on emergency supply. It is the first large-scale emergency potable water reservoir approved and constructed in many decades in this part of the country. The reservoir’s goal is to provide more than 240 million gallons (750 acre-feet) to serve approximately 170,000 families at 200gal/day for a week. While the district deemed this particular site to be the safest


1011GS_p14-33.indd 20

10/5/11 2:17 PM

Construction of the Upper Chiquita Reservoir (UCR) concluded this year, about two and a half years after the groundbreaking in June 2009. This panoramic photo of the UCR project in progress last summer looks north toward the Saddleback Mountains. This view of the reservoir also shows the actual cut of the reservoir from end to end.

PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS UPPER CHIQUITA RESERVOIR ORANGE COUNTY, CALIF. OWNER

Five regional partnerships, with the Santa Margarita Water District (SMWD) as lead agency

and most viable, true site security and conservation would come only through the use of a geosynthetic base and floating cover barrier system. Site security and water conservation were critical to project approval. To maximize performance, a geomembrane base liner and floating cover were designed into the facility with an emphasis on longevity placed on the cover membrane. The Upper Chiquita Reservoir is a key infrastructure piece of California’s Orange County, the third most-populous county in the state. Despite the reservoir’s relatively small floor, with its steep slopes and 17.8-acre surface, it is not a small project in either capacity or need. The funnel shape of the reservoir has been described as a huge martini glass. The bottom foot of the reservoir holds 150,000 gallons of water. The top foot—160 feet from the bottom—holds 5 million gallons.

RESERVOIR COVER

CSPE geomembrane, Burke Industries’ Environmental Products Division GEOMEMBRANE FLOATING COVER

900,000ft² of 60-mil CSPE BASE GEOMEMBRANE LINER

60-mil reinforced polypropylene, Carlisle Geomembranes INSTALLATION

Layfield Environmental Systems Corp. WELDING EQUIPMENT

Demtech Services Inc.

The design, in-depth A major pipeline break in 1999 may be what ultimately led to this project’s development. That break caused a disruption of potable water supply in the SMWD and highlighted the need for an alternative point of support. More than 18 acres of liner were installed to provide the essential containment and cover security. For the slope and base liner, the project team used a 60-mil polypropylene geomembrane. Polypropylene geomembranes have shown good longevity as reservoir liners, particularly when covered. Protected in the Upper Chiquita design by the floating cover, the polypropylene liner’s service life is extended by the absence of UV degradation.

GEOCOMPOSITE DRAINAGE AND VENTING

TenDrain-II 970-2, SynTec TOTAL COST

$53 million Steve Roades is a vice president at Burke Industries Inc. in San Jose, Calif.; [email protected] Photos courtesy of SMWD (pages 20-22) Photos courtesy of Layfield Environmental Systems Corp. (pages 23-24)


1011GS_p14-33.indd 21

21

10/5/11 2:17 PM

PROJECT SHOWCASE | The Upper Chiquita Reservoir

The floating cover is a 60-mil, three-ply CSPE geomembrane (two-ply rubber with a 10 × 10 scrim reinforcement) that capitalizes on the long-life performance and protection record of this geomembrane in exposed installations. The cover alone uses more than 900,000sf of geomembrane. The lining materials were manufactured in a site-requested custom color (“pebble tan”), a color originally developed for an irrigation reservoir for the world-renowned Pebble Beach-area golf courses on the Monterey Peninsula in Northern California.

A CSPE (née Hypalon®) primer Chlorosulfonated polyethylene (CSPE) geomembranes have a history of providing long-term performance in exposed environments. These geosynthetic barriers are increasingly referred to generically as CSM, but many people still refer to them by the no-longer-produced Hypalon elastomer brand name. DuPont, which had manufactured the Hypalon elastomer formerly used in the lion’s share of CSPE geomembrane production, chose to exit the market in 2009–2010. That departure put a strain on the supply of this elastomer across many industries. Japan-based Tosoh became a critical supplier for this essential component that has defined the longevity and success of CSPE/CSM geomembranes in reservoir design, floating covers, aquaculture, mine tailings containment, and many other applications.

Installation A key to the project’s economics: both the polypropylene base liner and CSPE floating cover were prefabricated into wide rolls at a controlled facility prior to site delivery. In this instance, the geomembrane was manufactured in 750 lineal-ft rolls and in widths of approximately 5ft. So in the prefabrication facility, seven rolls were joined. Once delivered to the site, these larger panels were unrolled into place and welded together. The base liner and cover were both prefabricated into approximately 35ftwide rolls. In addition to the geomembrane barrier layer, a tri-planar geocomposite for drainage and venting control was installed. Piezometers were installed for continuous monitoring of subsoil moisture content and integrity.

Coming online The Upper Chiquita Reservoir construction proceeded through several significant weather delays. The installer even pulled off the site for two months while the earthworks contractor repaired damage to access roads caused by the unseasonably heavy precipitation. That erosion may have best underscored why the geosynthetic lining system was the right choice for the reservoir facility: to maximize protection of the soil integrity and strength within and around the site.

In fact, the Upper Chiquita Reservoir design originally specified CSPE for both liner and cover. But with the project breaking ground in 2009, just at the onset of the supply crunch for CSPE, the project team opted to focus on the cover’s longevity as a protection and life extension aid for the liner. Hence, polypropylene became the polymer for the geomembrane liner while the large cover was fabricated from CSPE geomembrane. -S.R.-

The site’s steep slopes angle about 150ft to an 8ft-wide bench, then taper another 150ft down to what is actually a small floor. 22


1011GS_p14-33.indd 22

10/5/11 2:17 PM

One of the hallmarks of the Upper Chiquita Reservoir’s design is its depth—almost 160ft. It is one of the deepest reservoirs in the U.S.


1011GS_p14-33.indd 23

23

10/5/11 2:17 PM

PROJECT SHOWCASE | The Upper Chiquita Reservoir

The designers also took care to disguise the reservoir in the hill, and the custom pebble-tan colored geomembrane cover has also helped considerably in this regard.

Some local residents expressed concern with the reservoir’s siting from an aesthetics standpoint. They feared the reservoir, when covered, would be an eyesore. But the unique shape of the canyon footprint largely resolved those concerns. At an elevation of 865ft at its highest point, the reservoir is mostly hidden from nearby roadway and subdivision views. (Pump station walls may be visible from some angles.) The designers also took care to disguise the reservoir in the hill, and the custom pebble-tan colored geomembrane cover has also helped considerably in this regard. More than 1.6 million cubic yards of earth was moved at the Upper Chiquita site. General site construction concluded in November 2010, and liner and cover work was completed during the first half of 2011. Full service for this reservoir is scheduled for fourth quarter 2011. The $53 million project was facilitated through a partnership among the SMWD and four other south Orange County water agencies, each contributing a percentage of the cost per water amounts reserved. Revegetation for the surrounding environment, including the planting of coastal sage scrub and native grasses, will commence before the end of 2011. It will be conducted in coordination with the California Department of Fish & Game and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. G

Despite the reservoir’s relatively small floor, its steep slopes climb to a 17.8-acre surface.

24


1011GS_p14-33.indd 24

10/5/11 2:17 PM

1011GS_p14-33.indd 25

10/5/11 2:17 PM

The West Don Lands is one part of a waterfront renaissance in Canada’s largest city.

26


1011GS_p14-33.indd 26

10/5/11 2:17 PM

PROJECT SHOWCASE

On the waterfront A plan to rework the Don River Park near downtown Toronto uses geotextilewrapped wick drains to remediate soil and drainage problems By Adam Regn Arvidson

A

new neighborhood is growing on 80 acres (32 hectares) of former industrial land near downtown Toronto. Called the West Don Lands, it will be home to 6,000 housing units, office and retail buildings, and 23 acres (9.3 hectares) of parks and public spaces. This development is all possible through the use of a geotextile fabric application. Named for the Little Don River that flanks the site, the West Don Lands is one part of a waterfront renaissance in Canada’s largest city. Waterfront Toronto, a quasi-public agency funded by three levels of government, but functioning as both a private developer and a parks agency all in one, is in the midst of transforming more than five miles of underappreciated Lake Ontario shoreline into a water-centered swath of parkways, boardwalks, parks, beaches, offices, and high-density residential buildings. The area is already known for its WaveDecks—funky, undulating wooden plazas that reach out over the water—and its two beaches: sandy, umbrella-shaded oases near the heart of downtown. The West Don Lands, slightly inland from the lakefront, previously was home to three of the worst-of-theworst in terms of soil contamination: tanneries, a PCB storage facility, and underground fuel tanks. And to make matters even more difficult, all those industrial uses had been built on land that used to be Don River floodplain. This was a zone of soppy soil, historically inundated when the river backed up across the land before flowing into Lake Ontario just a short distance downstream. Remediation of the site, therefore, called for some wellplanned and well-designed solutions. That remediation was led by Infrastructure Ontario (IO), an arm of the provincial government. IO’s senior program manager Serge Chukseev describes the old river dirt as “pockets of unstable soils, like sponges in the

PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS CLIENT

Waterfront Toronto LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT

Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates MAJOR LAND SHAPING

AECOM DESIGN AND CONSULTING

CH2M HILL GEOTEXTILES

Geotextile filter fabrics in combination with prefabricated vertical drains (“wick drains”)

Adam Regn Arvidson, F.ASLA, is a Minneapolisbased landscape architect specializing in sustainable designs. He is a frequent contributor to Fabric Architecture, one of six magazines published by the Industrial Fabrics Association International (IFAI). Ron Bygness, editor of Geosynthetics, also contributed to this article. Photos courtesy Waterfront Toronto


1011GS_p14-33.indd 27

27

10/5/11 2:17 PM

PROJECT SHOWCASE | On the waterfront

ground.” These pockets were scattered throughout the site and lay anywhere from 3.7m–18m (12–59ft) deep, an indication of the historic dynamism of the Don River system. That soil required dewatering and consolidation before anything could be built, or the new neighborhood would literally slump downward here and there. IO hired engineering firm AECOM in 2005 to design the major streets for the new neighborhood and to develop a “flood protection landform” (FPL) that would protect the site—as well as much of Toronto’s financial district just to the west—from the Don’s rising waters. The remediation program was designed and managed by global multi-disciplinary consulting firm CH2M HILL. Once Waterfront Toronto became involved as the site’s primary developer, that agency hired landscape architecture firm Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates (MVVA) to design the 18-acre (7.2-hectare) Don River Park, which should be completed next year, situated atop the FPL between the neighborhood and the river. It is IO’s and CH2M HILL’s remediation work that features the geofabrics. The team assessed the site for soil contamination and removed pockets that exceeded standards for redevelopment. Then the entire site was capped with 5ft (1.5m) of clean fill. This is a typical remediation effort for chemically contaminated soils. To address the pockets of compressible muck, however, the team needed geotechnical soil consolidation. It installed a system of wick drains to help accomplish this objective. The wick drains are soft, perforated, filter geotextilewrapped plastic pipes, which were drilled down into the

A field of “wicks” is the result of installing 27,000 geotextilewrapped prefabricated vertical drains (wick drains) that help to consolidate the soil, preparing this area for the West Don Lands development.

How do wick drains work? The term wick drain is a misnomer because these clever devices do not actually wick away water. Wick drains, perhaps more accurately called strip or prefabricated vertical drains (PVDs), accelerate preconstruction soil consolidation. The drains are composed of a plastic strip with drainage channels, wrapped in a nonwoven geotextile filter fabric (see photo, left). The geotextile filter prevents soil particles from entering the channels and clogging the drain. The installation of the drains—often, but not always, vertically—into soft soils is performed using vibratory hammers or static methods, and the wick drain layout is typically a triangular or square pattern. Once installed, the PVD field looks like a series of wicks (see photos on pages 19 and 30). The time required for consolidation depends on the permeability of the soft strata, sand layers in the strata, the weight of the surcharge, and the spacing of the wicks. The drains shorten the pore water drainage path, thereby permitting the soil consolidation to occur, typically in weeks instead of years. -RB-

28


1011GS_p14-33.indd 28

10/5/11 2:17 PM

New Production plant for Geomembranes in Middle East.

www.atarfil.com 1011GS_p14-33.indd 29

10/5/11 2:17 PM

PROJECT SHOWCASE | On the waterfront

Pre-construction soil consolidation was accomplished through the installation of prefabricated vertical (“wick”) drains.

30

pockets of soppy soil. The plastic pipes are not unlike those used for underdrains in landscape installations, but they are softer, so they compress nearly flat rather than stay rigid and round. They are installed vertically into the ground. Once in place, the 27,000 wicks broke the surface of the site like the stubble of a man’s five-o’clockshadow (see photos, above and on page 19). Then IO placed a layer of sand to bury the tops of the wicks, followed by a layer of soil to the elevation needed for flood control—about 4m (13ft) higher than existing grade. Then portions of the site got another layer of soil—a surcharge as much as 7m (23ft) thick—dirt placed there for its weight. The surcharge and FPL soils press down on the underground pockets of old marsh. “It’s like taking the sponge and squeezing out the water,” said Chukseev. To continue the analogy, the water is squeezed out through 27,000 straws (the wicks) and is naturally forced into the sand layer, where it can dissipate into the surrounding soil. That process took place rather quickly—about eight weeks in 2008—and it made the subterranean soils dry and receptive for development. Today the wicks are completely buried by the FPL and surcharge soils. The surcharge is still there too. “Instead of removing those 5.5–7m (18–23ft) of materials, we re-graded that into the park,” explained Chukseev, a landscape architect by training. AECOM worked with park designers at MVVA to sculpt the land, then MVVA designed the park on top. Through the innovative use of textile-clad perforated pipe, the swampiest portion of this former industrial site will be home to play areas and trails serving residents in Toronto’s newest urban neighborhood. G


1011GS_p14-33.indd 30

10/5/11 2:17 PM

WE DON’T JUST GET BY ON OUR GOOD LOOKS ALONE (IT’S WHAT’S UNDERNEATH THAT COUNTS).

FOR UNSURPASSED STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY, YOU’LL FIND THE STRENGTH AND EXPERIENCE OF TENSAR® GEOGRIDS BEHIND EACH OF OUR GRADE SEPARATION SYSTEMS. Strength, beauty and proven performance. It’s an ideal combination, and one you’ll get only with Tensar International’s full line of grade separation solutions. We have the engineered system that’s right for any size project in any industry sector. Innovative, versatile, single-source systems that are costeffective and easy to install.

Tensar Uniaxial Geogrid

SierraScape® Connection

SIERRASCAPE® CONNECTION ROD

For more information on how we can save you time and money, call 888-828-5007 or visit www.tensarcorp.com/Integrity_GEO.

©2011, Tensar International Corporation. ARES, MESA, SIERRA and SIERRASCAPE are registered trademarks.

1011GS_p14-33.indd 31

FP-GSSGEO4C11

10/5/11 2:17 PM

The new Mirafi RS580i ... ®

It’s like comparing apples to oranges for Roadway R Modulus. Separation. Confinement. Water flow. Product identification. Superior integration*.

Mirafi® RS580i... the integrated difference.

Protective & Outdoor Fabrics Aerospace Composites Armour Composites 1011GS_p14-33.indd 32

Geosynthetics Industrial Fabrics Synthetic Grass

Integration refers to the overall set of described characteristics based on a review of technical specifications for comparable products published by their respective manufacturers. Individual characteristics of these products vary and may meet, exceed, or fall below one or more of the above described individual characteristics. 10/5/11 2:17 PM

y Reinforcement.

Orange wins. Mirafi® RS580i is the superior geosynthetic product for base reinforcement and subgrade stabilization. Our game changing new high-strength woven multi-layered geotextile product provides excellent reinforcement strength and base course confinement integrated with high water flow and soil retention capabilities.

Welcome to the new world of Mirafi® RS580i. For roads, railways, airport runways, haul roads and embankments, Mirafi® RS580i will be the engineer’s choice... period. All others are just...well...apples.

We will leave you seeing orange.

For a demonstration of this product, visit www.mirafi.com patent pending

*

1.800.685.9990 | mirafi.com

When compared to the leading subgrade stabilization geosynthetics: holds 2x more force with less overall system movement | lower ultimate elongation | 3x water flow | higher particle retention 1011GS_p14-33.indd 33

10/5/11 2:17 PM

Reduced CO2 emissions and energy consumption with geosynthetic installations By Boyd J. Ramsey and Chris Eichelberger

Abstract

I

The articles in this series encompass all types of geosynthetics and their applications viewed from the context of sustainability. Traditional solutions are compared with geosynthetic solutions from both cost and carbon footprint perspectives. From the Geosynthetics Research Institute’s 24th conference, 2011

n April 2010, GSE released a technical note titled “Geosynthetics lower CO2 emissions and energy consumption vs. traditional soils-based construction techniques.” This document compared the environmental impact and energy consumption of a hypothetical geosynthetic installation with that of an installation using traditional soil (clay and stone) design and construction techniques. This analysis contained many assumptions that have already been improved upon with time. The other presenters and papers in this conference have completed a more detailed and exacting analysis for similar situations and topics. While we were satisfied with the original analysis and stand by the conclusions stated therein, we wanted to improve the detail and accuracy of the analysis, particularly in the area of the energy consumption and CO2 emission related to the construction and installation process of the geosynthetic layers. We believe that our industry should have as thorough knowledge as possible of the installation portion of the topic that is directly related to geosynthetic materials. The data and information presented in this paper is a summary of the energy (fuel) consumption and the resulting CO2 emissions for a geosynthetic installation in northeastern Texas. The site is a liquid impoundment with a footprint of approximately 15,000m2 (~3.8 acres) and a maximum depth of 13m (~45ft). The installation includes a geosynthetic leak detection layer and a geomembrane barrier. A summary of the machinery used, fuel consumption, and the resulting CO2 emissions levels are included.

Background

Boyd Ramsey is chief engineer at GSE Lining Technology LLC in Houston. He is chairman of the Geosynthetic Materials Association’s executive council. Chris Eichelberger is director of business development with American Environmental Group Ltd. in Richfield, Ohio. 34

This installation is the re-lining of a site that previously had a geomembrane barrier. The existing geomembrane barrier was aging and it was decided to install a new geosynthetic system over the existing geomembrane barrier which was not removed. Figure 1 illustrates the cross section of the new double geomembrane lined systems (with intermediate geonet) placed immediately over the existing geomembrane. Table 1 presents a summary of the equipment used on-site and the daily fuel consumption. Two key factors were identified that would have a significant impact of fuel usage. Most important is the location of the material staging area relative to the site. Transportation of roll goods at this point is one or two rolls at a time and is usually done with a front-end loader or other relatively low-mileage equipment. At locations where the distance between the staging area and the deployment site is large—distances of a mile or more are not uncommon—this can cause a significant increase in fuel consumption. Also, at more remote sites, available lodging


1011GS_p34-51.indd 34

10/5/11 2:18 PM

FIGURE 1 Cross section of installed system over existing geomembrane

TABLE 1—Equipment and fuel consumption list

EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION

DAILY FUEL CONSUMPTION IN LITERS/DAY GALLONS/DAY

Ford F-350 diesel pickup truck

40 liters (10 gallons)

Ford F-350 diesel pickup truck


Ford E-350 diesel passenger van


Bobcat T250 compact track loader


John Deere 544J front-end loader


John Deere 200CLC hydraulic excavator


Kubota GL-7000 diesel generator (4)

17 liters (4.5 gallons) each × 4

Kubota GL-6500S diesel generator

17 liters (4.5 gallons)

Fuel consumption listed is for a full day of operations (equipment 100% utilized, approximately a 10-hour working day)


1011GS_p34-51.indd 35

35

10/5/11 2:18 PM

SUSTAINABILITY | Reduced CO2 emissions and energy consumption

for the installation crews can be located 80km (~50 miles) or more from the site, resulting in long daily commutes. That said, neither of these latter situations occurred at this site. This equipment was used by a crew of 10 installation workers with one supervisor. Installation began in late November and concluded just prior to Christmas. The team was on site for 22 days. The total installed area (all layers) was ~46,000 square meters (~11.4 acres). This fairly slow installation pace was the result of several unique installation details: (i) the installation of two drainage (leak-detection) channels running the length of the site; and (ii) the adjoining sumps and the installation crew being responsible for all aspects of the anchor trench surrounding the peak of the slopes. This time duration also includes full leak-detection surveys of both the secondary and primary geomembrane layers. During this installation process, fuel usage was a total of 3,255 liters (860 gallons). This results in CO2 emissions of 8,560 kg. The fuel usage compares to an estimate of 190 liters (50 gallons)/acre fuel consumption that was used in the initial calculations for the technical note mentioned above. With an installed area of ~46,000m2 (~11.4 acres), using the estimates made in the technical note, the expected fuel usage was ~2,160 liters of fuel (570 gallons).

Conclusions Actual fuel usage (and resulting CO2 emissions) for the installation portion of this “real world” project was 50% higher than predicted in the original estimation.

Carlisle SynTec offers: • GeoEPDM • GeoTPO • Polypropylene The right geomembrane for every type of application.

For more information on Carlisle’s GeoMembranes visit www.carlislegeomembrane.com

CARLISLE GEOMEMBRANES FOR AMERICA AND THE WORLD 800-479-6832 • P.O. Box 7000 • Carlisle, PA 17013 • Fax: 717-245-7053 • www.carlislegeomembrane.com Carlisle is a trademark of Carlisle. © 2011 Carlisle.

36


1011GS_p34-51.indd 36

10/5/11 2:18 PM

Based on this analysis, we would propose a figure of 300 liters (80 gallons) of fuel consumed per acre of geosynthetic installed. However, the contribution of the geosynthetic installation was estimated to be less than 2% of the total energy consumption and CO2 emissions for the entire project. Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge Earl Morris, Jon Edens, and Ron Zunker of American Environmental Group Ltd. (AEG) for their contributions and assistance.

Bibliography 1. Davis, Stacy C. et al. Transportation Energy Data Book (Edition 28 of ORNL-5198), U.S. Department of Energy, 2009 (Current Edition #30 available at: http://cta.ornl.gov/data/index.shtml). 2. Goleman, Daniel. “Ecological Intelligence: How knowing the hidden impacts of what we buy can change everything,” New York: Broadway Books, 2009. 3. Hammond, Geoff and Jones, Craig. “Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE)” N.p., April 2, 2010, (www.bath.ac.uk/mech-eng/sert/embodied/). 4. Heerten, Georg. “Reduction of Climate-Damaging Gases in Geotechnical Engineering by Use of Geosynthetics,” The International Symposium on Geotechnical Engineering, Ground Improvement, and Geosynthetics for Sustainable Mitigation and Adaptation to Climate Change including Global Warming, (2009), (www.naue.com/content-Ma/admin/img/pool/20100112103548.pdf ). 5. “Calculation Tools,” The Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative April 6, 2010, (www.ghgprotocol.org/calculation-tools). 6. “Forschungsstelle für Energiewirtschaft E.V.” Research Centre for Energy Economics. April 5, 2010, (www.ffe.de). 7. “Sustainable engineering.com”.,Stagnito Media. March 22, 2010, (www.sustainableengineering.com). G


1011GS_p34-51.indd 37

37

10/5/11 2:18 PM

Questions and Answers from the GMA Techline

Seam strength? Geotextile weight? Backfill?

—the Techline answers all To: GMA Techline RE: Liner questions I am designing a surface impoundment with interior side slopes of 1.5H:1V. This impoundment requires (per regulations) a geosynthetic clay liner (Bentomat DN or equivalent), 40-mil HDPE secondary liner, and 60-mil HDPE primary liner. A leak-detection system has been requested.

TECHLINE The Geosynthetic Materials Association (GMA) offers the GMA Techline, a resource for technical questions about geosynthetics. E-mail: [email protected] for fast, free, direct answers to your technical questions. GMA serves as the central resource for information regarding geosynthetics and provides a forum for consistent and accurate information to increase the acceptance, and to promote the correct use, of geosynthetics. >> For more, search techline at www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com

The pit is small (approximately 500ft × 200ft) without much travel distance for fluids should a leak occur. To avoid too many liners on a steep slope, I would like to use two textured HDPE liners as both the primary and the secondary without adding a fourth layer in for the leak-detection system. I have the following questions: • Is there information available about the transmissivity of two textured HDPE liners? Does it matter if it is blown or structured texture? • What is a typical range for an interface friction angle between two textured HDPE liners? • Any information or references would be appreciated. Melissa | Missouri

Melissa, Tough questions … 34 degrees is at, or slightly higher than, the best of geosynthetic interfaces (e.g., nonwoven to textured, internal to GCLs, etc.). So you are flirting with disaster to begin with. It is much worse with a GM-to-GM even when they are textured. In fact, even more so, since the shear plane must ride up on the asperities. What remaining transmissivity there is depends on the normal pressure applied. Clearly ASTM D4716 is the appropriate test to use and will also allow one to get a glimpse of how the asperities behave. Lastly, it very much depends on how the texturing has been manufactured. I suspect that blown film will indeed be different from structured with regard to shear strength and transmissivity. Melissa, you need to do some lab testing to quantify my commentary … Bob Koerner GMA Techline 38


1011GS_p34-51.indd 38

10/5/11 2:18 PM

To: GMA Techline RE: GCLs

To: GMA Techline RE: Leak location

I need some assistance in comparing two geosynthetic clay liners for a project where the specification gives a total bentonite mass required of 4500g/m² and a target hydraulic conductivity of < 5 x 10-11.

I have been reading though the GSI White Paper #8 regarding the CQA method.

We have an option of a liner that far exceeds the requirement of the hydraulic conductivity, with a slightly lower bentonite mass. Are there studies available showing the advantage of extra bentonite other than achieving the hydraulic conductivity, such as the bentonite’s performance as an attenuation layer?

I am designing a reservoir that will be around 50ft deep and has many 2:1 sideslopes (uncovered 60-mil HDPE liner) that I would also need to test for leakage. It doesn’t seem that the ELLS water-puddle technique could be used on sideslopes. How are sideslopes to be tested?

Kind Regards,

Also, I am not quite understanding the electrical part of the water-puddle technique. Can you help me connect the dots on that issue?

Michael | New Zealand

Rob | California

Michael,

Rob,

Good question and let me address the bentonite mass from a historical perspective.

The sideslopes are usually surveyed using a spray of water placed immediately before the electrode does its monitoring. ASTM is set up nicely in this regard with five or six methods, one of the being the water-spray method specifically for sideslopes.

The industry did, indeed, start at 4500g/m² but the focus shifted to hydraulic conductivity shortly thereafter. It was found that 4000 and then 3700g/m² was adequate from this perspective. Thus, current specifications, such as GRI-GCL3 (see www. geosynthetic-institute.org under Specifications) call for a minimum mass of 3700g/m². I have not had push-back from specifiers for using this value in years. That said, your value of hydraulic conductivity is right on … Bob Koerner GMA Techline

Regarding the circuitry, it is rather straightforward and the ASTM methods are quite descriptive in this regard. Please be aware that there are certified companies that provide such services … Bob Koerner P.S. I hope that you are using textured sheet. GMA Techline

Thanks for the answers. And yes, we are using a textured sheet. Rob


1011GS_p34-51.indd 39

39

10/5/11 2:18 PM

Questions and Answers from the GMA Techline

To: GMA Techline RE: Pond liner

To: GMA Techline RE: Draping and spraying

We have some air pockets under the geomembrane as the pond fills with water. Rather than try to cut and patch the flexible membrane liner (FML), would it not be easier to simply leave the anchor trench unfilled in those areas to “burp” the air out up top … or does that leave us too vulnerable to wind? Couldn’t we just sandbag those areas?

I am looking for a geosynthetic fabric webbing or netting that can be draped and then sprayed with concrete.

Mac | England

I suspect you are talking about shotcrete of gunite and my answer is accordingly.

Hi Mac, You have altogether quite a common problem. The original design should have had an underdrain system (for air and/or water) that led up the sideslope to vents. Vents are either stacks, inverted U-shaped pipes, or flap vents. For your situation, I suggest you cut in 6in.-diameter holes at 15–25ft spacings along the horizontal runout of the FML. Then weld 12in.-square pieces of FML over each hole, but only seam them along the top and two sides. This allows the air coming up the sideslope to get out of the unseamed bottom of the flap vent and also prevents rainwater or snow melt from getting in under the FML. It is much better than loosening the anchor trench. Next you will have to “chase” the pockets to the toe of the slope, which might be quite a chore. Let me know how it works … Bob Koerner GMA Techline P.S. These various vents are all shown in “Designing with Geosynthetics” Chapter 5, Designing with Geomembranes; 5.3, Liquid Containment (Pond) Liners.

Ted | California Ted,

Fabric-wise, you are probably best with a needle-punched nonwoven since the water/cement paste can infiltrate into the surface of the material. We did tests with concrete placed on such a fabric to investigate the shear strength and it was excellent pushing the shear plane into the noninfiltrated fabric. Alternatively, an open mesh grid might also work since the penetration of the wet sprayed-on concrete can encapsulate the entire material. You might consider a few small tests, which should give you great insight … Bob Koerner GMA Techline

To: GMA Techline RE: Welds Are destructs typically conducted on extrusion welds? Our flexible membrane liner (FML) spec doesn’t specifically address this. It does explicitly list a destruct frequency of every 500 linear feet of seam length. Does “seam” refer to both extrusion and fusion welds, or just fusion? Should we track both separately (i.e., take a destruct for every 500ft of extrusion and another for every 500ft of fusion) rather than a running combined total, which might make it harder to keep a proper balance? Brian | Kentucky

Brian, Destructive tests are indeed taken on both wedge and extrusion seams. The 500-ft rule generally is applied to the wedge welds and then whenever and wherever the CQA wants them taken on extrusion welds … Bob Koerner GMA Techline G

40


1011GS_p34-51.indd 40

10/5/11 2:18 PM

12

&

9BJ=FCBA9BH5@ 7CBB97H=CB

&$%&

IECA is bringing more of what you love to EC12 in Las Vegas! • New full-day courses and shorter sessions featuring more advanced content • More exclusive expo hall time in the largest exhibit hall of its kind • More opportunities to make business connections through unique events focused on building long-lasting relationships.

LEARN FROM THE INDUSTRY’S BEST! Designer and Reviewer Series with Dr. Jerry Fifield, CPESC, CISEC This intermediate course will cover: Tools for designers and reviewers to develop and review effective sediment and erosion control drawings for implementation on construction sites Practical, common sense and cost effective solutions for developing sediment and erosion control plans

• •

REGISTER NOW AT WWW.IECA.ORG/GEOSYNTHETICS

THE WORLD’S LARGEST SOIL & WATER EVENT FEBRUARY 26-29

»

2012 | LAS VEGAS | RIO ALL-SUITE HOTEL & CASINO DON’T MISS OUT ON IECA’S 40TH BIRTHDAY BASH ON FEB. 29TH!

IECA THANKS ITS EC12 SPONSORS

1011GS_p34-51.indd 41

10/5/11 2:18 PM

IN THE LAB European experience in pullout tests

The influence of geogrid’s geometry and structure on interface behavior By Daniele Cazzuffi, Lidia Sarah Calvarano, Giuseppe Cardile, Nicola Moraci, and Piergiorgio Recalcati

1. Introduction

T

>> For more, search geogrids at www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com

Daniele Cazzuffi—CESI SpA, Milano, Italy; IGS past-president and a member of the Editorial Advisory Committee for Geosynthetics magazine Lidia Sarah Calvarano, Giuseppe Cardile, and Nicola Moraci—Mediterranea University of Reggio Calabria, Italy Piergiorgio Recalcati—Tenax GTO, Milano, Italy

42

he use of geosynthetics to improve the soil mechanical response has become increasingly common practice in geotechnical engineering applications. Geosynthetic materials are commonly used in soil reinforced structures, in embankment toe reinforcements on compressible ground, and in paved and unpaved roads. The knowledge of equivalent friction parameter is important in the soil structures design (Cazzuffi et al., 1995). It can be done by direct shear tests and pullout tests carried out to simulate, as closely as possible, the on-site conditions. The geogrid pullout resistance is a function of skin friction, generated between the solid portion of the reinforcement and the soil, and the passive resistance mobilized in correspondence of the bearing members placed transversely to the pullout force direction. In particular, the main soil parameters that influence the pullout behavior are the same that typically affect the dilatancy, such as the relative density, the grain size distribution (in relation to the geogrid mesh size), and the vertical effective confining stress (Moraci and Montanelli, 2000). About the reinforcement, the geometry and thickness of the transverse elements, the mesh size (in terms of spacing between elements), and the longitudinal and transversal members’ stiffness play an important role on the mechanical behavior of geogrids. Therefore, for the extensible polymeric inclusions, the apparent coefficient of friction mobilized at the interface is a function of both the soil and the reinforcement characteristics. This article deals with some results of a wide experimental program developed in Europe aimed to study the behavior in pullout conditions at constant rates of displacement of different geosynthetics embedded in a granular compacted soil. The pullout tests were performed on two high-density polyethylene (HDPE) extruded mono-oriented geogrids, four polypropylene (PP) extruded bio-oriented geogrids, one polyester (PET) woven geogrid, and one PET welded geogrid. In particular, the main factors that influence the mechanical pullout response (in terms of peak pullout resistance and peak apparent coefficient of friction) of different geosynthetic reinforcement (different geometry and structure), installed in compacted granular soils, are reviewed.


1011GS_p34-51.indd 42

10/5/11 2:18 PM

2. Test apparatus To develop the test program, large-scale pullout equipment from the geotechnical laboratory of Mediterranea University of Reggio Calabria was used. The test apparatus was developed in previous research (Moraci and Montanelli, 2000; Moraci et al., 2003; Moraci and Recalcati, 2006; Gioffrè and Moraci, 2006; Moraci and Cardile, 2009). The test apparatus is essentially composed of a rigid steel large pullout box (1700mm × 680mm × 600mm), a vertical load application system, a horizontal force application device, two special clamps with sleeve system, and all required control and data acquisition instruments. Figure 1 shows the test apparatus and Figure 2 is a sketch illustrating its components. The test procedure was developed on the basis of the results from previous researches on the soil-geosynthetic interaction (Moraci and Montanelli, 2000; Moraci and Recalcati, 2006), and helps to ensure a good reproducibility of results and to minimize the scale effects. All pullout tests described herein have been performed at controlled rates of displacement (CRD) equal to 1.0mm/ min, until geogrid tensile rupture or until a total horizontal displacement of 100mm was achieved. For the application of the pullout force, an electric double-acting hydraulic jack connected to a load cell and to a special clamping system was used. To apply the tensile load to the different types of reinforcement specimens, two internal clamps were specifically designed and used. The internal clamping system has several advantages compared with the external ones most commonly used. The first is to ensure constant anchorage length during the pullout test. The second is the possibility to measure displacements and strains only in confined conditions.

FIGURE 1 Pullout test apparatus

FIGURE 2 Schematic of pullout test apparatus: (1) frame, (2) steel plate, (3) air bag, (4) electric engine, (5) reducer, (6) load cell, (7) electric jack (Moraci and Recalcati, 2006).

In contrast, the clamping system inside the pullout box needs a preliminary pullout test, carried out under the same test conditions, only on the clamp (without the geogrid), to evaluate the skin friction. In particular, for each type of clamp, three different calibration tests were performed at the vertical effective stress values equal to σ’v=10, 25, 50 kPa. Therefore, the pullout force due to the clamp friction (measured at each displacement level) needs to be subtracted from the pullout force measured in the test with the geosynthetic at the same displacement. www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com

1011GS_p34-51.indd 43

43

10/5/11 2:18 PM

IN THE LAB Finally, this internal clamping system permits the study of the reinforcement confined failure. The internal displacements along the geogrid specimen were measured and digitally recorded during the pullout test.

3. Test materials

FIGURE 3 Grain size distribution curve of the soil used in the experimental program

The test materials used in this study have been classified and mechanically characterized by standard laboratory tests allowed to evaluate the main strength and deformability parameters necessary to develop the next phase of pullout test analysis and discussions. 3.1 Soil characterization

FIGURE 4 Schematic cross section of a generic transversal geogrid bar

TABLE 1 Geometrical characteristics of the different geogrids Geogrid

S [mm]

Wr [mm]

Wt [mm]

Br [mm]

Bt [mm]

Ab [mm2]

GGEM1

240.0

11.26

6.60

3.80

3.57

66.35

GGEM2

240.0

11.86

6.00

4.65

4.48

85.35

GGEB1

56.92

16.24

59.49

4.95

3.72

269.70

GGEB2

64.58

14.98

44.34

5.73

3.88

225.29

GGEB3

27.82

16.12

32.86

4.42

4.10

174.19

GGEB4

39.48

14.81

25.84

3.76

2.90

107.10

GGK

26.00

7.46

33.84

-

1.18

39.93

GGW

70.00

13.00

26.48

1.12

1.14

44.75

The results of the classification test (Figure 3) indicate that the soil is a uniform medium sand (SP according to USCS classification system, A-3 according to CNRUNI 10006 classification system), with grain shape from sub-rounded to rounded, uniformity coefficient U equal to 1.96, and average grain size D50 equal to 0.32mm. The Standard Proctor compaction test performed indicates a maximum dry unit weight γdmax=16.24 kN/m3 and an “optimum” water content wopt=13.5%. The direct shear tests and the triaxial tests have been carried out at an initial unit weight equal to 95% of γdmax, obtained at a water content of 9.3% (corresponding to DR=76%). The peak shear strength angle ϕ’p yield, in range between 48° and 42°, where the higher and the lower values refer respectively to the lower (σ’v =10 kPa) and the higher (σ’v=100 kPa) confining pressure. The shear strength angle at constant volume ϕ’cv results equal to 34°. 3.2 Geometrical and mechanical characteristics of tested geogrids

The pullout tests have been performed on eight different geogrids with different geometry, structure, and tensile stiffness characteristics. 44


1011GS_p34-51.indd 44

10/5/11 2:18 PM

The pullout tests have been carried out on: two HDPE extruded mono-oriented geogrids (called GGEM1 and GGEM2), four PP extruded bi-oriented geogrids (named GGEB1, GGEB2, GGEB3, and GGEB4), one PET woven geogrid (GGK), and one PET welded geogrid (GGW). Figure 4 shows a schematic cross section of a geogrid bearing members (spacing between transversal bars in the pullout direction equal to S) that is placed transversely to the direction of pullout force. Table 1 shows the geometrical characterization of the geogrids, where Wr and Br are the node width and thickness, respectively; Wt and Bt are the width and thickness of the bar portion between two nodes, respectively (Figure 4); and Ab is the area of each rib element (including the node embossment and the bar portion between two nodes At+ Ar) where the bearing resistance can be mobilized. The mechanical properties (Table 2) of the different geogrids were evaluated by wide-width tensile tests (measured according EN ISO 10319, see also Cazzuffi, 1996) performed at the same rate of displacement used in pullout test (1mm/min).

TABLE 2 Mechanical proprieties of the different geogrids Geogrid

Polymer

TF [kN/m]

J2% [kN/m]

J5% [kN/m]

GGEM1

HDPE

73.06

946.5

719.5

GGEM2

HDPE

98.99

1338.5

1049.0

GGEB1

PP

35.26

536

390

GGEB2

PP

35.60

750

468

GGEB3

PP

39.70

725

538

GGEB4

PP

55.90

825

618

GGK

PET

168.20

1630

1078

GGW

PET

139.26

2100

1440

5(a)

4. Analysis of pullout response Figure 5 shows the classical pullout curves that report the pullout force (P) vs. the displacement measured at the edge attached to the clamp, for the investigated anchorage length (Lr=1.15m), varying the applied normal effective confining pressures [10 kPa (a), 25 kPa (b), 50 kPa (c)]. The pullout curves show, for GGEB2 and GGEB3 geogrids at vertical effective confining stresses lower than 25 kPa, for GGEM1, GGEM2, and GGK geogrids at effective normal confining tensions lower than 50 kPa, and for GGW geogrid under all applied confining stress levels, a softening mechanical response. In this case, there is a decrement of the pullout resistance after a peak valueat large displacements.

5(b)

5(c)

FIGURE 5 Pullout curves referring to the different geogrids (extruded monoand bi-oriented woven and knitted geogrids) at the same anchorage length (Lr=1.15m) and confining pressure [10 kPa (a), 25 kPa (b), 50 kPa (c)], (Calvarano et al., 2011).


1011GS_p34-51.indd 45

45

10/5/11 2:18 PM

IN THE LAB TABLE 3 Spacing between transversal bars (S), number of transversal (nt) and longitudinal (nl) bars, bearing (Ab) and frictional (Af) surface per unit area, for extruded mono- and bi-oriented geogrids.

Geogrid

S [mm]

nt

nl

Ab [mm2/m2]

Af [mm2/m2]

GGEM1

240

4.17

54.64

15107

380000

GGEM2

240

4.17

52.63

18717

410000

GGEB1

56.92

17.6

14.9

70598

230000

GGEB2

64.58

15.5

19.7

68530

250000

GGEB3

27.82

35.9

23.3

151910

320000

GGEB4

39.48

25.3

30.7

83359

310000

PR [kN/m]

4.1 Influence of the geogrid geometry on pullout response

σ'v [kPa] FIGURE 6 Peak pullout resistance envelopes varying the normal

PR [kN/m]

effective confining stresses, for extruded mono-oriented geogrids of different geometry.

σ'v [kPa] FIGURE 7 Peak pullout resistance envelopes varying the normal effective confining stresses for extruded bi-oriented geogrids of different geometry (black symbol indicates the tensile failure).

46

On the contrary, for GGEB1 and GGEB4 under all applied confining stress levels, and for the remaining geogrids at higher confining stress, a strain-hardening behavior, with a progressive increase of the pullout resistance with the increase of the displacement of the first geogrid confining section, until its maximum value more or less constant at large displacements, was observed. It is possible to say that the pullout interaction mechanism is progressively developed along the reinforcement specimen length, in the latter behavior, while it is developed almost at the same time along the geogrid in the former one. In the test carried out on all bi-oriented geogrid specimens and in the range of confining stress used, pullout tensile failure occurred. Particularly, it was achieved for GGEB2 and GGEB3 geogrids at normal effective confining stress equal to 25 kPa, and for GGEM1 and GGEM2 geogrids for confining tension equal to 50 kPa.

To study the influence geometry of the reinforcement on the mechanical pullout behavior, the results of the tests conducted on geogrid of the same structure and comparable strength tensile and stiffness were compared. The extruded geogrids were characterized by measuring the spacing between transversal bars in the pullout direction, the surfaces on which it is possible to mobilize the friction and the passive interaction mechanisms after defining the number of transversal and longitudinal bars (Table 3). Figures 6 and 7 show the peak pullout resistance envelopes varying the normal effective confining stresses, for extruded mono and bi-oriented geogrids (the filled symbol indicates the confined tensile failure). The GGEM2 geogrid, for all applied confining tensions, exhibited greater peak pullout resistance than the GGEM1 geogrid. The peak pullout resistance percentage difference varied about 23.5%. These experimental results may be due to the different surface values on which it can be mobilized, including the interaction mechanisms of passive and friction types. In fact, for the GGEM2 the above-mentioned areas were more than 8% different if compared to the GGEM1. This result is confirmed by applying the theoretical model developed by Moraci and Gioffrè (2006) (valid in absence of interference phenomena between the bearing members).


1011GS_p34-51.indd 46

10/5/11 2:18 PM

americanwick.com

WE’RE HERE TO COLLECT… The extruded bi-oriented geogrids for all applied vertical effective stresses showed comparable values of the peak pullout resistance when the tensile failure did not occur. This experimental result is particularly interesting because it disagrees with the comparison between the valuesof the overall frictional and bearing surfaces on which it is possible to mobilize the interaction mechanisms. In particular, the GGEB3 and GGEB4 geogrids have higher values of frictional and bearing surfaces when compared with the GGEB1 and GGEB2 geogrids, but the former ones are those that exhibit the lower spacing values between the bearing members than the GGEB1 and GGEB2 geogrids. Therefore, the comparable values of the peak pullout resistance, at the same test condition, are due to the interference phenomena between the passive failure surfaces that are generated in front of the bearing members and unloading stress areas at the back of these bars (Palmeira, 2004). In this case, the theoretical model (Moraci and Gioffrè, 2006) is not applicable. Consequently, to study the interference phenomena that occur when the distance between the bearing members decreases, additional tests were performed by removing some transversal bars from the specimens of GGEB4 geogrid, 0.90m long, which originally were spacing bars equal to S = 39.5mm. The new specimen was characterized by spacing between the bearing bars equal to 86.7mm and 129.8mm, respectively. Figure 8 shows the results of pullout tests carried out on GGEB4 geogrid specimens ( LR = 0.90m) varying the spacing between the transverse elements. All tests were performed at confining pressure equal to 50 kPa. In particular, Figure 8 shows the peak pullout resistance envelopes, in the same test conditions, for different geogrid mesh density.

A

WAT E R

merican Wick Drain provides proven, engineered, highly cost effective alternatives to pipe and stone

AWD Provides Solutions for:

systems. If you are looking for a more efficient way to collect,

t

VERTICAL WALLS

transport and redirect water… AWD has the answer. We’re not just

t

BRIDGE ABUTMENTS

down to earth, we’re… Focusing our Sites on Gaining Ground.

The AWD Advantage

Increased Flow Rates Reduces Hydrostatic Pressure Green Friendly 80% Open Area vs. 3-5% with Perforated Pipe Vertical and Horizontal Applications

800.242.WICK PH 704.238.9200 FX 704.296.0690 [email protected]

t

CUT-OFF AND TRENCH DRAINS

t

RETENTION/DETENTION PONDS

t

HIGHWAY EDGE DRAINS

t

LANDSCAPING

t

PERIMETER DRAINS

t

CONCRETE CHANNELS

t

SLOPE DRAINS

t

TUNNEL AND BOX CULVERTS

t

CHIMNEY DRAINS

Focusing Our Sites on Gaining Ground

Ingenious solutions. Practical experience. The Ausenco Vector Advantage. When you need geosynthetics engineering solutions you can trust, your best bet is to rely on proven, direct experience. Our reputation for innovative, practical and economical containment system solutions is the culmination of over 25 years of providing quality design and construction support services to our clients and a portfolio that includes over 700 million square feet of installed geomembrane systems. -

Siting Studies Site Characterizations Feasibility Studies Detailed Engineering Geosynthetics Alternatives Studies Construction Management Construction Quality Assurance Regulatory Compliance Optimization Studies

Talk to us about how we can help you achieve your project objectives. T +1 303-279-7533 E [email protected] W www.ausenco.com

Choose experience. Choose Ausenco Vector.


1011GS_p34-51.indd 47

47

10/5/11 2:18 PM

PR [kN/m]

IN THE LAB

interasse S [mm] FIGURE 8 Effect of the transversal bars spacing on peak pullout resistance for GGEB4 geogrid specimens. (LR=0.90 m, σ’V = 50 kPa), (Calvarano et al., 2011).

The experimental results illustrated in Figure 8 show the optimum spacing, Sopt, which maximizes the peak pullout resistance. In fact, when the transverse bars spacing is lower than the “optimum” value, the pullout response appears to be affected by the interference between the bearing members. When the transverse bars spacing is higher than the “optimum” value, the pullout resistance decreases due to the minor number of bearing members that provide passive resistance contribution to the overall pullout resistance. These results demonstrate the significant effect of the density of the bearing elements of the geogrid mesh on the mechanical response of polymeric geogrids. 4.2 Influence of the geogrid structure on pullout response

PR [kN/m]

To study the influence of the reinforcement structure on the geogrid pullout behavior, the results of pullout tests conducted on geogrids of different structure and similar strength tensile and stiffness, were compared. In this case, the analysis relates to the extruded geogrid GGEM2, the woven geogrid GGK, and the welded geogrid GGW. The results were analyzed in terms of peak pullout resistance and of peak apparent coefficient of friction, the latter defined as:

PR [kN/m]

σ'v [kPa] FIGURE 9 Peak pullout resistance trend vs. vertical effective confining stress for the geogrids tested in this research of different structure (GGEM2, GGK and GGW), (Calvarano et al., 2011).

σ'v [kPa] FIGURE 10 Peak apparent coefficient of friction trend vs. vertical effective confining stress for the geogrids tested in this research of different structure (GGEM2, GGK, and GGW), (Calvarano et al., 2011).

48

μS/GSY =

PR

(1)

2 . Le . σ' v

where: PR= pullout resistance, corresponding to the maximum pullout force (per unit of width) measured during a pullout test; Le= confined effective length of the reinforcement equal to the sum of initial reinforcement length plus the geogrid specimen elongation Δl acquired at the value of PR; σ’v= vertical effective confining stress acting at soil-reinforcement interface. It is important to note that the determination of μS/GSY by using equation (1) can be performed without any assumption about the values of the soil shear strength angle mobilized at the interface; it can be easily determined from the pullout tests. Figure 9 shows, for each geogrid specimen and for the same anchorage length, the peak pullout resistance envelopes vs. the applied vertical effective confining pressure. It is possible to observe that, for all pullout tests performed, the maximum peak pullout resistance was


1011GS_p34-51.indd 48

10/5/11 2:18 PM

AUGU R

ED WA TTLES

measured for the extruded mono-oriented geogrid GGEM2 (although it is characterized by lower values of tensile strength and stiffness). In particular, the maximum percentage difference of peak pullout resistance equal to 19% is given with the comparison between the extruded geogrid GGEM2 and the woven geogrid GGK, while the greater percentage difference is equal to about 21% in the comparison between the extruded geogrid GGEM2 the welded geogrid GGW. This result is due to interference effect and geometry effect, the latter associated to the different production processes, as evidenced by the data reported in Table 1. In Figure 10 the pullout test results are interpreted in terms of peak apparent coefficient of friction mobilized at the interface. For geogrids of different structures (with the same anchorage length Lr=1.15 m), the trend of the peak apparent coefficient of friction is mobilized at the interface vs. the effective vertical confining stress. In all the analyzed cases (for different geogrid processing structure types and equal length) it is possible to observe a reduction in the mobilized peak pullout interface apparent friction coefficient with the increase of the applied vertical effective stress. This result is connected to the soil dilatancy phenomena, whose entity decreases with the increases of the confining normal effective pressure σ'v , that developed in correspondence with the three-dimensional passive failure surfaces that arise at the bearing members of the geogrid.

ARE B

ETTER

!

L&M

SUPPLY CO. U.S. EROSION CONTROL PRODUCTS

Leaders in Geotextiles, Silt Fence, Landscaping & Erosion Control Products One of the largest manufacturers of erosion control blankets & wattles, sod staples & silt fence in the USA.

PROTECT YOUR SLOPE. GEOWEB®

soil stabilization system

Our wattles are made using a special augered process for increased density and superior performance.

Ask about our special truckload pricing! GEOWEB®— Protecting the earth’s surface for over 30 years.

Call 800-948-7870 or

The ultimate economical and environmental solution to slope, channel and shoreline challenges. VË.¬jËFË.ÁjjË+ÁÍjWÍ VËjjMÁ?jË+ÁÍjWÍ VË.ÍÁÝ?ÍjÁÊ Á??~jË ?jÄ VË-

Ë+ÁjWÍË Ü?Ö?Í

PRESTO

Presto Geosystems®ËVËoååy|oÏ|Ô| or ÔåÈÏo¤ÏÔoË V www.prestogeo.com

“wattle” onto our website: www.landmsupplyco.com

AP-6753


1011GS_p34-51.indd 49

49

10/5/11 2:18 PM

IN THE LAB

These results demonstrate the significant effect of the density of the bearing elements of the geogrid mesh on the mechanical response of polymeric geogrids.

It is also important to note that geogrids GGK and GGW, for confining stresses higher than 25 kPa, mobilized a peak apparent coefficient of friction lower than the constant volume shear strength angle value refers only to the soil. While the extruded geogrid GGEM2, for all applied confining condition, shows a μS/GSY higher than the constant volume shear strength angle refers only to the soil. Comparing the experimental results refer to pullout tests carried out on geogrids varying structure types, at the same applied vertical effective stress, to be not influenced by soil dilatancy phenomena, it is possible to evaluate the effects of reinforcement different structures on the peak apparent coefficient of friction mobilized at the soilgeosynthetic interface. In particular, higher μS/GSY values, for each investigated confining pressure, are associated with extruded mono-oriented geogrid GGEM2. Particularly, the greater percentage difference of μS/GSY values (Table 4), equal to 20.71%, is given with the comparison between the extruded geogrid GGEM2 and the woven geogrid GGK, while the maximum percentage difference is equal to about 22.69% in the comparison between the extruded geogrid GGEM2 and the welded geogrid GGW.

5. Conclusions

TABLE 4 Pullout test results in terms of PR e μS/GSY. Geogriglia

Polimero

σ’V [kPa]

PR [kN/m]

μS/GSY [-]

GGEM2

HDPE

10

26.96

1.17

25

51.43

0.89

50

75.62

0.66

10

23.54

1.00

25

42.24

0.71

50

67.71

0.55

10

21.98

0.95

25

40.68

0.69

50

62.18

0.52

GGK

GGW

PET

PET

The experimental results presented in this article show the influence of the different parameters studied (geogrid’s geometry and structure) on the mechanical response of different geosynthetic reinforcement in interaction with compacted granular soil, in pullout conditions. Particularly with the increase of the surface where the passive and friction interaction mechanisms are mobilized, in the absence of interference phenomena, it is possible to note corresponding enhancement both of peak pullout resistance and mobilized peak pullout interface apparent friction coefficient. In contrast, when the proximity of the bearing members produces interference phenomena, the increases in the bearing surface are not associated with increases of the mechanical response parameters. In the latter case, the effect of interference between bearing members shows the existence of an optimum spacing bars, Sopt, below which the pullout response appears to be affected by the interference phenomena.

Acknowledgments This paper was originally presented in Italian by Calvarano et al. (2011) at the XXIV Geotechnical National Conference held in June 2011 in Napoli, Italy. It has been edited for Geosynthetics magazine style and format.

50


1011GS_p34-51.indd 50

10/5/11 2:18 PM

References Calvarano L. S., Cardile G., Moraci N., 2011. “Influenza della geometria e della struttura del rinforzo sulla risposta meccanica all’interfaccia terreno-rinforzo in condizioni di sfilamento.” Atti XXIV Convegno Nazionale di Geotecnica (Proc. XXIV Geotechnical National Conference), Volume II, Napoli, pp. 359–365. Cazzuffi, D., 1996. “Evolution of European standardization on geosynthetics, with special reference to mechanical tests,” Proceedings Index -‘96 Nonwoven Congress–Construction Session, Geneva, pp. 1–15. Cazzuffi, D., Gourc, J.P., Rimoldi, P., 1995. “L’esperienza europea nella valutazione dell’interazione terrenogeosintetici mediante prove di attrito (European experience for the evaluation of the soil-geosynthetic interaction),” Atti XIX Convegno Nazionale di Geotecnica (Proc. XIX Italian Geotechnical Conference), Volume I, Pavia, pp. 193–200. Moraci N., Montanelli F., 2000. “Analisi di prove di sfilamento di geogriglie estruse installate in terreno granulare compattato(Evaluation of pullout behaviour of geogrids embedded in compacted granular soils),” Rivista Italiana di Geotecnica (Italian Geotechnical Journal), n.4 (16), pp. 5–21. Moraci N., Montanelli F., Romano G., 2003. “Interface pullout behaviour of geogrids embedded in compacted granular soils,” XIII European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Prague, pp. 837–842.

PLASTIC WELDING

WELDPLAST S6

Output: 26 lbs / hr www.leisterusa.com [email protected] Toll-free: (855) Leister / CA (888) 438-6324

We know how.

Moraci N., Recalcati P.G., 2006. “Factors affecting the pullout behaviour of extruded geogrids embedded in compacted granular soil,” Geotextiles and Geomembranes, Vol. 24 (22), pp. 220–242.

TARP/LINER REPAIR KIT

Moraci N., Gioffre’ D., 2006. “A simple method to evaluate the pullout resistance of extruded geogrids embedded in granular soil,” Geotextiles and Geomembranes, Vol. 24 (12), pp.116–128. Moraci N., Cardile G., 2009. “Influence of cyclic tensile loading on pullout resistance of geogrids embedded in a compacted granular soil,” Geotextiles and Geomembranes, Vol. 27 (12), pp. 475–487.

SIMPLY CUT AND PEEL

Palmeira E. M., 2004. “Bearing force mobilisation in pullout tests on geogrids,” Geotextiles and Geomembranes, Vol. 22 (28), pp. 481–509.

Super Kwik Patch! A new revolutionary approach to repair all your polyethylene and polypropylene products.

Teixeira S.H.C., Bueno B. S., Zornberg J..G., 2007. “Pullout resistance of individual longitudinal and transverse geogrid,” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering (ASCE) (13), pp. 37–50. G

COVER TEAR

Tarps • Liners • Landfill Covers Available in: Silver, White, Black, Blue, Red & Green

ISO 9001:2008 & AS9100B CERTIFIED PRESS DOWN... AND IT’S PATCHED

Phone: (909) 829-4444 • Fax (909) 829-0564 Email: [email protected] Website: www.artech2000.com www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com

1011GS_p34-51.indd 51

51

10/5/11 2:18 PM

PANORAMA GEO NEWS AND NOTES FROM AROUND THE WORLD

Auburn inventors receive patent Dave Elton, former NAGS president, is among the foursome to devise geotextile fabrics with electronic antenna capabilities By Ron Bygness

The invention

A

Dave Elton

uburn University in Auburn, Ala., has been assigned a patent developed by four co-inventors for “reinforcement fabrics with electronic transmission capabilities.” The inventors are three professors, Gwen Thomas, Lloyd Riggs, and David Elton, and Ph.D. graduate, Andrew Sivulka, all from Auburn. The new fabric design includes metallic antennas and adds transmission capabilities to materials used for other purposes, such as geotextiles. When added to roadbed fabric, these antenna arrays confer the ability to transmit cellular, Wi-Fi, and other signals through the roadbed and into vehicles and surrounding buildings. In addition to roads, these fabrics could be added to buildings, bridges, or even natural surfaces such as trees.

Advantages According to Auburn’s Office of Technology Transfer, the advantages could include: >> View more news at www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com

• Transmitting cellular/phone or television signals, creating internet hotspots, Wi-Fi access, and broadcast capabilities to roadways. • Reducing the overall physical size of the antenna (or array), leading to cost savings. • Functioning in tunnels and other areas less accessible by cellular or satellite transmissions, plus increasing area and continuity of coverage. • Potential to enable other public safety and law-enforcement functions such as vehicle speed monitoring, vehicle tracking, traffic rerouting and accident avoidance. • Being less vulnerable than current systems to potential terrorist attacks, vandalism, and weather disasters, increasing the reliability and safety of the network.

Description This invention embodies antennas consisting of nonwoven geotextiles with embedded metallic or other wave-carrying fibers. These textiles would serve the needed purpose of the textile, such as geotextiles for road bed protection, while adding the functionality of electronic transmission. For road applications, the geotextile and the antennas would include electromagnetic, radio signal or fiber-optic capabilities, enabling delivery of cellular, Wi-Fi, and television signals to vehicles on the road and also to nearby buildings. Transmission to nearby buildings suggests applications for this technology in “last mile” situations where other infrastructure is not yet in place. Additionally, geotextile antennas are considerably less vulnerable to damage and are less expensive than the current infrastructure. For work done to date, weaving or an industrial fabric method called warpknitting is used to knit the polymer geotextile fibers with the antenna material, coupled to each other by a signal carrier. Dipole antennas are used and they are 52


1011GS_p52-Cv4.indd 52

10/5/11 2:18 PM

Coming in February

placed perpendicular to the road to achieve minimum interference. A prototype was installed under highway pavement and tested successfully. A field test for cell phone transmission capability with antennas 50ft apart demonstrated just a -8Db loss over that distance. The signal strength of the antennas was found to be -73.3Dbm.

Geosynthetics Elton, an Auburn civil engineering professor and current past-president of the North American Geosynthetics Society, contributed geotextile and pavement overlay expertise. “Geotextile antennas are flexible and easily conform to natural and man-made surfaces. In particular, geotextiles used in asphalt concrete roads are especially well-protected by the asphalt pavement above, making them much less vulnerable to vandalism, terrorism, and natural disasters than conventional tower-based antennas” Elton said. The new antenna can be installed in high-temperature asphalt concrete pavement without damage. Beyond the use of an antenna supplying cellular phone signals, the novel geotextile can be used to deliver other services to homes and businesses including telephone, cable, Internet and electrical power through a grid under roads.

Now it’s easy to locate your next service provider.

GEOSYNTHETICS SERVICE DIRECTORY Installers t Test Labs t Consultants

osynt hetic Insta s ller

tics ynthe s Geos nt a t l u cons

7894 ant.com 555lt 800- eoconsu .g www

pany t Com ultan treet Cons Geo S 4 3 2 13 1 N 551 lis, M o p a e Minn

Phone

Installl le

rs & A 123-5 ssocia 55-98 tes, In 75 | Fa c. x 970555-7 www.x 842 yzinsta llers.c om

Also available online! www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com To advertise in this section contact Shelly Arman: (800) 436 2408

T R I D Y R T S U D IN L L A T U WITHO . K C U M THE

The inventors Dr. Gwen Thomas is an associate professor in Auburn’s Department of Polymer and Fiber Engineering. Dr. Lloyd Riggs is a professor in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. Dr. David Elton is a professor in the university’s Department of Civil Engineering. Andrew Sivulka is an Auburn Ph.D. graduate from the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. G

Search Geosynthetics

Try it now |

Go o

www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com


53

10/5/11 2:18 PM


Solutions that reinforce the earth LEADING EXPERT INFORMATION ON • New products/innovative applications • Global industry topics & trends • Detailed case study analysis Please Print. Name ______________________________________________________ Company ___________________________________________________ Address_____________________________________________________

2 years for the price of 1

City ________________________________________________________

❑ $99

State _______________________________________ Zip ____________

❑ $129

Phone ______________________________________________________

❑ $179

Fax ________________________________________________________ Email _______________________________________________________

Title (please check): ❑ Owner/Corporate executive ❑ Chief/Staff Engineer ❑ Geotechnical Engineer ❑ Civil Engineer ❑ Research/Development Professional ❑ Other (please specify) _______________

0411GEOsubform.indd 54 1011GS_p52-Cv4.indd 1

Type of Business (please check): ❑ Engineering Firm / Engineer in Private Practice ❑ Contractor ❑ Geosynthetic Installer ❑ Installation/Fabrication Equipment Supplier ❑ Geosynthetic Producer/Distributor ❑ Other (please specify) _______________

59 /2 Years U.S.A. $69 /2 Years Canada (U.S. funds) $99 /2 Years Other Int'l (U.S. funds)

$

❏ Bill me ❏ Check Enclosed $ ___________________ ❏ Credit Card Payment ❍ Visa ❍ Master Card ❍ Amex ❍ Discover Card Number __________________________________________________ Expire Date ____________________________________________________ Card Holder Name _____________________________________________ Signature _________________________________ Date ________________

SUBSCRIBE TODAY! Fax: +1 651-631-9334 Phone: 800-208-6129 Mail: IFAI, NW 6183, PO Box 6183, Minneapolis, MN 55485-6183 Offer ends December 31, 2011. Please allow 4-6 weeks for shipment of first issue. Offer valid for new subscribers only.

3/17/11 10/5/11 7:51:23 2:18 AM PM

GMA NEWS

By Andrew Aho

GMA members meet with their U.S. reps during Lobby Day GEOSYNTHETIC MATERIALS ASSOCIATION GMA is dedicated to our members’ success. GMA actively identifies, assesses, analyzes and acts upon market growth opportunities and issues that affect its member companies. The activities of the association are proactive in nature and center on five areas: » Engineering support » Business development » Education » Government relations » Geosynthetics industry recognition

Andrew Aho Managing Director +1 651 225 6907 or 800 636 5042 [email protected]

G

MA members from 10 companies met with U.S senators, representatives, and their staffs during a full day on Capitol Hill Sept. 14. GMA’s annual Fall Lobby Day featured member participation during three days, Sept. 13–15 in Washington, D.C. GMA members met with 22 congressional offices, seeking support and providing education on three key GMA government relations issues. GMA members were briefed on legislative issues and the current political environment in Washington lobbying team during a well-attended dinner meeting on Sept. 13. Martin Whitmer, Rudy Barry, Rob Houton, and Jimmy Kemp gave an insightful overview of the legislative and political climate as the Congress was renewing its work following the annual August recess.

Key GMA issues • The GMA study titled “Analyzing life cycle cost-benefits of pavements incorporating geosynthetics as separators and interlayers” (or simply the Separation Study). • Geosynthetic liner systems for coal-ash waste facilities. • Educating members of congress regarding the environmental solutions that geosynthetic materials provide to the shale gas extraction industry. GMA expects congressional support to ask the Government Accounting Office (GAO) to complete the first phase of the Separation Study. GMA proposed that GAO perform Phase I of this study, which would consist of assembling and analyzing existing data that demonstrates the benefits of geosynthetics as separators. There is ample academic, industry, and state department of transportation information publicly available that can be used by the GAO to complete the Separation Study. Having GAO complete this study as a credible third party and government entity will give this $2 billion domestic industry increased validation as our industry’s products are used more frequently and in variety of applications. The GAO can provide recommendations on how to best build roadways using geosynthetic technologies and best practices. We received strong support from Members of Congress for this approach. GMA’s Phase II goal is to take the GAO’s recommendations and implement them into a real-world situation. GAO will prescribe the best methods to test this material in an actual demonstration. This demonstration will be at no additional cost because GMA is seeking to use an existing research budget at the U.S. DOT. The Separation Study will provide an opportunity for geosynthetic companies to grow their markets and businesses, eventually hiring more employees. As reported in the August/September issue of Geosynthetics, the coal-ash disposal issue has both a legislative and regulatory track. The legislative initiative has been

John Goers (left) and Paul Oliveira (right) of Indianapolisbased Firestone Specialty Products met with Indiana Sen. Dick Lugar during GMA’s Lobby Day in Washington, D.C., Sept. 14.


3/17/11 7:51:23 AM


55

10/5/11 2:18 PM

GMA NEWS

brought forward by the House to speed up a solution to the coal-ash issue. The EPA has signaled that a regulatory solution may wait until after the 2012 elections. The legislative initiative is consistent with GMA’s position regarding coal ash—that is should be designated a non-hazardous waste and the waste facilities should require a geosynthetic lining system to contain the waste and protect groundwater. During our Lobby Day meetings, Members of Congress whose districts touch on the areas where shale rock contains natural gas were educated about the role geosynthetics play in the shale gas industry. GMA members demonstrated how geosynthetic materials help make the extraction process more efficient, economical, and environmentally friendly. The GMA focus group on shale gas has produced a technical white paper describing the geosynthetic opportunities within the shale gas industry. It has also produced a brochure that graphically demonstrates the geosynthetic application for the industry. That brochure and brochures describing geosynthetic materials can be found on GMA’s website. G

GMA launches new website GMA has launched a new website to better serve its members and the geosynthetics industry as a whole. The new site features: • news feeds from GMA’s official publication—Geosynthetics magazine. • downloadable education and engineering resources. • an industry events calendar. • a revamped bookstore link. • links to geosynthetics interest groups and service providers. Non-members can now join GMA online and renewals for current members are easy to complete on the site. www.gmanow.com

>> For more, search GMA at www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com

STATEMENT OF OWNERSHIP

56



10/5/11 2:18 PM

GSI NEWS

By Bob Koerner & George R. Koerner

GSI fellowship status for 2011-2012 academic year

A GEOSYNTHETIC INSTITUTE GSI’s mission is to develop and transfer knowledge, assess and critique geosynthetics, and provide services to the member organizations.

Bob Koerner, Ph.D., P.E., NAE, is director of the Geosynthetic Institute in Folsom, Pa., and is a member of Geosynthetics magazine’s Editorial Advisory Committee. GSI: +1 610 522 8440, www.geosynthetic-institute.org

s in the past, GSI has been awarding graduate fellowships for students performing geosynthetics research. It is a worldwide program and one in which the awards are based on student proposals. (There were nine new proposals this year.) These proposals were then reviewed by the GSI Board of Directors consisting of the following members along with Bob and George Koerner. • Boyd Ramsey, GSE Lining Technology • Dave Jaros, Army Corps of Engineers • Dick Stulgis, Geocomp Corp. • Gary Kolbasuk, Raven Industries • Kent von Maubeuge, NAUE Group

• Rex Bobsein, Chevron Phillips • Sam Allen, TRI Environmental Inc. • Tony Eith, Waste Management Inc. • Wayne Hsieh, NPUST-GSI Taiwan

The currently established criteria are: • Students must be working on a geosynthetics topic that furthers the technology in a proactive manner. • Students must have completed their candidacy requirements leading to a doctoral degree. (Comment: We hope that some of them will “go academic” and teach and/ or research geosynthetics in the future.) • Students must be recommended by their advisor or department head. • The fellowships can be renewed for total of three years depending upon acceptable annual reports. The following table identifies the successful recipients, their university, advisor and topic. We congratulate the students and wish them success in their endeavors. G George R. Koerner, Ph.D., P.E., CQA Director Designate, GSI

Robert M. Koerner, Ph.D., P.E., NAE Director, GSI

GSI Fellowship Status for 2011-’12 Academic Year Class 2 (c)—3rd year No.

Name

University

Advisor

Topic

4-09

Majid Khabbazian

U. of Delaware

Victor Kaliakin

GS basal reinforcement

Class 3 (b)—2nd year No.

Name

University

Advisor

Topic

1-10

Tanay Karademir

Georgia Tech

David Frost

Temperature effects on shear strength

2-10

Jing Ni

U.of Wollongong, Australia

Buddhima Indraratna

PVDs in railroad stabilization

3-10

Carmen Franks

U. of Maryland

Ahmet Aydilek

GT filters for stormwater runoff

Topic

Class 4 (a)—1st year No.

Name

University

Advisor

1-11

Ryan Corey

U. of Kansas

Jie Han

GS protection of buried pipelines

2-11

G. Hossein Roodi

U. of Texas at Austin

Jorge Zornberg

Pavement lifetime using field data

3-11

Felix Jacobs

RWTU-Aachen, Germany

Martin Ziegler

Geogrid reinforced soil behavior

4-11

Mahmound Khachan

Syracuse University

Shobha Bhatia

Deflocculants for geotextile tubes



57

10/5/11 2:19 PM

REGISTER TODAY FOR THE LEADING EVENT ON GEOSYNTHETICS THROUGHOUT THE MIDDLE EAST UNDER PATRONAGE OF

www.GeosyntheticsMe.com

25 & 26 OCTOBER 2011 | ABU DHABI UAE 300 DELEGATES FROM 25 COUNTRIES IN 2010

INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS RAIL NETWORKS

TUNNELING ORGANIZED BY


IN COOPERATION

BRIDGES AIRPORTS ROADS STRATEGIC PARTNER

MEDIA PARTNER

10/5/11 2:19 PM

FGI NEWS

The mission of the Fabricated Geomembrane Institute is to develop and transfer knowledge, assess and critique fabricated geomembranes, and to provide relevant services for member organizations. For more pictures of fabricated geomembranes and golf course ponds: www.fabricated geomembrane.com

Andrew Mills is Research and Development Manager, Layfield Group, in Edmonton, A.B., Canada. He is the current FGI president.

By Andrew Mills

Fabricated geomembranes and cold weather

O

ne of the key advantages of fabricated geomembranes is the ability to take large sheets into the field to minimize field welding. Nowhere is this more important than in cold or wet weather. As winter moves in, installation conditions can deteriorate rapidly from rain, snow, and cold conditions. Moving the welding of the geomembrane out of the field and into the shop makes sense in these situations. On smaller projects, fabricated geomembranes are sometimes delivered to the jobsite in one piece. One-piece liners work well for oilfield pit liners, secondary containments, remediation pads, and small ponds. Prefabricated single panel sizes can range from 22,000ft² for heavy reinforced geomembranes to more than 100,000ft² for lightweight reinforced geomembranes (based on 5,000lb panel sizes). One-piece prefabricated liners bypass the problems of field welding entirely, allowing jobs to go ahead in even the most difficult weather conditions. There is a perception that field welding can’t take place at temperatures lower than freezing. While it’s true that some field-fabricated geomembranes are best not welded in the cold, a number of shop-fabricated geomembranes can be welded in all temperatures. Many fabricated geomembranes are flexible in the cold and are not adversely affected by welding in cold weather. Fabricated geomembrane materials have been installed and welded in temperatures as low as -40 (C or F).

ABOVE At the Red Dog Mine in Alaska, a diversion canal was built to move clean water away from the site. Building this diversion channel in the winter helped to control water runoff in the construction area. In the spring, the channel was completed and clean water was diverted away from the mine site. The lightweight reinforced fabricated geomembrane (blue in the picture) was fabricated in canal widths and in panels up to 4,000lbs (about 62,000ft² per panel). The seams in this project were simple overlaps. Installation took place at -40 (F and C). This project was completed in the early 1990s. All photos courtesy of Layfield



59

10/5/11 2:19 PM

FGI NEWS

Large prefabricated flexible panels can also speed installation in poor weather. Flexible prefabricated geomembranes are often assembled in a staging area and then deployed across ponds full of water to create floating covers. This same technique has been used in poor weather to deploy liners into ponds where standing water has been holding up welding or to even deploy the geomembrane directly onto a pond covered with a layer of snow. More clients are specifying cold weather installation with prefabricated geomembrane liners. Irrigation canals are one application where all work takes place in the winter off-season. In the high Arctic, clients are creating temporary secondary containments, using ice as their building material and white geomembranes to prevent the ice from melting during service. Working when everything is frozen can be an advantage because it is easier to protect streams and waterways from construction silts and sediments when there is a cap of ice. Tailings dams have been built at remote sites in the dead of winter using fabricated geomembranes where summer construction would have been much more difficult. Fabricated geomembranes provide a variety of materials that can address the needs of winter installation, including cold and wet weather. The variety of fabricated geomembranes and the ability to make large panels mean that there is likely a fabricated geomembrane that will be right for your project. G

This is a picture of a typical canal liner in Alberta, Canada. In this photo, the lightweight reinforced fabricated geomembrane (black in this picture) was fabricated into canal widths and in panels of 3,000lbs each (75,000ft² per panel). The seams in these canals consist of 5ft of clean overlap confined with backfill.

A flexible polypropylene dam core liner is welded in place at a tailings dam in Siberia at -30 C (-22 F). By installing the liners in the winter, potential damage to local waterways from construction was minimized and access to the remote site over ice roads was possible. Prefabricating the liner panels reduced time on site in a remote region of Siberia.

>> For more, search geomembranes at www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com

60



10/5/11 2:19 PM

CALENDAR OCTOBER

NOVEMBER

Geosynthetics in Pavements Systems

Waterproof Membranes–2011

2021 OCTOBER | ATLANTA

Organized by Applied Market Information Ltd., Waterproof Membranes–2011 is at the Maritim Hotel in Cologne.

This 1.5-day NAGS/GMA short course with instructors Barry Christopher and David Suits is at the Sheraton Atlanta Perimeter North Hotel.

For more information and to register: http://geosyntheticsmagazine.com/ articles/081511_atlanta_course.html

4th International Conference/ Geosynthetics Middle East 2011 2526 OCTOBER | ABU DHABI, UAE The 4th International Conference/Geosynthetics Middle East 2011 will take place in Abu Dhabi, UAE. Last year, this event attracted more than 300 delegates from 25 countries. With a main focus on the Mid-East region’s infrastructure projects, this event includes topics such as: railways, roads, airports, seaports, bridges, tunnels, landfills, and environmental protection.

For more information: +49 931 4104 436, [email protected], www.skz.de

IFAI Expo Americas 2011 2527 OCTOBER | BALTIMORE The 2011 edition of IFAI Expo Americas is at the Baltimore Convention Center. Leading the way in specialty fabrics: the largest specialty fabrics trade show in the Americas.

For more information on exhibiting, sponsoring, or speaking at the show: www.ifaiexpo.com

1517 NOVEMBER | COLOGNE, GERMANY

This event will feature four technical sessions: environmental aspects, performance testing, barrier properties, and case studies.

For more information: www.amiconferences.com

2011 International Conference of the Korean Geosynthetics Society 2324 NOVEMBER | SEOUL The 10th anniversary of the Korean Geosynthetics Society Foundation is commemorated this year with an international conference in Seoul. “Sustainable Applications of Geosynthetics Technology” is the theme of the 2011 International Conference of the Korean Geosynthetics Society (ICKGSS). The objective of this conference is to provide a forum for the dissemination and exchange of scientific and technical ideas, and to review progress among researchers, making this conference useful for both practitioners and researchers. It is organized by the Korean Geosynthetics Society under the auspices of the International Geosynthetics Society. Conference topics include: coastal, transportation, and underground engineering; erosion control and hydraulic engineering; geo-environmental and green structures; testing, standardization, regulation, and reliability; geosynthetic stabilized and reinforced soil structures; MQC/MQA and CQC/CQA for geosynthetics.

For more information: www.kgss.or.kr/

Geosynthetics in the Mining Industry 29 NOVEMBER | SPARKS, NEV. In conjunction with the 2011 Northwest Mining Association’s annual meeting, the Fabricated Geomembrane Institute (FGI) is presenting a one-day short course featuring advances and current trends with geosynthetic materials in mining applications. Speakers include: Tim Stark, Allan Breitenbach, Ron Frobel, John Heap, Chris Athanassopoulos, Mark Smith, and Daren Laine. The course will take place at the Nugget Casino Resort in Sparks, Nev.

To register or for more information: 217 333 7394, [email protected]

DECEMBER International Symposium on Sustainable Geosynthetics and Green Technology for Climate Change (SGCC2011) 78 DECEMBER | BANGKOK, THAILAND A retirement symposium to honor Prof. Dennes T. Bergado, SGCC–2011 is Dec. 7–8 at the Grand Centara Convention Hotel in Bangkok.

For more information: www.set.ait.ac.th/ acsig/sgcc2011/introduction.html

FEBRUARY 2012 EC12—IECA’s Environmental Connection 2629 FEBRUARY | LAS VEGAS The International Erosion Control Association’s annual Environmental Connection (EC–’12) conference is in Las Vegas Feb. 26–29 at the Rio Hotel & Casino.

MSE Walls & Reinforced Soil Slopes: LRFD and ASD Design Approaches

Geosynthetics in Pavements Systems

2628 OCTOBER | NEWARK, N.J.

2829 NOVEMBER | ORLANDO

Instructors: Dov Leshchinsky and Jim Collin

This 1.5-day NAGS/GMA short course with instructors Barry Christopher and David Suits is at the Orlando Holiday Inn—Orlando Airport.

Among the topics for the 2012 conference and trade show: effluent limitation guidelines (ELGs), stormwater and non-stormwater discharge issues, active and passive treatment for lowering turbidity, wetland and soil restoration, erosion issues related to mining, environmental impacts of green energy, bioremediation and engineering for slopes, procedures and specifications for BMP selection and installation.

For more information and to register:

For more information: www.ieca.org

This course presents the latest national recommendations for design and construction practice for reinforced soil structures including mechanically stabilized earth walls. It includes the latest on reinforced wall and slope design based on LRFD and ASD plus hands-on use of two software packages (MSEW and ReSSA), licensed to the FHWA and state DOTs.

http://geosyntheticsmagazine.com/ articles/081511_orlando_course.html

For more information: www.geoprograms. com/downloads/Newark.pdf



61

10/5/11 2:19 PM

CALENDAR MARCH 2012

MAY 2012

SEPTEMBER 2012

ASCE’s GeoCongress 2012

GeoAmericas

EuroGeo5

2529 MARCH | OAKLAND, CALIF.

25 MAY 2012 | LIMA, PERU

1619 SEPTEMBER 2012 | VALENCIA, SPAIN

“State of the art and practice in geotechnical engineering” is the theme for the 2012 edition of the annual GeoCongress of the American Society of Civil Engineers at the Oakland Marriott City Center.

The 2nd Pan-American Geosynthetics Congress is May 2–5, 2012, at the Westin Libertador San Isidro in Lima, Peru. It is organized by IGS/Peru Chapter, under the auspices of the International Geosynthetics Society (IGS).

Under the auspices of the International Geosynthetics Society (IGS), EuroGeo5 will be the 5th Regional Conference on Geosynthetics in Europe. The event is conducted every four years, with the last conference in 2008 in Edinburgh, Scotland.

GeoAmericas 2012 will highlight the main topics and applications in the geosynthetics industry. Keynote lectures and selected papers will be presented on the conference’s primary themes:

State-of-the-art architecture, open spaces, and versatility are the hallmarks of the conference location—the Convention & Exhibition Centre of Valencia.

• Geosynthetics in Environmental Applications

EuroGeo5 will present the major geosynthetic applications including:

Among the highlights for the 2012 conference and trade show: presentations specific to state of the art covering the geo-profession; Terzaghi, Peck, and Seed lectures; and technical sessions, panel discussions, short courses, workshops, and student activities.

For more information: www.geocongress2012.org

• Geosynthetics in Dynamic Applications • Geosynthetics in Hydraulic Applications • Geosynthetics in Mining Applications

APRIL 2012 NACE Annual Conference 15 APRIL | LEXINGTON, KY The annual conference of the National Association of County Engineers is set for April 1–5 in Lexington, with the Kentucky-based theme: “Racing to the Future.” Exhibit space and sponsorships are now available. Early bird registration discounts are available until Dec. 31

For more information: www. countyengineers.org

• Geosynthetics in Highway Applications • Geosynthetics in Sanitary Applications • Case Histories • New Geosynthetics Products Among the scheduled speakers at GeoAmericas are: J.P. Giroud, Dov Leshchinsky, Mark E. Smith, and Jorge Zornberg. English and Spanish are the official languages for this conference.

For more information: www.geoamericas2012.com

• Transport (roads, railways, tunnels and airports) • Hydraulic structures (dams, reservoirs, canals) • Erosion control and coastal works • Building construction • Soil improvement and reinforcement • Mining • Environmental applications (waste landfills and soil remediation technologies) • Agriculture and aquaculture All aspects of the use of geosynthetics will be dealt with, drawing on experience gained in case histories as well as research and development into new products and uses: • Testing and properties • Specification and certifications

>> For more events, go to: www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com/ resources/calendar

JUNE 2012

• Long term experiences and durability

IFAI Expo Asia 2012

• Design concepts and calculation methods

2628 JUNE 2012 | SINGAPORE

• Installation and pathology

IFAI Expo Asia 2012 returns to Singapore after its successful premiere last March. The 2012 conference and trade show will take place June 26–28 at the Suntec Singapore International Exhibition Centre.

For more information: www.eurogeo5.org

IFAI president and CEO Stephen Warner said that feedback on IFAI Expo Asia 2011 was extremely positive. “Many of the exhibitors told us that this trade show was a long time coming—a show in the Asia Pacific region specifically focused on the growing technical textiles marketplace.” IFAI Expo Asia 2011, organized by the Industrial Fabrics Association International (IFAI), attracted more than 1,400 registered participants from 39 countries. The exhibitor prospectus and booth selections for the 2012 show are available now. Among the technical symposiums at Expo Asia 2012 are: Geosynthetics—Waste and Water Containment; and Geosynthetics—Roads and Bridges.

For more information about IFAI Expo Asia 2012: www.ifaiexpoasia.com 62



10/5/11 2:19 PM

ADVERTISER INDEX This magazine is made possible by the ongoing investment of the advertisers you see here. We thank our readers for supporting them throughout the year. For advertising rates and information, call Shelly Arman at 800 436 2408.

Cv2 Agru America ✦ GMA 800 373 2478 www.agruamerica.com

47 American Wick Drain Corp. ✦ 800 242 9425 www.americanwick.com

51 AR Industries ✦ +1 909 829 4444 www.artech2000.com

29 Atarfil S.L. ✦ www.atarfil.com The advertisers in bold are exhibitors at IFAI EXPO Americas 2011. Be sure to visit their booths at the show, which will be held in Baltimore, Maryland on October 25–27, 2011. For more information on IFAI Expo 2011, please visit www.ifaiexpo.com. For advertising rates and information call Shelly Arman at +1 651 225 6987 or 800 225 4324.

47 Ausenco Vector Engineering Inc. +1 303 279 7533 www.ausenco.com

36 Carlisle SynTec 800 479 6832 www.carlislegeomembrane.com

9 CETCO Lining Technologies ✦ GMA 800 527 9948 www.cetco.com

1 DEMTECH Services Inc. ✦ 888 324 9353 www.demtech.com

13 Fiberweb ✦ GMA 800 441 2760 www.TyparGeotextiles.com The Geosynthetic Materials Association actively identifies, assesses, analyzes and acts upon market growth opportunities and issue that affect its member companies. The activities of the association are proactive in nature and focus on five areas: Engineering support • Business development • Education • Government relations • Geosynthetic industry promotion

2 Firestone Specialty Products ✦ GMA 800 428 4442 www.firestonesp.com/ifai8

CONTACT

Andrew Aho [email protected] 800 636 5042.

www.ieca.org/geosynthetics

49 L & M Supply Co. ✦ GMA 800 948 7870 www.landmsupplyco.com

51 Leister USA ✦ 855 534 7837 www.leisterusa.com

37 Naue GmbH & Co. ✦ GMA +1 404 504 6295 www.naue.com

49 Presto Products ✦ GMA 800 548 3424 www.prestogeo.com

Cv3 Raven Industries ✦ GMA 800 635 3456 www.RavenEFD.com/im

32, 33 TenCate Geosynthetics ✦ GMA 800 685 9990 www.mirafi.com

31 Tensar International Corporation ✦ GMA 888 828 5007 www.tensarcorp.com/integrity_GEO

5 Thrace-LINQ ✦ GMA 800 445 4675 www.thracelinq.com

25 Varicore Technologies Inc. 800 978 8007 www.multi-flow.com

58 Geosynthetics Middle East 2011 www.GeosyntheticsMe.com

7 GSE Lining Technology Inc. ✦ GMA +1 281 443 8564 www.gseworld.com

Cv4 Huesker Inc. ✦ GMA 800 942 9418 www.huesker.com

VISIT

www.gmanow.com

41 IECA

✦ IFAI member

SEE US ONLINE www.geosyntheticsmagazine.com AR Industries ✦ Atarfil S.L. ✦ Cooley Group ✦ GMA Leister USA ✦ Plastatech Engineering Ltd ✦ Raven Industries ✦ GMA Thrace-LINQ ✦ GMA

GMA Geosynthetic Materials Association member



63

10/5/11 2:19 PM

FINAL INSPECTION GeoAmericas 2012—Lima, Peru By Elizabeth Peggs

G

eoAmericas 2012 will be held May 2-5 in the San Isidro district of Lima, the capital and largest city in Peru. San Isidro is the epicenter of the region’s finance, business, and mining interests. The importance of this district, however, is not all that makes this next installment in the quadrennial GeoAmericas conferences unique. • Simultaneous translation will be

available for every session at the event. From short courses to keynote lectures, presentations will be heard in English and Spanish. • The conference organizers are valuing quality. Paper selection standards are exceptionally high. The number of presentations will be slightly fewer to give attendees more substantial information and to facilitate more question-andanswer time. • The preliminary schedule includes four short courses, 12 parallel sessions, six training lectures, six special lectures, and multiple discussion panels. Machu Picchu

• Attendees can interact with more than 50 top companies in the GeoAmericas exhibit hall and a series of industry presentations are all within the Westin Lima Hotel Spa & Convention Center, a new five-star facility.

A city to experience

Catedral de Lima

Lima is a city of exceptional social and dining opportunities. Whether it’s a simple breakfast or a nine-course dinner, Lima delivers culinary excellence at a reasonable (actually, almost absurdly low,) cost. Travelers can also explore catacombs, tour Incan ruins, and visit colonial landmarks. GeoAmericas 2012 organizers will offer companion tours during the event and also pre- and post-conference touring options, both local and to other Peruvian attractions including Machu Picchu.

Don’t miss out GeoAmericas 2012 is organized by the Peruvian Chapter of the International Geosynthetics Society (IGS) and is presented under the auspices of the IGS. To register or for the latest information: www.geoamericas2012.com G Elizabeth Peggs, director at geosynthetica.net, is the IGS Secretary, www.geosyntheticssociety.org

64



10/5/11 2:19 PM

1011GS_p52-Cv4.indd Cv3

10/5/11 2:19 PM

Huesker’s eco-friendly Geosynthetics fit nicely under our corporate umbrella.

Huesker’s ISO 9001 certified line of quality ecofriendly Geosynthetics are known for strength and long-lasting durability. That’s important to you and the planet because today’s designs call for reinforcement products that ensure your project will endure well into the future. It’s good to know when you’re trying

Geogrids

Geotextiles

Geocomposites

Applications for Embankments s Walls s Slopes s Airport Runways Canal Liners s Landfill Capping Systems s Encased Columns

to keep costs from raining down on your project.

Mining s Roadways s Railroads s Levees

Engineering with Geosynthetics 800.942.9418 huesker.com 704.588.5500

1011GS_p52-Cv4.indd Cv4

10/5/11 2:19 PM