Thermal desiccation of geosynthetic clay liners under brine pond conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Desiccation of geosynthetic clay liners (GCLs) in composite lining systems is investigated experimentally. Field conditions similar to those encountered in brine ponds (high surface temperature and low overburden pressure of 20 kPa) are simulated in two soil columns. The GCL is first allowed to hydrate from a sandy subsoil under isothermal conditions (44 days), then subjected to a thermal gradient applied through a heat source (78°C) on top of the geomembrane (39 days). Changes in water content, temperature of subsoil and movement of the surface during hydration and heating stages are measured. A sharp rise in moisture content is observed in the upper region of the subsoil immediately after the start of heating, which shortly dissipates. After 39 days of heating, the bentonite in the tested GCLs is dehydrated to around 8% gravimetric water content, down from over 100% after hydration. In addition, more than 3 mm of shrinkage of bentonite in the vertical direction is recorded. X-ray imaging after the tests reveals extensive desiccation cracking of bentonite. The study has confirmed the existence of a significant risk of desiccation of GCLs under thermal gradients and has generated data that are useful for validating models used for the prediction of GCL behaviour.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".