Effect of temperature on hydration of geosynthetic clay liners in landfills
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Geosynthetic clay liners (GCLs) have gained popularity as a barrier system in modern landfill construction. As such, it is depended upon to provide a level of impermeability to prevent the escape of contaminants into the surrounding soil and groundwater. It has been proven that a GCL's hydraulic conductivity is closely related to its moisture content. GCLs are known to absorb moisture from the underlying soil after installation. In a landfill, temperatures near the liner can reach upwards of 55ºC. The effect of these elevated temperatures on the hydration process of the GCL was determined for two types of GCL over two types of subsoil: sand and clay. It was found that elevated temperatures prevented the GCL from reaching moisture content levels that would be acceptable in a real-life scenario. Temperatures in landfills could be expected to cause a GCL to reach a moisture equilibrium at roughly 16% gravimetric moisture content, where GCL at room temperature would reach higher than 100% gravimetric moisture content. The significant difference in moisture equilibrium of GCLs at different temperatures may suggest that the heat naturally produced in landfills could negatively affect the liner's hydraulic performance. The importance of allowing a GCL to properly hydrate before heat exposure must be better understood in order to minimize the potential negative effect of a landfill on our environment and our livelihood. This study also confirmed that the hydration potential of GCL depends on the method of GCL manufacture and the subsoil characteristics.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".