A Study on Soil-Geotextile Interaction Using Gradient Ratio Tests

Scientiﬁ c Review – Engineering and Environmental Sciences (2019), 28 (2), 235–243 Sci. Rev. Eng. Env. Sci. (2019), 28 (2) Przegląd Naukowy – Inżynieria i Kształtowanie Środowiska (2019), 28 (2), 235–243 Prz. Nauk. Inż. Kszt. Środ. (2019), 28 (2) http://iks.pn.sggw.pl DOI 10.22630/PNIKS.2019.28.2.22 Anna MISZKOWSKA Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Warsaw University of Life Sciences – SGGW A study on soil-geotextile interaction using gradient ratio tests

Key words: nonwoven geotextile, soil, gra- Kim, 2016; Miszkowska & Koda, 2017; dient ratio, clogging, permeability, fi lter Palmeira & Trejos Galvis, 2018). A geotextile performs the fi ltration function by limiting migration of soil Introduction particles across its plane, while allow- ing relatively unrestricted liquid fl ow Nonwoven geotextiles are made of through the fi lter over a projected service randomly or directionally orientated fi - lifetime of the application under consid- bres, fi laments or other element, chemi- eration. Filtration function also provides cally and/or thermally and/or mechani- separation benefi ts (Giroud, 1981; Koda, cally bonded (PN-EN ISO 10318). They Szymański & Wolski, 1989; Koerner, have been widely used as fi lters in geoen- 2012). Figure 1 shows that a geotextile vironmental and geotechnical works for allows passage of water from a soil mass over 50 years. This type of geosynthetics while preventing the uncontrolled migra- gathers special features that commonly tion of soil particles. lead to applications with faster execution It is also worth mentioning that when and lower costs in comparison with tradi- a geotextile fi lter is placed adjacent to tional, granular fi lters. What is more, the a base soil, between the natural soil use of nonwoven geotextiles can bring structure and the structure of the geotex- benefi ts for environment due to less emis- tile arises a discontinuity, which allows sion of harmful gases to the atmosphere, some soil particles to migrate through the less water consumption and energy and geotextile under the infl uence of seepage more environmentally friendly construc- fl ows. It is important that a condition of tion procedures, for instance (Heibaum, equilibrium is established at the soil- 2014; Koerner & Koerner, 2015; Yoo & -geotextile interface as soon as possible

A study on soil-geotextile interaction using gradient ratio tests 235 FIGURE 1. Geotextile fi lter (Wesolowski, Krzywosz & Brandyk, 2000) to prevent soil particles being piped for ging. Physical clogging is the accumula- an indefi nite period through the geosyn- tion of soil particles within the openings thetic. At equilibrium, three zones may of a geotextile, thereby reducing its hy- be identifi ed: the undisturbed soil, a soil draulic conductivity (Fig. 2). Clogging layer, and a bridging layer (Wesolowski can be also caused by chemical and/or et al., 2000; Shukla, 2016; Miszkowska, biological processes (Stępień, Jędryszek Lenart & Koda, 2017). & Koda, 2012; Koda, Miszkowska & The successful use of a synthetic Stępień, 2016; Miszkowska, Koda, fi lter is dependent on knowledge of the Krzywosz, Król, & Boruc, 2016; Sabiri, interaction between the base soil and the Caylet, Montillet, Le Coq & Durkheim, geotextile that is complex because of the 2017; Fatema & Bhatia, 2018). large number of parameters involved. One of the methods to evaluate com- The essential properties to be determined patibility between a granular base mate- are particle-size distribution and perme- rial and a geotextile fi lter is to use the ability of soil and water permeability gradient ratio (GR) test (Calhoun, 1972; normal to the plane, characteristic open- Palmeira, Beirigo & Gardoni, 2000; Caz- ing size, the number of constrictions in zuffi et al., 2016). case of nonwoven (Giroud, 2010; Caz- Fannin, Vaid, and Shi (1994) de- zuffi , Moraci, Mandaglio & Ielo, 2016). fi ned a modifi ed gradient ratio using What is more, nonwoven geotextiles a port located 8 mm above the geotextile are the fi rst in contact with soil in fi lters layer. Gardoni (2000) proposed a defi ni- applications, the design must be pre- tion of GR using a port 3 mm above the pared to avoid the negative phenomenon geotextile fi lter to evaluate soil-geotex- causing a decrease of the permeability tile interaction closer to the soil-fi lter in- of the geotextile fi lter in time like clog- terface. However, the defi nition of is in

236 A. Miszkowska FIGURE 2. Physical clogging (Shukla, 2016) both cases is the same as that proposed The main properties of the geotextile are by ASTM. summarised in Table 1. To avoid clogging, gradient ratio The soil used in gradient ratio test was should be less than 3 (Haliburton & classiﬁ ed as silty sand (siSa). According Wood, 1982; Carroll, 1983). But according to ASTM D5101-12, a gradient ratio TABLE 1. Properties of the geotextile tested (own greater than 1.0 indicates system clog- and manufacturer studies) ging or restriction at or near the surface Properties Value of the geotextile. tensile strength – machine 25 The main aim of this study was to direction [kN·m–1] present the laboratory gradient ratio test tensile strength – cross machine 25 results to evaluate soil-geotextile inter- direction [kN·m–1] action. The following hypothesis can be elongation at maximum load 50 proposed: gradient ratio, GR is changing – machine direction [%] with time and apart from gradient ratio Mechanical elongation at maximum load 60 also soil-gradient ratio, SGR should be – cross machine direction [%] determined to carry out a detailed analy- dynamic perforation resistance 12 sis of soil-geotextile interactions. [mm] water permeability normal to the 55 plane [l·m–2·s–1] Material and methods characteristic opening size – O 90 65 Hydraulic [μm] In this study nonwoven geotextile, thickness under 2 kPa [mm] 1.6 needle punched and made of continu- weight [g·m–2] 300 ous polypropylene ﬁ bres, was tested. Physical number of constrictions 22

A study on soil-geotextile interaction using gradient ratio tests 237 to Kenney and Lau (1985) method the nical Engineering at Warsaw University assessment of internal stability soils, the of Life Sciences – SGGW using ASTM tested soil was internally unstable. The modiﬁ ed apparatus. Piezometers (6 and soil properties are shown in Table 2. 7) were installed to obtain additional pressure measurements in the layer of TABLE 2. Soil properties soil situated close to nonwoven geotex- Properties Value tile layer. Figure 3 shows a detailed sche- matic view of the device. Soil particle d10 [mm] 0.012 Soil particle d [mm] 0.04 At the beginning of test, the soil was 15 dried (in 105°C for 24 h) and sieved Soil particle d [mm] 0.12 30 through a two-millimeter mesh. Then, Soil particle d50 [mm] 0.18 the soil sample was placed on the non- Soil particle d85 [mm] 0.27 woven geotextile sample. After that, wa-

Coefﬁ cient of curvature – Cc [-] 6 ter was delivered into the apparatus from

Coeffi cient of uniformity – CU [-] 16.7 bottom to top for 24 h. In the next step Coeffi cient of soil permeability – k of the test, fl ow direction was changed s 0.000079 [m·s–1] (Fig. 4). When the water fl ow reached dn – the soil particle diameter that n% of all soil a steady condition, the pressure of indi- particles are fi ner by weight. vidual piezometer (Δh), temperature of the water fl ow (T), volume of the fl ow (V) The gradient ratio was determined in and time of the fl ow (t) were measured the laboratory of Department of Geotech- for each of the hydraulic gradients at 1.0,

FIGURE 3. Scheme of gradient ratio test apparatus: g – nonwoven geotextile, Ln – distance between piezometer n-th and the bottom of geotextile, hn – the piezometer reading for n-th piezometer (Wojtasik, 2008)

238 A. Miszkowska • zone 4.5–6 (17 mm layer of soil within the distance from 8 to 25 mm above nonwoven geotextile between piezometers 4.5 and 6), • zone 2.3–4.5 (50 mm layer of soil within the distance from 25 to 75 mm above nonwoven geotextile between piezometers 2 and 3 as well as 4 and 5). The value of the gradient ratio can be generally deﬁ ned as (ASTM D-5101-12): i GR LG is where: GR – the gradient ratio, i – the hydraulic gradient across a soil FIGURE 4. Front view of gradient ratio test de- LG vice (photo by the author) thickness (L) and the geotextile, is – the reference hydraulic gradient in 2.5, 5.0, 7.5 and 10.0 until the change of the soil, measured in a region away from these parameters was not observed. The the geotextile (calculated for the segment test was done in triplicate. of the soil specimen between 25 and The following piezometer readings 75 mm above the geotextile ﬁ lter). were taken in individual zones: In the presented test, the gradient ra- – for soil-geotextile: tio in soil-geotextile system was calcu- • zone 7–8 (geotextile and 4 mm lated according the formula: layer of soil between piezom- 'h L eters 7 and 8), GR 4.5 8 24 Lh • zone 6–8 (geotextile and 8 mm 42.34.5' layer of soil between piezometrs 6 and 8), where: • zone 4.5–8 (geotextile and 25 GR – the gradient ratio, mm layer of soil between pi- Δh4.5–8 – the difference manometer read- ezometers 4 and 5 to 8), ings between average reading of 4 and – for soil: 5 piezometers and 8 piezometer [mm], • zone 6–7 (4 mm layer of soil L4 – the distance between piezometer 4 within the distance from 4 to and the bottom of geotextiles [mm], 8 mm above nonwoven geotextile L2–4 – the distance between piezometers between piezometers 6 and 7), 2 to 4 [mm],

A study on soil-geotextile interaction using gradient ratio tests 239 Δh2.3–4.5 – the distance in manometer ning of the tests (GRs, SGR17s; where: readings between average reading of 2 s – start) as well as when the water and 3 piezometers and average reading fl ow reached a steady condition (i.e. the of 4 and 5 piezometers [mm]. changes in reading of piezometers were Also, the gradient ratio for the soil not observed – GRf, SGR17f; where: f layers 17 mm above the geotextile was – fi nish). calculated from: The obtained results show that the gradient ratio GR has increased from 'h4.5 6 L24 0.75 to 0.9 under tested hydraulic gra- SGR17 Lh46' 2.34.5 dient and soil-gradient ratio SGR17 has where: increased from 1.15 to 1.42 under tested hydraulic gradient. The gradient ratio SGR17 – the gradient ratio for the soil layers 17 mm above the geotextile, and soil-gradient ratio have increased with time and with a higher hydraulic Δh4.5–6 – the difference manometer readings between average reading of 4 and 5 gradient because of clogging mechanism piezometers and 6 piezometer [mm], (Kutay & Aydilek, 2005; Wu, Hong, Yan & Chang, 2006; Fannin, Palmeira, L4–6 – the distance between piezometers 4 to 6 [mm]. Srikongsri, & Gardoni, 2008; Sabiri et al., 2017) but signifi cant clogging oc- curred in the 17-mm soil layer situated Results and discussion in distance from 8 to 25 mm above nonwoven geotextile sample. Figure 5 shows the relationship be- A review of the data shows that non- tween average values of gradient ratio, woven geotextile tested with silty sand (siSa) would be considered to clogged GR and soil-gradient ratio, SGR17 under hydraulic gradient from 1 to 10. The GR based on criterion that sets of GR (SGR) of 1 as the limit (ASTM D5101-12), and SGR17 were calculated at the begin-

1,5 1,42

1,25 1,27 1,15

17 1,1 GRs 1 GRf 0,9

GR or SGR 0,75 0,84 SGR17s 0,75 SGR17f 0,71

0,5 0 2,5 5 7,5 10 Hydraulic gradient [-]

FIGURE 5. Relationship between GR or SGR17 and hydraulic gradien (own studies)

240 A. Miszkowska however would not be considered cording to ASTM D5101-12) but also clogged when the US Army Corps of soil-gradient ratio, SGR17. Engineers’ limit of 3 is used (Haliburton The obtained results confi rmed that & Wood, 1982). Fannin (2015) also con- gradient ratio as well as soil-gradient ra- fi rmed that a GR value larger than 3 is an tio increases with time due to physical indication of excessive clogging. What clogging. However, based on fi lter de- is more, Fischer, Mare and Holtz (1999) sign criteria, the tested nonwoven geo- showed that value of GR equal to 1 may textile can be used as fi lter for internally not be representative because of analysis unstable soil with fi ne content of 20%. of a relatively small soil-geotextile contact zone in the gradient ratio apparatus. Nevertheless, the results confi rm that not References only gradient ratio, GR should be determined to evaluate and study soil-geo- ASTM D-5101-12 (2017). Standard Test Method textile interaction but also soil-gradient for Measuring the Filtration Compatibility of Soil-Geotextile Systems. ratio, SGR. In addition, Lafl eur (2016) Calhoun, C. (1972). Development of design crite- proposed a modifi ed gradient ratio test ria and acceptance specifi cations for plastic which includes the measurement of the fi lter cloths. Technical Report S-72-7. Vicks- amount of particles passing through the burg, MS: U.S. Army Corps of Waterways geotextile and collected at the bottom Experiment Station. of the permeameter, what can yield the Carroll, R.G. Jr. (1983). Geotextile fi lter criteria. Transportation Research Record, 916, 46-53. complete portrait of the compatibility Cazzuffi , D., Moraci, N., Mandaglio, M.C. & Ielo, between a fi lter and a soil too. D. (2016). Evolution in design of geotextile fi lters. In Proceedings of the 6th European Geosynthetics Congress, Ljubljana 25- -28.09.2016 (pp. 40-63). Conclusions Fannin, R.J. (2015). The use of Gradient Ratio test for the selection of geotextiles in fi ltra- The compatibility of a nonwoven tion. Geosynthetics. Geotechnical News, geotextile and soil can be established by Canadian Geotechnical Society, 33-36. means of the gradient ratio test. Interpre- Fannin, R.J., Palmeira, E.M., Srikongsri, A. & tation of the gradient ratio test is based Gardoni, M.G. (2008). Interpretation of the Gradient Ratio Test for Geotextile Filtration on measurements of the head loss that Design. In Proceedings of the 1st Pan Ameri- occurs across the geotextile specimen can Geosynthetics Conference & Exhibition and in the soil sample with imposed hy- (pp. 1699-1707). draulic gradient and with respect to time. Fannin, R.J., Vaid, Y.P. & Shi, Y. (1994). A critical The permeameter used in the tests was evaluation of the gradient ratio test. Geotech- nical Testing Journal, 17(1), 35-42. modifi ed to better defi ne the variation of Fatema, N. & Bhatia, S.K. (2018). Sediment Re- head loss in the sample. The additional tention and Clogging of Geotextile with High piezometers were installed closer to the Water Content Slurries. International Journal top surface of the nonwoven geotextile. of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering, 4, For that reason, it was possible to de- 13. DOI 10.1007/s40891-018-0131-0 termine not only gradient ratio, GR (ac- Fischer, G.R., Mare, A.D. & Holtz, R.D. (1999). Infl uence of Procedural Variables on the

A study on soil-geotextile interaction using gradient ratio tests 241 Gradient Ratio Test. Geotechnical Testing tems. Geotechnical Testing Journal, 28(1), Journal, 22(1), 22-31. 1-13. Gardoni, M.G. (2000). Hydraulic and fi lter char- Lafl eur, J. (2016). A modifi ed gradient ratio test acteristics of geosynthetics under pressure for the fi ltration performance of geotextiles. and clogging conditions (doctoral disserta- In Proceedings of the 6th European Geosyn- tion). Brasilia: University of Brasilia. thetics Congress (pp. 697-702). Giroud, J.P. (1981). Designing with geotextiles. Miszkowska, A. & Koda, E. (2017). Change of RILEM materials and structures. Research water permeability of nonwoven geotextile and Testing, 14(4), 257-272. DOI 10.1007/ exploited in earthfi ll dam. In Proceedings of BF02473945 the 24th International PhD Students Confer- Giroud, J.P. (2010). Development of criteria for ence – MendelNet 2017 (pp. 790-795). geotextile and granular fi lters. In Proceed- Miszkowska, A., Koda, E., Krzywosz, Z., Król, ings of the 9th International Conference on P. & Boruc, N. (2016). Zmiany właściwości Geosynthetics (pp. 45-64). fi ltracyjnych geowłókniny po 22 latach Haliburton, T.A. & Wood, P.D. (1982). Evaluation eksploatacji w drenażu zapory ziemnej of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Gradi- [Change of hydraulic properties of nonwoven ent Ratio Test for Geotextile Performance. In geotextile after 22 years of exploitation in Proceedings of the 2nd International Confer- earthfi ll dam]. Acta Scientiarum Polonorum, ence on Geotextiles (pp. 97-101). Architectura, 15(3), 119-126. Heibaum, M. (2014). Geosynthetics for wa- Miszkowska, A., Lenart, S. & Koda, E. (2017). terways and fl ood protection structures Changes of permeability of nonwoven geo- – Controlling the interaction of water and textiles due to clogging and cyclic water fl ow soil (The Mercer Lecture). Geotextiles in laboratory conditions. Water, 9(9), 660. and Geomembranes, 42(4), 374-393. DOI DOI 10.3390/w9090660 10.1016/j.geotexmem.2014.06.003 Palmeira, E.M. & Trejo Galvis, H.L. (2018). Kenney, T.C. & Lau D. (1985). Internal stability Evaluation of predictions on nonwoven of granular fi lters. Canadian Geotechnical geotextile pore size distribution under con- Journal, 22, 215-225. DOI 10.1139/t85-029 fi nement. Geosynthetics International, 25(2), Koda, E., Miszkowska, A. & Stępień, S. (2016). 230-240. Quality control of non-woven geotextiles Palmeira, E.M., Beirigo, E.A. & Gardoni, M.G. used in a drainage system in an old remedial (2010). Tailings-nonwoven geotextile fi lter landfi ll. In Geo-Chicago 2016: sustainable compatibility in mining applications. Geo- geoenvironmental systems: selected papers textiles and Geomembranes, 28, 136-148. from sessions of Geo-Chicago 2016, 14- PN-EN ISO 10318-1:2015-12/A1:2018-09. Geo- -18.08.2016, Chicago (GSP 271) (pp. 254- syntetyki. Część 1: Terminy i defi nicje [Geo- -263). DOI 10.1061/9780784480144.025 synthetics. Part 1: Terms and defi nitions]. Koda, E., Szymański, A. & Wolski, W. (1989). Warszawa, Polski Komitet Normalizacyjny. Behavior of geodrains in organic subsoil. In Sabiri, N-E., Caylet, A., Montillet, A., Le Coq, Proceedings of the 12th International Con- L. & Durkheim, Y. (2017). Performance of ference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation. nonwoven geotextiles on soil drainage and Vol. 2 (pp. 1377-1380). fi ltration. European Journal of Environmen- Koerner, R.M. & Koerner, G.R. (2015). Lessons tal and Civil Engineering. DOI 10.1080/196 learned from geotextile fi lter failures under 48189.2017.1415982 challenging fi eld conditions. Geotextiles and Shukla, S.K. (2016). An introduction to geo- Geomembranes, 43, 272-281. synthetic engineering. Leiden: CRC Press/ Koerner, R.M. (2012). Designing with geosyn- /Balkema. thetics. Bloomington: Xlibris Publishing Stępień, S., Jędryszek, M. & Koda, E. (2012). Corporation. Assessment of water permeability change Kutay, M.E. & Aydilek, A.H. (2005). Filtration of non-woven geotextile fi lter used in leach- Performance of Two-Layer Geotextile Sys- ate drainage on sanitary landfi ll. Scientifi c

242 A. Miszkowska Review – Engineering and Environmental soil-geotextile system were assessed using Sciences, 21(3), 159-170. laboratory tests. An ASTM modifi ed gradient Wesolowski, A., Krzywosz, Z. & Brandyk, T. (2000). ratio test device was used to determine gradi- Geosyntetyki w konstrukcjach inżynierskich ent ratio as well as soil-gradient ratio. One [Geosynthetics in engineering constructions]. type of nonwoven geotextile and soil were Warszawa: Wydawnictwo SGGW. used to simulate the conditions in drainage Wojtasik, D. (2008). Evaluation of nonwoven geo- system. The obtained results indicate that the textile as a fi ltration layer for internally unsta- gradient ratio and soil-gradient ratio increas- ble soils. Annals of Warsaw University of Life es with time because of clogging mechanism. Sciences, Land Reclamation, 40, 107-114. However, the tested geotextile can be used as Wu, Ch.S., Hong, Y.S., Yan, Y.W. & Chang, B.S. fi lter for soil with fi ne content of 20%. (2006). Soil-nonwoven geotextile fi ltration behavior under contact with drainage materials. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 24(1), 1- -10. DOI 10.1016/j.geotexmem.2005.09.001 Yoo, C. & Kim, B. (2016). Geosynthetics in Underground Construction. In Proceedings of the 6th European Geosynthetics Congress (pp. 208-225). Author’s address: Anna Miszkowska (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7715-2809) Szkoła Główna Gospodarstwa Wiejskiego Summary w Warszawie Wydział Budownictwa i Inżynierii Środowiska A study on soil-geotextile interaction Katedra Geoinżynierii using gradient ratio tests. Nonwoven geo- ul. Nowoursynowska 159, 02-776 Warszawa textile have been widely used for fi ltration. Poland In this paper, the clogging potential for a e-mail: [email protected]

A study on soil-geotextile interaction using gradient ratio tests 243