You are on page 1of 45

TrIsoplast |Ineral LIners nternatIonal 87 Dude WeIstraat 17 5JJ4 LK 7elddrIel The Netherlands

T: +J1 (0)418 6J 60 J0 F: +J1 (0)418 6J J7 90 Info@trIsoplast.com www.trIsoplast.com

















TrIsopIast

0ocumentatIon

VersIon 1.2c



|ay 2004


TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
2
CDNTENTS
LIST DF FICUPES...................................................................................................... 4
LIST DF TALES....................................................................................................... 4
0ISCLAIhEP............................................................................................................ 5
1 INTPD0UCTIDN.................................................................................................. 6
1.1 What Is TrIsoplast:......................................................................................... 6
1.2 Use and approval of TrIsoplast for the sealIng of waste dIsposal sItes and contamInated
sItes .......................................................................................................... 9
1.J DbjectIve and structure of thIs documentatIon....................................................... 9
2 CDhPDNENTS DF TPISDPLAST ............................................................................. 10
2.1 Cranular materIal .........................................................................................10
2.2 8entonIte...................................................................................................10
2.J Polymer.....................................................................................................10
2.4 |IxIng water ...............................................................................................11
3 CDNSTPUCTIDN DF TPISDPLAST APPIEP ............................................................... 12
J.1 SelectIon of the TrIsoplast components...............................................................12
J.2 |IxIng of the TrIsoplast components ..................................................................12
J.2.1 StatIonary and mobIle mIxIng plants ............................................................12
J.2.2 |IxIng technIque....................................................................................12
J.2.J |IxIng process .......................................................................................1J
J.J Emplacement and compactIon of TrIsoplast..........................................................14
4 PPDPEPTIES DF TPISDPLAST ............................................................................... 16
4.1 Ceneral IdentIfIcatIon....................................................................................16
4.2 PermeabIlIty ...............................................................................................16
4.2.1 Water permeabIlIty.................................................................................16
4.2.2 AIr permeabIlIty.....................................................................................19
4.2.J PermeatIon of landfIll leachate ..................................................................19
4.2.4 nfluence of chemIcally aggressIve fluIds .......................................................19
4.J |echanIcal resIstance....................................................................................20
4.J.1 StabIlIty and deformatIon resIstance ............................................................20
4.J.2 HydraulIc resIstance................................................................................24
5 0UPAILITY DF TPISDPLAST................................................................................ 27
5.1 FesIstance agaInst chemIcal effects ...................................................................27
5.2 FesIstance agaInst bIologIcal effects ..................................................................27
5.2.1 |Icro organIsms and fungus .......................................................................27
5.2.2 7egetatIon ...........................................................................................J0
5.2.J SoIl fauna and burrowIng anImals ................................................................J2

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
J
5.J FesIstance agaInst physIcal Impact ....................................................................J2
5.J.1 Temperature.........................................................................................J2
5.J.2 Weather ..............................................................................................J2
5.J.J Changes In water content .........................................................................JJ
5.J.4 |echanIcal effects..................................................................................J5
6 UALITY hANACEhENT...................................................................................... 37
7 FIEL0 STU0IES DN THE PEPFDPhANCE DF TPISDPLAST

APPIEPS.................................. 38
7.1 ConstructIon test fIlls ....................................................................................J8
7.2 LysImeter studIes .........................................................................................J8
7.J ExcavatIon of completed systems ......................................................................J8
8 PPDJECT PEFEPENCES....................................................................................... 40
PEPDPTS AN0 PULICATIDNS DN TPISDPLAST.......................................................... 41

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
4
LIST DF FICUPES
FIgure 1: ComposItIon of TrIsoplast .............................................................................. 7
FIgure 2: SchematIc representatIon of the InteractIon between bentonIte and polymer ............... 8
FIgure J: |obIle TrIsoplast mIxIng plant........................................................................1J
FIgure 4: |obIle mIxIng plant ...................................................................................14
FIgure 5: nstallatIon and compactIon of the TrIsoplast mIxture...........................................15
FIgure 6: Water permeabIlIty of TrIsoplast barrIers as a functIon of water content and degree of
compactIon (benchmark test 2001 In Cermany)...................................................18
FIgure 7: SwellIng pressure test accordIng to Huder E Amberg ............................................25
FIgure 8: Water tensIon durIng root penetratIon tests wIth TrIsoplast and glacIal marl barrIers In
the laboratory ..........................................................................................J1
FIgure 9: Water tensIons In glacIal marl and TrIsoplast barrIers durIng drywet cycles In the
laboratory test ..........................................................................................J4
FIgure 10: 0IstrIbutIon of water content In TrIsoplast barrIers after constructIon and sIx years
later (thIckness of draInage layer and topsoIl above barrIer app. 0.6 m; locatIon E1:
composIte barrIer system wIth geomembrane above TrIsoplast

barrIer, E2: only
TrIsoplast barrIer wIthout geomembrane)..........................................................J9


LIST DF TALES
Table 1: Water permeabIlIty of TrIsoplast (laboratory data)...............................................16
Table 2: PermeabIlIty of TrIsoplast for aggressIve fluId medIa and In comparIson wIth water .......20
Table J: FrIctIonal stress values between TrIsoplast and geomembrane or geotextIle
(0DC 200108)...........................................................................................22
Table 4: 7alues revealed from the pressure and creep behavIour ........................................24
Table 5: LandfIll cover systems (composIte systems wIth geomembrane and TrIsoplast barrIer)Fout! IadwIjzer nIet gedefInIeerd.
Table 6: LandfIll cover systems (applIcatIon of TrIsoplast wIthout geomembrane)Fout! IadwIjzer nIet gedefInIeerd.
Table 7: LandfIll bottom lIners (composIte systems wIth geomembrane and TrIsoplast barrIer)Fout! IadwIjzer nIet gedefInIeerd.
Table 8: LandfIll bottom lIners (applIcatIon of TrIsoplast wIthout geomembrane)Fout! IadwIjzer nIet gedefInIeerd.


TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
5
0ISCLAIhEP
ThIs document Is protected by copyrIghts held by TrIsoplast |Ineral LIners nternatIonal 87 In The
Netherlands. FeproductIon of thIs document In any form Is prohIbIted wIthout wrItten permIssIon of
TrIsoplast |Ineral LIners nternatIonal 87. ntellectual property rIghts In thIs document may be held by the
author(s), and/or TrIsoplast |Ineral LIners nternatIonal 87. All rIghts are reserved.

TrIsoplast Is produced under lIcense of TrIsoplast |Ineral LIners 87. ThIs document contaIns general
InformatIon and descrIbes only characterIstIc propertIes. t Is publIshed for use by IndIvIduals who are
able to decIde for themselves whether the products are suItable for certaIn purposes/uses. No
guarantee Is gIven, nor lIabIlIty Is accepted; the use of these data and the use of the products, as
descrIbed here, Is therefore entIrely at the user's own rIsk.

Please notIfy TrIsoplast |Ineral LIners nternatIonal 87 at h.mulleneers@trIsoplast.nl should you notIce
any mIstakes, have any comments or suggestIons that should be consIdered for/Incorporated Into the next
edItIon of the TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon.

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
6
1 INTPD0UCTIDN
All InformatIon and data provIded In thIs document have been generated wIth great care and should
enable the reader/user to get a better understandIng of TrIsoplast and Its specIfIc propertIes. 0ue to the
well defIned specIfIcatIon and descrIptIon of all relevant components and processes for the productIon of
TrIsoplast (see TrIsoplast |anual for further detaIls) It Is ensured that the same mInImum standard for
every applIed TrIsoplast layer Is achIeved. Anyhow varIatIons may occur due to acceptable varIatIons
wIthIn the preproducts e.g. the granular component that mIght have an effect on the values quoted In
thIs document. Therefore any desIgn relevant values have to be evaluated by IndIvIduals who are capable
and qualIfIed to judge whether the products mentIoned In thIs documentatIon are suItable for certaIn
purposes/uses. Further testIng usIng the actual components mIght be necessary. The prIncIpal hImself Is
responsIble for the desIgn and must ensure that all components used wIthIn the total system are
compatIble and meet the requIrements of the specIfIc project.


1.1 What Is TrIsopIast!
TrIsoplast Is an InnovatIve mIneral sealIng materIal. n The Netherlands It was developed to technIcal
maturIty and successfully tested by Independent testIng laboratorIes regardIng Its usabIlIty. SInce 1992 It
has been approved and used for varIous sealIng applIcatIons In several European countrIes. TrIsoplast Is
protected by patent. t consIsts of the followIng components:
Cranular component, e.g. sand
8entonIte
Polymer

The components are mIxed In mIxIng plants and low amounts of water are added If requIred.
Thus TrIsoplast Is compacted at water contents below the optImum water content. The
uncompacted mIxture consIstIng of the abovementIoned TrIsoplast components Is referred to as
"TrIsoplast mIxture". After compactIon the term "TrIsoplast barrIer" Is used for better dIfferentIatIon.
The TrIsoplast components are subjected to defIned requIrements; complIance wIth such requIrements Is
monItored. Furthermore for each project a proof of conformIty Is furnIshed, ensurIng that the TrIsoplast
barrIer constructed wIth the components used on that specIfIc project complIes wIth the standard qualIty
of TrIsoplast.

The components are only mIxed In plants that can be calIbrated, whIch enables a hIghly accurate dosIng of
the components. n the fIrst step the dry polymer powder Is mIxed wIth the bentonIte powder, and In the
second step the granular materIal Is mIxed Into the bentonItepolymer premIx.

n the readIly prepared TrIsoplast mIxture the mass proportIons of the three basIc components arIse as
follows (see FIg. 1):

0urIng the mIxIng process the dry polymer and the bentonIte wIth Its delIvery water content of 1J by
weIght are fIrst mIxed, then added to the granular materIal (In most cases sand wIth a water content of 4
to 12 by weIght) and homogeneously mIxed. n order to control the dosIng of the mIxture components the
water contents of the bentonIte and the granular materIal must be determIned before the mIxIng process
and taken Into account when calculatIng the masses. The mass proportIons for the components result from
the followIng weIghed portIons In the mIxIng process. To 1.000 kg (dry mass) of granular materIal at least
120 kg of dry bentonIte must be added (mInImum 12 by weIght related to the weIghed portIon of the dry
granular materIal). The polymer proportIon Is at least 1.9 by weIght of the weIghed bentonIte portIon,
I.e. mInImum 2.J kg In the mentIoned example. The percent values of the basIc components on the
readIly prepared TrIsoplast mIxture are therefore: granular materIal 89.1 by weIght,

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
7
bentonIte 10.7 by weIght and polymer 0.2 by weIght. The water content of the mIxture Is between
J.6 and 12.1 by weIght.

To assure that the ready mIxed TrIsoplast

mIxture contaIns the requIred mInImum proportIon of bentonIte
polymer premIx of 12 by weIght of the weIghed portIon of dry granular materIal or 10.9 by weIght of
the dry TrIsoplast mIxture, the bentonItepolymer ratIo Is In practIce overdosed by at least 1 by weIght
In relatIon to the weIghed portIon of the granular materIal.


FIgure 1: ComposItIon of TrIsopIast

The fInIshed mIxture Is loose, has a granular appearance and pourable wIthout formIng any solId lumps.
The TrIsoplast

mIxture Is handled and compacted wIth conventIonal earth constructIon equIpment
(telescopIc or long stIck excavators and rather lIght smooth drum rollers) In a sIngle layer on a subgrade of
suffIcIent load bearIng capacIty. The sIngle layer InstallatIon Is possIble, because TrIsoplast Is far more
homogeneous In Its partIcle structure, clay mIneral content and water content than most natural clays, It
does not contaIn any oversIze partIcles and, for complIance wIth the demanded low permeabIlIty, places
consIderably lower demands on the requIred mInImum dry bulk densIty. The major benefIt of the sIngle
layer applIcatIon Is the consIderably hIgher area output, so that the InstallatIon of the TrIsoplast barrIer
and the geomembrane can be coordInated much easIer than usually durIng the constructIon of
conventIonal composIte lIners wIth compacted clay. ThIs also reduces the probabIlIty of weather related
damage to the stIll openly spread out mIneral component of a composIte lInIng system.

The specIal propertIes and the hIgh qualIty of TrIsoplast are achIeved by the addItIon of the polymer. The
polymer Is a mIcrobIal degradatIon resIstant fundamental chaIn of carbon of hIgh molar mass, sImIlar to
polyethylene, and functIonal pendant groups, whIch form strongly sorptIve bondIng wIth the clay mIneral
bentonIte, so that a practIcally IrreversIble net of polymer and bentonIte Is created. 8ondIng of the
functIonal groups to the clay materIal Is accomplIshed by hydrogen brIdges at the clay mIneral surfaces,
anIonIc adsorptIon (especIally at the breakIng edges of the clay mInerals or through polyvalent catIons
adsorbed on the clay mIneral) and catIonIc adsorptIon In the clay mIneral layers as well as specIfIc

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
8
adsorptIon (complex bondIng). 0ue to the strong InteractIons between the functIonal groups and the clay
mIneral the polymer pendant groups are also protected and can hardly be attacked bIo chemIcally.

TrIsoplast uses a certaIn polymer wIth defIned propertIes. The specIfIcatIons of thIs polymer are
confIdentIally deposIted at the 0utch ATD0LD In WagenIngen and the Cerman 8undesanstalt fur
|aterIalforschung und -prufung (8A|) (Federal nstItute for |aterIal Fesearch and TestIng) In 8erlIn. A
selected group of Independent experts was also Informed about the nature and specIfIcatIon of the
polymer, under the oblIgatIon of secrecy. However, the patent protectIon for TrIsoplast Is not restrIcted
to the actually used polymer, but applIes for all water soluble polymers able to react wIth bentonIte,
whIch contaIn for Instance CDDH, CDD

|e
+
, CDNH
2
, DH and/or =CDC= groups as functIonal groups.
Examples for polymers protected In accordance wIth the terms of the patent are among others
polyacrylamIde, polymethacrylamIde, acrylamIdeacrylIc acId copolymer, ethenolacrylIc acId copolymer,
polyethylene oxIde and mIxtures of these. The molecular weIght of the polymer Is generally below
15.000.000 (preferably between 400.000 and 10.000.000).


FIgure 2: SchematIc representatIon of the InteractIon between bentonIte and poIymer

The manufacturIng process of the polymer, the entIre transport as well as the mIxIng wIth the bentonIte Is
completely monItored and qualIty assured by applIcatIon of a method assessed and approved In Cermany
by the 8undesanstalt fur |aterIalforschung und -prufung (8A|, 8erlIn) by selfmonItorIng of the polymer
manufacturer, by selfmonItorIng of TrIsoplast |Ineral LIners and the respectIve TrIsoplast lIcensee as
well as Independent testIng offIcIals.

The conglutInatIon and the elastIc lInkIng of clay mIneral partIcles wIthIn the soIl pores provIdes TrIsoplast
wIth Its specIal soIl mechanIcal propertIes: very low lIquId and gas permeabIlIty, crack free deformabIlIty
over extreme bendIng radII, extremely slow desIccatIon, and a strongly retarded and partly restrIcted
exchange of Ions.

n comparIson wIth conventIonal barrIers, consIstIng of natural clays and compacted wet of optImum
TrIsoplast has the followIng essentIal advantages:
7ery homogeneous sealIng materIal made of defIned components, manufactured In hIghly accurate
mIxIng plants under applIcatIon of qualIty assurance measures: due to the low dIversIfIcatIon of
the materIal propertIes, the nonexIstence of excessIve partIcle sIzes, the low water permeabIlIty

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
9
and the low compactIon requIrements the materIal can be applIed In a sIngle layer of low
thIckness.
7ery fast applIcatIon, therefore consIderably better coordInatIon wIth the company layIng the
geomembrane and early protectIon agaInst weather Influences
Lower materIal consumptIon and less transport efforts.
No danger for the geomembrane caused by oversIze or sharp partIcles.
ConsIderably better crackfree deformatIon: constructIon of the fInal sealIng system therefore
already possIble on areas sensItIve to settlement wIthout any addItIonal temporary measures.
8etter longterm performance due to a consIderably reduced rIsk of desIccatIon and shrInkage
cracks (compactIon dry of optImum water content, delayed lIberatIon of water due to the
InsulatIng effect of the polymer).
8etter longterm performance due to the consIderably slower lIberatIon of water to plant roots.
8etter longterm performance due to the InhIbItIon of the Ion exchange.
ThInner layer thIckness and possIbly hIgher waste dIsposal volume.


1.2 Use and approvaI of TrIsopIast for the seaIIng of waste dIsposaI sItes and
contamInated sItes
TrIsoplast Is used for the sealIng of waste dIsposal sItes, contamInated land sItes as well as for ponds,
canals, buIldIng pIts, storage areas, foundatIons, noIse InsulatIon walls etc.. n the Netherlands TrIsoplast
was tested, evaluated and approved for use In waste dIsposal sIte sealIng systems by varIous offIcIal and
Independent prIvate sector InstItutes under supervIsIon of ND7E| (Nederlandse DrganIsatIe 7oor EnergIe
en |IlIeu Netherlands State Agency for Energy and the EnvIronment). SInce then more than 4,6 mIllIon
m (sItuatIon 0ecember 200J) have been sealed wIth TrIsoplast In the Netherlands (1.2 mIllIon m bottom
lIners, 2.6 mIllIon m In landfIll covers, 0.8 mIllIon m for other applIcatIons). Further applIcatIons In the
fIeld of waste dIsposal and contamInated sItes were realIzed In the followIng countrIes: Cermany,
8elgIum, FInland, Sweden, taly, |alaysIa and FomanIa.

n Cermany TrIsoplast was also examIned by the workIng commIttee "TrIsoplast", formed by the
representatIves of the responsIble envIronmental agencIes as well as Independent experts from
unIversItIes, federal agencIes and consultant engIneers and scIentIsts. TrIsoplast has passed all tests and
has been approved as beIng generally suItable for the surface sealIng of waste dIsposal sItes In August
2002.The workIng commIttee concluded that 7 cm TrIsoplast are equIvalent to the 50 cm thIck |Ineral
8arrIer accordIng to TASI (Cerman LandfIll 0IrectIve) . TrIsoplast has been applIed In several projects In
Cermany sInce then.


1.3 DbjectIve and structure of thIs documentatIon
ThIs documentatIon Is Intended to provIde a summarIsIng overvIew of the status of knowledge concernIng
the propertIes and the use of TrIsoplast In the sealIng of waste dIsposal sItes and contamInated sItes. t
addresses Interested experts wIthIn lIcensIng authorItIes, plannIng offIces, testIng InstItutes and
constructIon companIes. t Is based on numerous InvestIgatIons and expertIses on TrIsoplast as well as on
the qualIty management manual TrIsoplast (|anual, 0DC 200402) and summarIses the most Important
results of these documents, whIch are lIsted In chapter 9 of thIs documentatIon and cIted In the text by
gIvIng the documentnumber (0DC yearnumber). For a more detaIled preoccupatIon the IndIvIdual
InvestIgatIon reports, expertIses, as well as the TrIsoplast |anual are avaIlable from TrIsoplast |Ineral
LIners.

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
10
2 CDhPDNENTS DF TPISDPLAST
2.1 CranuIar materIaI
The granular materIal of TrIsoplast must meet the followIng requIrements:
|Ineral partIcles 0.06J mm 15 by dry mass
|Ineral partIcles 10.0 mm*
1
0.0 by dry mass
50 partIcle dIameter (d
50
or |50) 0.15 mm - 0.7 mm
DrganIc matter content 1.5 by dry mass
Hydrogen Ion actIvIty (pH) 4.5 - 10.0
ElectrIc conductIvIty 1000 S / cm
ChlorIde: 600 mg / kg dry mass
|oIsture Content 12

The granular component may not contaIn any sharp edged or foreIgn partIcles, such as buIldIng rubble,
lumps of loam or roots. AlternatIve granular components outsIde the general specIfIcatIon can be used
after addItIonal testIng has confIrmed suItabIlIty.
The granular materIal Is subjected to a prelImInary check to confIrm Its complIance wIth the propertIes
mentIoned above and It Is also Inspected upon arrIval at the mIxIng plant (self and external InspectIon
together wIth an examInatIon of the delIvery note).


2.2 entonIte
The sodIum actIvated calcIum bentonIte must meet the followIng specIfIcatIons before beIng accepted for
the productIon of TrIsoplast:
|ontmorIllonIte content 70 by dry mass
|ethylene blue test 200 mg methylene blue / g bentonIte
|Ineral partIcles 0.125 mm 5 by dry mass
Water content 1J by mass related to the dry mass
SwellIng capacIty 25 ml/2 g
Water absorptIon capacIty after 24 h 450 (EnslInNeff) or 700 (EnslIn or Cur JJ) wIth
dIstIlled water (by mass) related to dry, sodIum
actIvated

The bentonIte Is subjected to self and external testIng In the plant and Is addItIonally Inspected upon
arrIval at the mIxIng plant (self and external testIng and examInatIon of the delIvery note).


2.3 PoIymer
The polymer Is delIvered by TrIsoplast |Ineral LIners, the developer of TrIsoplast, who purchases It
from a certIfIed supplIer, who In turn manufactures the polymer by keepIng the recIpe, the
productIon method and the requIrement crIterIa under strIct secrecy. The specIfIcatIon of the
polymer component of TrIsoplast, IncludIng requIrements to be fulfIlled In qualIty testIng, the test
InstructIons to be applIed and an orIgInal sample of the polymer were deposIted wIth the 0utch InstItute
ATD0LD In WagenIngen and the Cerman 8undesanstalt fur |aterIalforschung und prufung (8A|) In 8erlIn
by the patent proprIetor.

1
0ependIng on the local regulatIons the maxImum acceptable graIn sIze mIght have to be reduced (e.g. when usIng In combInatIon
wIth a geomembrane In order to mInImIze the rIsk of any damage)

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
11
2.4 hIxIng water
The mIxIng water used must not negatIvely Influence the propertIes of TrIsoplast. When usIng drInkIng
water for mIxIng, the water does not need to be examIned, because drInkIng water meets the
requIrements for the preparatIon of TrIsoplast and the water works permanently monItor the water
qualIty. Dther types of water, such as surface or ground water are examIned before beIng mIxed wIth
TrIsoplast. They can only be used If the followIng requIrements are met:
ConductIvIty: 1,500 S/cm;
AcIdIty (pH): 5.0 9.0
|IxIng water absorptIon capacIty of
the dry, actIvated bentonIte after 24 h: J85 by dry mass (EnslInNeff) or
600 (EnslIn or CUF JJ)
SwellIng capacIty of the dry,
actIvated bentonIte In the mIxIng water: 22 ml/2 g


TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
12
3 CDNSTPUCTIDN DF TPISDPLAST APPIEP


The followIng chapter descrIbes the stepbystep preparatIon of TrIsoplast, from the suItabIlIty test and
the selectIon of the components vIa the mIxIng process to the emplacement and compactIon of the barrIer
layer wIthIn the sealIng system. The entIre manufacturIng process Is subjected to a qualIty assurance by
self and external testIng as well as offIcIal monItorIng. The TrIsoplast |anual contaIns a detaIled
descrIptIon of the qualIty assurance procedure. An unbroken chaIn of IdentIty approvals, mIxIng and
testIng protocols, documents the qualIty conformIng preparatIon. The most essentIal subjects can be
traced and tested by means of stored samples, even after completIon of constructIon.


3.1 SeIectIon of the TrIsopIast components
Dnly components meetIng the requIrements specIfIed In chapter 2 are used for the preparatIon of the
TrIsoplast

mIxture. The |anual descrIbe the examInatIon and selectIon of the components.

After completIon of the prelImInary testIng of the components a test mIxture wIth the selected
components Is prepared In the laboratory - by hand usIng the same mIxIng sequence and partIcle dosage as
wIll be later used In the mIxIng plant. Samples wIth defIned water contents and bulk densItIes are
compacted wIth the materIal of thIs test mIxture In order to determIne the water permeabIlIty. The
results are used as evIdence for the conformIty, whIch proves that the qualIty of the test mIxture
prepared from the selected components complIes wIth the standard qualIty of TrIsoplast, and that the
requIrements concernIng the permeabIlIty, demanded by the stIpulatIon of the plannIng assessment
decIsIon, the admInIstratIve approval decIsIon, the qualIty assurance plan and the constructIon contract as
well as the delIvery contract wIth TrIsoplast lIcensee, are fulfIlled. Furthermore, the conformIty
verIfIcatIon process also determInes the permIssIble range of water content for applIcatIon and the
requIred mInImum dry densIty of the TrIsoplast barrIer.

The use of any other basIc materIals for the preparatIon of TrIsoplast

than the ones descrIbed, e.g.
resIdues as granular materIal, other clay components and surface or ground water as mIxIng water, Is not
accepted. Should the use of such substances be desIred In a partIcular project, a specIfIc proof of usabIlIty
must be carrIed out, the extent of whIch by far exceeds the standard proof of conformIty measures.


3.2 hIxIng of the TrIsopIast components
3.2.1 StatIonary and mobIIe mIxIng pIants
At project locatIons where larger areas are to be sealed the TrIsoplast mIxture Is mIxed on sIte In specIal
mobIle mIxIng plants ("In plant"). ThIs Is not justIfIed for smaller projects from economIcal and
organIsatIonal poInt of vIew. To cover orders for the complete materIal demand of such projects and for
subsequent orders TrIsoplast ready mIx Is produced In statIonary batch mIxIng plants at selected locatIons
off sIte and, If necessary, stored (weather protected storage), for justIntIme delIvery to the constructIon
sItes as bulk materIal In form of 8Igbags, tarpaulIn covered contaIners or trucks. |IxIng method, type of
components used and accuracy of dosIng are the same In both mobIle and statIonary plants. They only
dIffer In sIze, InstallatIon and arrangement of components. The followIng sectIon therefore descrIbes the
mIxIng technIque when usIng mobIle plants on sIte.


3.2.2 hIxIng technIque
The technology of TrIsoplast mIxIng plants complIes wIth the technology used In mIxIng plants for the
productIon of qualIty monItored cement concretes. Furthermore, these mIxIng plants are able to produce
accurately dosed premIxture products (bentonIte/polymer) and to supply these to the Integrated maIn

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
1J
batch mIxIng stage (bentonIte/polymer + mIneral component + water, If necessary) wIth exact dosIng and
addIng sequence (gravImetrIc statIonary weIghIng, varIable access to startIng and transfer tImes for each
component, adaptatIon of the effectIvely requIred pure mIxIng tIme).
Thus a hIgh qualIty product can be produced on sIte on equIpment optImally adapted for thIs purpose.
Hourly outputs of 50 to 80 t/h are possIble. The InstallatIon of the plants requIres partly reInforced subsoIl
or carrIageway plates specIally laId for thIs purpose (20 m x 4 m reInforced, total area requIred for the
equIpment approx. J0 m x 15 m wIthout IntermedIate storage space, boxes for bulk materIals, etc.). FIg. J
and 4 show such a plant.


FIgure 3: hobIIe TrIsopIast mIxIng pIant


3.2.3 hIxIng process
FIght from the start and durIng productIon the TrIsoplast components are subjected to Inherent moIsture
tests. The materIal recIpe Is based on the dry mass; all IndIvIdual moIsture values are proportIonally
evaluated and examIned wIth respect to the targeted moIsture In the TrIsoplast mIxture to be achIeved.
The quantIty defIcIt of water must be added to the mIxture durIng mIxIng stage 2.

Mxny stcye 1 ( 8entonte + Polymer)
The powdery components polymer and bentonIte are drawn from the respectIve storage contaIners (sIlo or
bIgbag), prepared to IndIvIdual batches by statIonary weIghIng, and transferred by screw conveyors Into a
conIcal mIxIng/receIvIng contaIner, whIch Is equIpped wIth a specIal mIxer and produces a homogeneous
IntermedIate product. ThIs IntermedIate product, 8entonItePolymer|Ix Is prepared In the receIvIng
contaIner and supplIed to the next stage of the mIxIng process In a quantIty that assures that the
proportIons of bentonIte and polymer are In exact complIance wIth the values for these two components
specIfIed for the ready mIxed TrIsoplast mIxture.

Mxny stcye 2 (8entontePolymerMx + yrcnulcr mctercl)
The thIrd TrIsoplast component, the granular materIal (sand), Is fIlled Into a materIalreceIvIng contaIner
by means of a loadIng shovel. StatIonary weIghIng of the batch quantIty Is accomplIshed by force
measurIng cells, whIch permanently record the mass beIng drawn off by the conveyor belt runnIng
underneath the bIn and supplIed to the doubleshaft compulsory mIxer. The batch quantIty of the mIneral

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
14
component to be dosed accordIng to the recIpe, under consIderatIon of the water content, Is then
adjusted by stoppIng the conveyor belt. The bentonItepolymer mIx Is added to the mIxer where all
components of the TrIsoplast mIxture are Intensely mIxed, If necessary by addIng exactly the water
quantIty requIred to compensate the calculated "water defIcIt". The water Is added at Intervals. The
exact dosage of the water quantIty Is accomplIshed by the flow meter wIth pneumatIc, twostage valve,
Integrated In the automatIc data recordIng system. WeIghIng and mIxIng tImes are also automatIcally
recorded and prInted out.


FIgure 4: hobIIe mIxIng pIant

The qualIty assurance of the mIxIng process, the self and external monItorIng must take over the followIng
tasks (see the TrIsoplast |anual):

nspectIon of the delIvered components upon arrIval.
ExamInatIon of the results of the mIxIng plant runnIngIn operatIon
|onItorIng of the mIxture productIon by checkIng the operatIon of the mIxIng plant (mIxIng
protocols wIth InformatIon on weIghed portIons and mIxIng tImes, component consumptIon)
ExamInatIon of the produced TrIsoplast mIxture

These tasks are fulfIlled, regardless of whether the TrIsoplast mIxture Is prepared on sIte after delIvery
of all solId components or bentonIte and polymer have already been mIxed off sIte before delIvery to the
sIte or all three solId partIcle components are mIxed off sIte and supplIed to the sIte as a prefabrIcated
ready mIx.


3.3 EmpIacement and compactIon of TrIsopIast
At the mIxIng plant the TrIsoplast mIxture Is loaded on dump trucks and dumped at the applIcatIon
locatIon wIthout any mIxIng wIth foreIgn materIal.

The foundatIon of the barrIer Is profIled wIth an accuracy of 2 cm. The TrIsoplast barrIer Is applIed In a
sIngle layer, whIch has an average thIckness of at least 7 cm or 9 cm when beIng applIed as a barrIer In a
cover system or basal lInIng system respectIvely. SIngle measurements may vary by 2cm from these
average mInImum values. For thIs purpose the mIxture Is usually spread out by a longstIck excavator In a
wIdth of 5 to 11 m, In composIte barrIer systems complyIng wIth the subsequently to be laId
geomembrane. The loosely spread mIxture Is then levelled to a heIght of about 12 to 14 cm, wIth
reference to a steel gIrder placed along the edge. The thIckness Is then checked In the area wIth a
yardstIck, before the materIal Is compacted wIth a lIght smooth drum roller or a vIbratIng plate.
Preferably TrIsoplast should be compacted wIth rollers havIng a statIc lInear load of 1/J to 1/2 of the

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
15
roller used for compactIng the foundatIon layer. The fInIshed TrIsoplast barrIer Is ImmedIately covered
wIth the followIng layer e.g. a geomembrane or the draInage layer materIal. 0ue to the hIgh area output
of the TrIsoplast InstallatIon, the constructIon progress can be easIly coordInated wIth the layIng of the
geomembrane.

8efore startIng the routIne InstallatIon of the TrIsoplast barrIer In a landfIll cover or bottom lInIng system,
the constructIon technology Is checked and, If necessary, optImIsed In a test fIeld.

The requIrements regardIng the test fIeld, the foundatIon layer, the routIne spreadIng and compactIon of
the TrIsoplast mIxture as well as the qualIty assurance procedure are explaIned In the TrIsoplast |anual
and are substantIated In the project specIfIc qualIty assurance plan.







FIgure 5: InstaIIatIon and compactIon of the TrIsopIast mIxture

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
16
4 PPDPEPTIES DF TPISDPLAST
4.1 CeneraI IdentIfIcatIon
TrIsoplast was developed to technIcal maturIty In the Netherlands. 0urIng thIs development dIfferent
component mIxIng ratIos were subjected to suItabIlIty tests. The results of these tests wIth dIfferent
mIxtures have been documented, e.g. In 0DC 199601 and 199701. n The Netherlands the TrIsoplast
Standard was eventually determIned wIth a weIghed portIon of bentonItepolymermIxture of 1J by
weIght, relatIng to the dry mass of the granular materIal (thIs weIghed portIon of 1J corresponds wIth a
dry mass proportIon of 11.5 by weIght on the ready mIxed TrIsoplast mIxture, compare wIth FIg. 1).

8entonIte and polymer are mIxed as dry powders (as delIvered), before the granular materIal Is added
wIth Its gIven water content. FInally the ready mIxture Is compacted dry of optImum water content.
0Ifferent InstItutes determIned the Proctor densIty of TrIsoplast between 1.62 g/cm` and 1.76 g/cm`,
and, dependIng on whIch study Is used as a reference, the optImal water contents are between 8.5 by
weIght and 16 by weIght (0DC 199602, 199701, 199901).

0DC 199701 specIfIes the plastIc propertIes as follows: plastIc lImIt J6 , lIquId lImIt 179 and plastIcIty
Index 14J . Dn the clay gel the water absorptIon capacIty (EnslIn value) was determIned wIth about
950 .


4.2 PermeabIIIty
4.2.1 Water permeabIIIty
|any InstItutIons examIned the permeabIlIty of TrIsoplast barrIers In laboratory tests by applIcatIon of
varIous methods. Table 1 provIdes an overvIew of the results for determInatIons on standard TrIsoplast
mIxtures.

TabIe 1: Water permeabIIIty of TrIsopIast (Iaboratory data)
InstItutIon 0ocu-
ment
Test method
(test duratIon)
HeIght of
sampIes
[cmj
InItIaI water
content
[X dry weIghtj
uIk densIty
[glcmj
Saturated
hydrauIIc
conductIvIty
[mlsj

0LD 199602 fallIng head
(6J9 days)
2,5 J,5 1,485

1,0 x 10
11

0LD 199602 fallIng head
(200 days)
2,5 J,5 1,490

1,2 x 10
11

LD 199701 fallIng head acc.
Hoeks et al. 1990
(untIl throughflow
constant)
2,5 25,0

1,560

4,J x 10
11

0LD 199701 dIto 2,5 6,4

1,710

0,6 x 10
11

0LD 199701 dIto 2,5 20,0 1,670

0,6 x 10
11

0LD 199701 dIto 2,5 16,0 1,690

2,7 x 10
11


Tcble to be contnued


TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
17
NSA Lyon 199702 fIxed wall
permeameter
(test over 60 days,
data extrapolated)
4,0 6,5 1,46 J x 10
11

KDAC accord.
199802
+ 1996
01
0N 181J0
(n.g.)
8,0 n.g.
n.g.
1 x 10
12

KDAC accord.
199802
+ 1996
01
CUF
(n.g.)
8,0
n.g. n.g.
1 x 10
12

Ceotechn.
8uro Prof.
0ullmann
accord.
199802
flexIble wall
permeameter
(n.g.)
o.A.
n.g. n.g.
2,2 x 10
12

CT 199901 flexIble wall
permeameter
(I=J0, test untIl
Inflow eq. outflow)
12,0. 17,0 1,70 7,1 x 10
12

CT 199901 dIto 12,0 20,0 1,61 7,5 x 10
12

CT 199901 dIto 12,0 1J,0 1,76

7,8 x 10
12

CT 199901 dIto 12,0 16,0 1,72

2,6 x 10
11

CT 199901 dIto 12,0 16,0 1,664

2,4 x 10
11

0LD 199905 deformatIon cell
(measurement
before deformatIon)
(untIl throughflow
constant)
2,5 12,0 1,600 6 x 10
12

CT 200002 flexIble wall
permeameter
(I=J0, , test untIl
Inflow eq. outflow)
12,0 5 to 2J
(n = 21)
1,2 to 1,8
(n = 21)
J,4 x 10
12
to
8,9 x 10
11

(n = 21)
SS 200106 flexIble wall
permeameter
(I=50, prelImInary
data)
12,0 1J,J 1,7J 4 x 10
11

SS 200106 dIto 12,0 14,6 1,75 2 x 10
11

SS 200106 dIto 12,0 1J,8 1,77 1 x 10
11

SS 200106 dIto 12,0 1J,6 1,8 2 x 10
11

Ceotechn.
8uro Prof.
0ullmann
20011J 0N 181J01
(I=J0; 160 days)
12,0 6 to 12 1,589 to
1,894
1,J x 10
12
to
9,J x 10
12
(n=8)
LCA 8ayern 200114,
200209
0N 181J01 (=J0;
70 days)
7,0
6,2 to 12
1,56 to 1,74 5,2 x 10
12
to
1,6 x 10
11
(n=6)
SS 200115
0N 181J01
(=J0; 148 days)
7,0
6,5 to 12,1
1,47 to 1,67 9,2 x 10
12
to
J,1 x 10
11
(n=6)
|elchIor +
WIttpohl
ngenIeur
gesellschaft
200116,
200202
0N 181J01
(=J1; 217 days)
7,0
6,7 to 12,J
1,590 to
1,654
1,6 x 10
11
to
2,4 x 10
11

(n=4)


TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
18
0ue to the low water content of TrIsoplast barrIers durIng constructIon, It takes long to saturate the
samples to determIne the saturated hydraulIc conductIvIty In the lab (several weeks to months, see 0DC
200002).

The overvIew of avaIlable laboratory tests unanImously shows very low permeabIlIty values, consIderably
lower than 1 x 10
10
m/s, In many cases around J x 10
11
m/s and lower.

The permeabIlIty Is so low, that a TrIsoplast barrIer of only a few centImetre thIckness already fulfIls the
requIrements concernIng the tolerable leakage through compacted clay barrIers of waste dIsposal sItes
demanded by 0utch and Cerman regulatIons.

n 2001 a benchmark test on the water permeabIlIty determInatIon of TrIsoplast was conducted In
Cermany (0DC 20011J to 0DC 200116, 200202, 200209). Each of the four testIng InstItutes partIcIpatIng
In thIs InvestIgatIon receIved IdentIcal sample materIal from a mIxture batch produced under external
supervIsIon. The mIxture was used to produce a total of 24 test specImen by followIng a unIform
preparatIon InstructIon. These specImens were used to determIne the water permeabIlIty accordIng to 0N
181J0. 8oth the InItIal water contents as well as the compactIon degrees of the samples were varIed
wIthIn a specIfIed range. FIgure 6 shows an overvIew of the results. The values are between 1.J x 10
12

m/s and J.1 x 10
11
m/s. n the top sectIon of the fIgure the water permeabIlIty Is shown as a functIon of
the InItIal water content of the samples and In the bottom sectIon It Is shown as a functIon of the
compactIon degree of the samples (related to the maxImum densIty that can be achIeved In the Proctor
unIt by applIcatIon of standard compactIon energy). The tests revealed that the permeabIlIty dId neIther
sIgnIfIcantly depend on the water content nor on the dry densIty. n contrast to conventIonal compacted
clay barrIers a suffIcIent sealIng effect Is achIeved wIth TrIsoplast even wIthout placIng partIcular
demands on the compactIon of the materIal durIng InstallatIon (see also 0DC 200008).

FIgure 6: Water permeabIIIty of TrIsopIast barrIers as a functIon of water content and degree of
compactIon (benchmark test 2001 In Cermany)

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
19
Complementary to the laboratory tests InfIltratIon measurements on dIsturbed and undIsturbed
samples of J0 cm dIameter were performed on test fIelds at SpInder near TIlburg, Netherlands, over
a perIod of fIve months (0DC 199701). The mean InfIltratIon rate thereby was 0.08 mm/d. WIth a
gradIent of 27 thIs results In a permeabIlIty coeffIcIent of J.J x 10
11
m/s.

4.2.2 AIr permeabIIIty
0AFCY's law applIes also for aIr (see KEZ0, 1976). WIth IdentIcal pressure gradIent the water to aIr
permeabIlIty ratIo (K
W
/K
L
) Is of the same ratIo as the respectIve dynamIc vIscosItIes. At a temperature of
10`C to 15`C thIs ratIo Is approxImately 70. ThIs means that K
L
70 K
W
. WIth IncreasIng water saturatIon
S
F
K
L
wIll decrease and wIll be zero at S
F
0.8.

AccordIng to KEZ0, 1976, the followIng approxImatIon applIes:

K
L
70 K
W
(1 1,25 S
F
)
J

wIth
K
L
AIr permeabIlIty
K
W
Saturated water permeabIlIty
S
F
actual degree of saturatIon

For the threshold value (K
L
= K
W
) the followIng applIes
1 (1/70)
1/J

S
F
= = 0.606
0.64

ThIs means that the aIr permeabIlIty wIll drop below the water permeabIlIty at water saturatIon levels S
F

60.6.

0Irectly after compactIon the degree of saturatIon of TrIsoplast barrIers wIll be approx. J5 (assumIng
moIst densIty to be 1.8 g/cm
J
, water content 8) and the aIr permeabIlIty wIll therefore be:
K
L
= 70 x 5 x 10
11
(1 - 1.25 x 0.J5)
J
6 x 10
10
m/s,
If the water permeabIlIty coeffIcIent Is K
W
5 x 10
11
m/s.

n summary there Is no doubt that for the rather dry condItIons after constructIon the aIr permeabIlIty Is
approx. a power of ten hIgher than the water permeabIlIty under saturated condItIons.

SInce the water content and therefore the saturatIon can only Increase after the InstallatIon of TrIsoplast,
the aIr permeabIlIty wIll successIvely decrease and wIll be almost IdentIcal wIth the water permeabIlIty at
S
F
60 and almost drop to zero at S
F
80.

4.2.3 PermeatIon of IandfIII Ieachate
n 0DC 199701 determInatIons of the permeabIlIty coeffIcIent of TrIsoplast

barrIers for percolatIng landfIll
leachate sItes are documented (double determInatIons on the basIs of 6 samples wIth dIfferent dry
densItIes). The tests were performed on samples wIth a thIckness of 2.5 cm over a perIod of J months and
resulted In a mean permeabIlIty coeffIcIent of 2.5 x 10
11
m/s. ThIs value was lower than the value of
4.J x 10
11
m/s determIned In a parallel test wIth water. The authors conclude that percolatIng water on
waste dIsposal sItes does not have a negatIve effect on the permeabIlIty of TrIsoplast

barrIers.

4.2.4 InfIuence of chemIcaIIy aggressIve fIuIds
0DC 199602 and table 2 show results concernIng the permeabIlIty of TrIsoplast

barrIers

agaInst the testIng
medIa crude oIl, phenol, dIesel and seawater. For these examInatIons the TrIsoplast samples were

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
20
saturated wIth tap water and then subjected to the respectIve percolates. 0ependIng on the testIng
substance the tests were performed over a perIod of maxImum 50, 169 and 6J9 days. WIth the permeates
crude oIl and phenol the permeabIlIty even slIghtly decreased wIth IncreasIng testIng tIme. WIth dIesel
and seawater the values Increased notIceably over the tIme. For acetone no effect on the permeabIlIty
was found. However, all measured values are very low. ThIs proves that the Influence of these aggressIve
fluIds on the permeabIlIty of TrIsoplast

Is only of mInor sIgnIfIcance. 0DC 199701 contaIns permeabIlIty
determInatIons for hydrochlorIc acId and caustIc soda solutIon. Also In thIs case no hIgher permeabIlIty
values were found when compared wIth comparIson trIals carrIed out wIth water.

TabIe 2: PermeabIIIty of TrIsopIast for aggressIve fIuId medIa and In comparIson wIth water
PercoIate Test method 0uratIon of
test
[daysj
Saturated hydrauIIc
conductIvIty
[mlsj
0ocument
hydrochlorIc acId
(HCl)

FallIng head acc. Hoeks et al. 1990,
sample heIght 2.5 cm, dry densIty
1.560 g/cm`
J20 pH 1.5:
1,2 x 10
11
pH J:
1.5 x 10
11

199701
caustIc soda
solutIon (NaDH)

FallIng head acc. Hoeks et al. 1990,
sample heIght 2.5 cm, dry densIty
1.560 g/cm`
J20 pH 8.9:
1.7 x 10
11
pH 10:
1.1 x 10
11

199701
crude oIl FallIng head acc. Hoeks et al. 1990,
sample heIght 2.5 cm, dry densIty
1.485 g/cm`
1J2
196
6J9
0.6 x 10
11
0.1 x 10
11

0.J x 10
11

199602
phenole dIto 1J2
196
2.4 x 10
11

1.5 x 10
11

199602
dIesel dIto 1J2
196
6J9
0.2 x 10
11

J.5 x 10
11

16.0 x 10
11

199602
sea water dIto 1J2
196
6J9
1.8 x10
11

2,2 x 10
11

9,0 x 10
11

199602
acetone dIto 50 0,4 x 10
11
199602
water dIto 1J2
196
6J9
1,4 x 10
11
1,2 x 10
11
1,0 x 10
11

199602


4.3 hechanIcaI resIstance
4.3.1 StabIIIty and deformatIon resIstance
The report 0DC 199402 descrIbes the InvestIgatIon of the shearIng resIstance of varIous TrIsoplast
samples after consolIdatIon under IsotropIc tensIon by means of the undraIned shearIng test (C
u
test) In a
trIaxIal cell. The test results were used to calculate the stabIlIty of TrIsoplast on slopes and Its load
bearIng capacIty.

Three samples of a TrIsoplast mIxture supplIed by the StarIng Centrum, nstItuut voor Dnderzoek van het
LandelIjk CebIed (SC0LD), WagenIngen wIth a water content of 25 by dry mass were compacted to a dry
densIty of approx. 1.56 g/cm`.

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
21

After a 14day saturatIon perIod and a 4day permeabIlIty test at a gradIent of I = 25 In fIxed wall
permeameters the samples were Installed In the trIaxIal cells. The saturatIon took place at a saturatIon
pressure of J00 kN/m and a cell overburden pressure of 10 kPa. Dne of each sample was consolIdated In
the trIaxIal cell at 15 kN/m, J0 kN/m or 450 kN/m respectIvely and was sheared off wIth a vertIcal
punch movement and a punchIng speed of 0.046 mm/mIn.

The authors then used the shearIng parameters gaIned from the samples to perform case related slope
stabIlIty calculatIons, whIch IndIcated stable condItIons wIth TrIsoplast

wIth embankment InclInatIons up
to 1:1.95 regardless of the embankment heIght.

Load bearIng calculatIons for TrIsoplast on the basIs of the detected data under varIous load areas
(vIbratory plate, dozer track and roller contact area) have revealed that TrIsoplast can be compacted wIth
conventIonal equIpment and area pressures of 5 kN/m to 10 kN/m. AccordIng to the report the tested
TrIsoplast mIxture can be passed over and compacted wIth lIght bulldozers or lIght rollers.

The shearIng behavIour of the composIte barrIer systems of geomembrane above TrIsoplast was examIned
In 0DC 199704, 0DC 19980J and 0DC 200109.

0DC 199704 Includes the followIng examInatIons:

A TrIsoplast sample from TrIsoplast

|Ineral LIners wIth a delIvery water content of 7.5 by dry mass was
tested In combInatIon wIth a H0PEmembrane wIth a structured surface delIvered by "0e Lange PlastIcs".
n the fIrst test TrIsoplast was compacted to a dry densIty of 1.54 g/cm` above the 0.J5 m x 0.J5 m H0PE
membrane. The test was conducted as a dIrect shearIng test wIth a shearIng speed of 1 mm/h and applIed
loads of 10 kN/m, 20 kN/m and 50 kN/m. After a consolIdatIon perIod of 24 hours the sample was
sheared off. The test was repeated wIth a reverse InstallatIon, I.e. geomembrane above TrIsoplast barrIer.
The trIal wIth the InstallatIon TrIsoplast above geomembrane revealed a frIctIon angle of J1.4` and a
cohesIon value of 2 kN/m. For the reverse InstallatIon these values were J4` and 4 kN/m.

The author comes to the conclusIon that both arrangements of TrIsoplast and H0PEsealIng lIner are stable
when used on embankment InclInatIons of 1:J or less.

0DC 19980J contaIns the results of shearIng tests performed on TrIsoplast and a geomembrane performed
wIth a J0 cm x J0 cm shearIng unIt. TrIsoplast was Installed wIth a water content of 6.7 by dry mass and
dry densItIes of 1.49 g/cm` and 1,41 g/cm`. The geomembrane was a flexIble type (CH0) wIth a
structured pImpled surface.

The geomembrane was placed Into the fIxed, bottom shearIng housIng. After a 24hour consolIdatIon
perIod the sample was sheared off. The trIals were carrIed out as double determInatIon.

The examInatIon up to the state of faIlure (total shearIng dIstance approx. J0 mm) revealed a frIctIon
angle of J5.6` and a cohesIon value of 7.1 kN/m for test 1. Test 2 revealed shearIng parameter values of
J2.6` and 10.4 kN/m.

As an approxImatIon for stabIlIty calculatIons the shearIng parameters for both applIcatIon densItIes were
addItIonally determIned for a shearIng dIstance of 10 mm. n thIs case the values were 27.1` or 26.J`
respectIvely and 14.6 kN/m or 16.0 kN/m respectIvely.

0DC 200108 represents TrIsoplast frIctIon tests wIth J dIfferent geomembranes (approved by the Cerman
8A|) and a geotextIle. TrIsoplast was Installed Into the testIng unIt wIth a water content of 12 by dry
mass and a dry densIty of 1.67 g/cm` (corresponds wIth 92 of the Proctor densIty 1.82 g/cm`). For the
tests the followIng geomembranes were used:

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
22
"0ura Seal H0 8A| smooth J mm" from Co. CeolInIng: smooth from both sIdes
"|egakron" from Co. Naue Itb CmbH E Co. KC: |egakronstructure on tested sIde
"0FS" 2.5 mm, from Co. CSE LInIng Technology: sandy structure on both sIdes

The tested geotextIle Is the product "0epotex J05 F" from Co. Naue FasertechnIk CmbH E Co. KC (PEH0,
mechanIcally bonded staple fIbred nonwoven wIth an area weIght of approx. J00 g/m`).

The test was performed In a frame shearIng unIt wIth a testIng sIze J0 cm x J0 cm and vertIcally moveable
top frame, by followIng the recommendatIon C0A E J8 of the Cerman CeotechnIcal SocIety (0eutsche
Cesellschaft fur CeotechnIk) and the draft of 0N EN SD 129571. The testIng speed was 0.0167 mm/mIn,
the consolIdatIon perIod was about 12 hours, the tests were performed wIthout bankIngup of water. The
tests resulted In the followIng frIctIonal stress values at the states of faIlure and slIdIng:

TabIe 3: FrIctIonaI stress vaIues between TrIsopIast

and geomembrane or geotextIIe (0DC 2001-08)
Interface NormaI stress

[kNlmj
State of faIIure

[kNlmj
State of sIIdIng

[kNlmj
TrIsoplast
above
0rua Seal H0 8A| smooth J mm
20
40
80
5.8
11.9
22.2
5.7
11.2
20.J
TrIsoplast
above
|egakron 2.5 mm
20
40
80



20.J
J5.4
68.7
TrIsoplast
above
0FS 2.5 mm
20
40
80



19.6
J6.9
68.1
TrIsoplast
above
0epotex J05 F
20
40
80



11.2
26.8
56.7

Under small normal load condItIons and assumIng generally low loadIng speeds - as typIcal for cappIng
sItuatIons - the followIng shear parameters can be consIdered for the constructIon phase (moIsture
content on the dry sIde of the proctor curve) (0DC 20021J):
8reack values: ' = J4 J7`
C' = 127 150 kN/m
2

FesIdual 7alues 'r = J2 JJ`
C'r = 12 J2 kN/m
2


For the long term stabIlIty the moIsture content can go above the optImum moIsture content up to full
saturatIon (wet sIde of the Proctor curve). The followIng approxImate values can be assumed:
8reack values: ' = J0 J2`
C' = 50 120 kN/m
2

FesIdual 7alues 'r = J0 J1`
C'r = J7 40 kN/m
2


TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
2J
0DC 19970J contaIns a report on the examInatIon results concernIng the effect of settlement on the
permeabIlIty of TrIsoplast. 0urIng the tests settlement was sImulated by applIcatIon of a load. After the
deformatIon process the water permeabIlIty was determIned.

Test setup

A measurIng cell was fIlled up from bottom to top as follows:
1. draInage sand
2. concave shaped pIece of Ice (thIckness 4.5 cm, dIameter 28 cm), curvature facIng up
J. draInage sand (5 cm), compacted
4. TrIsoplast wIth 1J bentonIte (7 cm), compacted to 92 Proctor densIty
5. geotextIle
6. draInage sand (5 cm)
7. concave shaped pIece of cement concrete (thIckness 4.5 cm, dIameter 28 cm), curvature
facIng down

Test procedure

FIrst a load of 1.44 t/m (
=
approx. 80 cm of soIl cover) was applIed at an InItIal ambIent
temperature of 0`C. The temperature was slowly raIsed and the emergIng water was collected.
Dnce the Ice had completely melted and no more water draIned out, the load, the draInage sand
and the geotextIle were removed.
The TrIsoplast barrIer was then vIsually examIned; after settlement It showed cracks startIng at
the edges and runnIng towards the mIddle of the sample. The depth of the cracks were not
measured.
Then the geotextIle was reapplIed to the TrIsoplast barrIer, the measurIng cell was fIlled wIth
draInage sand and the water permeabIlIty was tested. At the begInnIng (1
st
measurIng perIod: 02
days) the water permeabIlIty was as low as 4.2 x 10
12
m/s In spIte of the vIsIble cracks. After thIs
tIme no further water flow through the TrIsoplast barrIer was detected.

The author comes to the conclusIon that the unIform settlement had no effect on the water permeabIlIty.
ExtensIve tests concernIng the effect of deformatIons on the permeabIlIty of TrIsoplast are descrIbed In
0DC 199705, 199904 and 199905.

The effect of deformatIons on the permeabIlIty of TrIsoplast was the subject of the examInatIon by
applIcatIon of a laboratory method developed by the 0LDStarIng Centre In WagenIngen, the Netherlands.
A sample wIth a dIameter of 0.4 m and a thIckness of 0.025 m was Installed In a test apparatus and loaded
wIth a controllable deformatIon rate of 0 hPa to 250 kPa In saturated and unsaturated state. The samples
were Installed wIth a dry densIty of 1.6 g/cm. The water content of the nonsaturated samples was 12
by dry mass. Dne sample was deformed by 0, 1, 2, J, 5, 7.5 and 10 In saturated state and the
permeabIlIty was always determIned when the steady state was reached. 0urIng the deformatIon of the
unsaturated samples a new sample was Installed after each deformatIon process. The followIng results
were detected:

n saturated condItIon an Increase of the permeabIlIty coeffIcIents from 6 x10
12
m/s (0) to 2.J x
10
11
m/s (5) was found after the deformatIon. WIth deformatIons of more than 5 no sIgnIfIcant
further changes In permeabIlIty were detected (2.1 x 10
11
m/s).
The permeabIlIty of deformed unsaturated samples droped from 6 x 10
11
m/s (7.5) to J.7 x 10
11

m/s (10).
All the determIned permeabIlIty coeffIcIents are low and IndIcate that the deformatIon of the
sample occurred wIthout cracks or If InItIally cracked they had closed agaIn as a result of the self
healIng abIlIty of TrIsoplast.


TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
24
0DC 20000J represents the results of sIngleaxIs tensIle tests. SIx samples (d = J5 mm, l = 80 mm) wIth
water contents of 7.5, 15 and 20 by dry mass and dry densItIes between 1.45 g/cm` and 1.67 g/cm` were
loaded In a dIstance controlled manner wIth a deformatIon speed of approx. 0.05 mm/mIn or about 0.1
/mIn. The detected tensIle strengths were between 9 kPa and 22 kPa, the straIn lImIts between 1.0 and
J.0. The test results were used to determIne the maxImum permIssIble bendIng radII In accordance wIth
the C0ArecommendatIon E 21J of the Cerman CeotechnIcal SocIety (0eutsche Cesellschaft fur
CeotechnIk). For a barrIer layer wIth a thIckness of 0.1 m these are, In dependence on the water content,
5 m to 12 m. Consequently TrIsoplast barrIers are extremely deformable wIthout the rIsk of damage.

0DC 200005 contaIns the results of tests concernIng the pressure and creep behavIour of TrIsoplast
accordIng to EN 0N 181J5. For the tensIons of J0 kN/m and 50 kN/m, whIch are of relevance In surface
barrIers, a moIst sample (water content 26.J by dry mass, dry densIty 1.5J g/cm`) was used to
determIne the stIffness coeffIcIents of E
s
= J to 4 |N/m wIth InItIal loadIng and E
s
= 5 to 6 |N/m under
repetItIve loadIng. For a dry sample (water content 7.1 by dry mass, dry densIty 1.70 g/cm`) the values
were E
s
= 0.8 |N/m or 1.5 |N/m for InItIal loadIng. WIth tensIons of 400 |N/m the stIffness
coeffIcIents are about 20 |N/m for InItIal loadIng and about 60 |N/m for repetItIve loadIng. The
evaluatIon of the creep behavIour revealed the followIng values:

TabIe 4: VaIues reveaIed from the pressure and creep behavIour
TensIon


[kNlmj
ConsoIIdatIon tIme t
50


[mInj
ConsoIIdatIon
coeffIcIent c
v

[mlsj
hydrauIIc conductIvIty
durIng the prImary
settIement
[mlsj
Creep coeffIcIent c

of
the secondary
settIement
[1j
50 J00 1,2 x 10
9
1,5 x 10
11
9,87 x 10
J

200 1J0 2,5 x 10
9
6,2 x 10
12
J,61 x 10
J

800 22 1,J x 10
8
6,4 x 10
12
2,79 x 10
J


For water contents between 6 and 22 by dry mass the axIal compressIon strength of TrIsoplast Is In the
range of 95 kN/m and 125 kN/m (0DC 20000J). The breakIng compressIon Increases wIth the water
content from only a few percent to values above 20 . AccordIng to 0DC 199502 the compressIon strength
of TrIsoplast complIes wIth the strength of a sandbentonIte barrIer wIthout polymer refInement.

0DC 20000J contaIns the results of a swellIng pressure test accordIng to Huder E Amberg. ThIs test Is
used to determIne the deformatIon caused by vertIcal swellIng under restrIcted lateral expansIon In the
oedometer (wIth suspended rIng) whIle gradually relIevIng the load. ThIs test sequence results In a curve,
from whIch the tensIon dependent swellIng expansIon can be read.

The functIon of the vertIcal swellIng deformatIon In dependence on the swellIng pressure Is
= 7,19 log (/128,75)
and Is shown In FIgure 7.

4.3.2 HydrauIIc resIstance
0ue to the adsorptIve and specIfIc bondIng of the polymer to the bentonIte, the bondIng of the bentonIte
In TrIsoplast Is consIderably stronger than In any conventIonal sandbentonIte barrIer. PeptIsatIon of the
bentonIte In water Is prevented by the bonds wIth the polymer.

ErosIon Is ruled out due to ImmedIate coverIng of the barrIer wIth the geomembrane or draInage layer
durIng constructIon. Though In practIce It Is observed that also a longer exposure of uncovered TrIsoplast
to raIn only leads to some swellIng but not to erosIon.

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
25
-10,00
-9,00
-8,00
-7,00
-6,00
-5,00
-4,00
-3,00
-2,00
-1,00
0,00
10 100 1000
Swelling pressure [kN/m]
D
e
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n

d
u
r
i
n
g

s
w
e
l
l
i
n
g

[
%
]
30 50
Typical loads of barriers
in landfill covers

FIgure 7: SweIIIng pressure test accordIng to Huder Amberg

The rIsk of suffusIon wIth respect to the fIlter stabIlIty of the barrIer materIal can be evaluated as follows
(compare wIth C0ArecommendatIon E J7 of the Cerman CeotechnIcal SocIety, 0eutsche Cesellschaft fur
CeotechnIk):

AccordIng to 0avIdenkoff the followIng applIes for the mean partIcle dIameter 0
50
of the contact layer and
for a horIzontal contact area ( = 0`) when usIng cohesIve soIls:

15 C
0

0
50
=
(' +
w
I)

wIth safety coeffIcIent []
C
0
tensIle strength [kN/m
2
]
' specIfIc weIght of the soIl under buoyancy [kN/m
J
]

w
specIfIc weIght of the water [kN/m
J
]
I hydraulIc gradIent []

SInce the 0avIdenkoff formula only applIes for the loosest bulk densIty of the fIlter materIal, = J.0 can
be assumed a suffIcIent value. Therefore

5 C
0

0
50
=
' + w I


TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
26
WIth '
w
10 kN/m
J
and C
0

ZSoIl
(e.g.
Z
= 20 kN/m
2
) one obtaIns

10
0
50
[m]
(1 + I)
The result shows that only exceptIonally hIgh gradIents (I = 1000 would result In 0
50
= 10 mm) could have
an effect on the fIlter stabIlIty. SInce gradIents of thIs magnItude do not occur wIthIn a landfIll (even If
the water draInage system would faIl), the examIned fIlter stabIlIty must be assumed as beIng suffIcIent.
When usIng TrIsoplast, occurrences of suffusIon can therefore be generally ruled out for landfIll
applIcatIon.

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
27
5 0UPAILITY DF TPISDPLAST
5.1 PesIstance agaInst chemIcaI effects
nfIltrated precIpItatIon water, percolatIng landfIll leachate and other aggressIve fluIds may have a
chemIcal effect on barrIers of waste dIsposal sItes. These InvestIgatIons concernIng the effect of fluIds on
TrIsoplast barrIers are descrIbed In the chapters 4.2.1 to 4.2.J. Apart from a moderate Increase of the
permeabIlIty coeffIcIent when subjected to a flow of dIesel or seawater (after 6J9 days), no damage was
found that would IndIcate a decrease of the effIcIency or a faIlure of the barrIer. Further InvestIgatIons
concernIng the resIstance of TrIsoplast agaInst acIds and alkalIne solutIons were performed In combInatIon
wIth other InvestIgatIons on the resIstance agaInst mIcrobIologIcal effects and are presented and
evaluated In chapter 5.2.1.

WIth barrIers contaInIng bentonIte there Is also the questIon concernIng the effect of catIon exchange on
the barrIer propertIes, especIally the permeabIlIty and swellIng capacIty.

TrIsoplast contaIns sodIum actIvated bentonIte whIch Is lInked wIth the polymer. The InteractIon between
polymer and bentonIte was descrIbed In chapter 1. 0ue to thIs InteractIon, especIally the catIonIc and
specIfIc adsorptIon, a consIderable proportIon of the exchange locatIons for catIons Is occupIed and
wIthdrawn from the Ion exchange. The catIon exchange capacIty of TrIsoplast Is therefore only 450
mmol(eq)/kg (0DC 199701). n pure bentonIte wIthout the polymer addItIve the catIon exchange capacIty
Is more than twIce thIs value.

n addItIon TrIsoplast Is compacted dry of the optImum water content wIth a very low unsaturated water
conductIvIty. n comparIson wIth conventIonal clay barrIer compacted wet of optImum TrIsoplast barrIers
provIde a much smaller water fIlled cross sectIon for water transport, so that the convectIve and the
dIffusIve IntroductIon of multIvalent Ions, whIch would be the prerequIsIte for an Ion exchange, Is strongly
restrIcted and delayed.

The standard mIxture of TrIsoplast contaIns a hIgh amount of bentonIte and therefore has a surplus of
swellIng capacIty. Last but not least TrIsoplast

stIll contaIns a certaIn surplus of non dIssolved soda from
the Inplant actIvatIon of the bentonIte, whIch Is dIssolved by the gradual wettIng of the TrIsoplast
barrIer, causIng a correspondIngly hIgh sodIum concentratIon, thereby provIdIng a buffer.

For these reasons the Ion exchange In TrIsoplast Is hIghly restrIcted and TrIsoplast Is far less endangered
by the exchange of Ions than barrIers wIthout polymer modIfIed sodIumbentonIte.

0etaIled theoretIcal consIderatIons and calculatIons wIth sImulatIon models on the longterm Ion exchange
In TrIsoplast and Its effect on the water permeabIlIty can be found In 0DC 19990J and 0DC 199904.
AccordIng to these reflectIons the permeabIlIty caused by Ion exchange would only Increase by about 16
over a perIod of 100 years under standard condItIons.


5.2 PesIstance agaInst bIoIogIcaI effects
5.2.1 hIcro organIsms and fungus
0DC 199J01 contaIns examInatIons concernIng the bIologIcal and chemIcal stabIlIty of the TrIsoplast clay
gel consIstIng of bentonIte and polymer (wIthout any mIneral addItIves). n parallel tests these
examInatIons were also performed to a certaIn extent wIth nonrefIned bentonIte samples.

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
28
8Ioreactor test:
10 cm x 10 cm x 1 cm clay gel samples were stored for 2.5 months at a temperature of 20`C under
anaerobIc condItIons at a ph of 4.5 In a nutrIent solutIon Inoculated wIth forest soIl and waste
water.
SoIlburIal test:
10 cm x 10 cm x 1 cm clay gel samples were stored over 2.5 months burIed In moIst garden soIl.
|odIfIed storm test:
500 mg of ground and screened sample materIal (clay gel and bentonIte) was agItated for max. 28
days at 20`C under aerobIc condItIons In nutrIent solutIon Inoculated wIth sewage slurry, whereby
the formatIon of CD
2
was measured.
Closedbottle test:
ThIs test was conducted to determIne the bIologIcal oxygen consumptIon of a ground and screened
clay gel or bentonIte sample (J0 to 50 mg each) after a perIod of four days at 20`C In a nutrIent
solutIon Inoculated wIth waste water.
AlkalIne solutIon and acId resIstance test:
An aqueous solutIon of the polymer was fIrst prepared wIth a pH of J and then gradually adjusted
to a ph 5 and 9 by addIng caustIc soda solutIon (NaDH). The molecular weIght was determIned
always after 0, J and 19 days.
Clay gel and actIvated bentonIte were agItated In water, adjusted to a hIgh pHvalue and the pH
was then gradually reduced to 9, 8, 7, 6 and 5 by addIng hydrochlorIc acId (HCl). After J weeks
the samples were drIed agaIn to theIr InItIal water content (70 by dry mass).

After lyophIlIzatIon and gold coatIng the structure and morphology of the samples subjected to these tests
were Inspected wIth the scannIng electron mIcroscope, theIr rheologIcal propertIes, I.e. dynamIc
vIscosIty, were examIned wIth a rheometer and compared wIth control samples.
The results of these tests are summarIzed In the report mentIoned above as follows:
The polymer was not degraded or decomposed, neIther In the closed bottle test nor In the
modIfIed storm test.
At low pHvalues (pH J) the polymer was chemIcally resIstant and dId not dIsIntegrate.
n excessIvely swollen condItIon at phvalues 5 the clay gel changes Its morphologIcal and
rheologIcal propertIes that wIth pure bentonIte already change at phvalues of 6.
Changes to the clay gel In the bIoreactor and In the soIl burIal test were traced back to changes of
the pHvalue.

The authors come to the conclusIon that, under waste dIsposal sIte condItIons, the clay gel Is resIstant
agaInst mIcrobIal attacks and that mIxIng polymer Into the clay gel consIderably Increases the acId
resIstance of the bentonIte.

Dn behalf of the Nederlandse DrganIsatIe voor EnergIe en |IlIeu, Netherlands State Agency for Energy and
the EnvIronment (ND7E|), the 0utch TND Kunststoffen en Fubber nstItut assessed the InvestIgatIon
concernIng the durabIlIty of the polymer In TrIsoplast, that had been performed untIl 1995, as follows
(0DC 199501):

After many years the polymer wIll be hardly or not at all bIologIcally degraded. f at all, the
degradatIon wIll be lImIted to the top layers, because the polymer Is hardly accessIble In the clay
polymer gel. The relatIvely hIgh pHvalue of the gel wIll addItIonally slow down the bIologIcal
process.

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
29
n the claypolymer gel the polymer Is screened agaInst U7radIatIon. n the test the polymer was
much more dIsIntegrated by U7radIatIon than can be expected In the fIeld, because only a thIn
layer of claypolymer gel was examIned In the laboratory, wIth a relatIvely large area In relatIon
to the total area beIng subjected to the radIatIon.
n the temperature trIals the polymer In the claypolymer gel was not dIsIntegrated. Thermo
gravImetrIcally It was revealed that pendant groups of the polymer are released at J00`C. From
the author's poInt of vIew thIs Is Irrelevant for natural condItIons.
The examInatIon of the polymer under acIdIc condItIons dId not IndIcate any dIsIntegratIon. The
hIghest permeabIlIty values of the claypolymer gel were measured at a phvalue of 7, also
assessed by the authors as an IndIcatIon agaInst a chemIcal dIsIntegratIon.
0ue to the low permeabIlIty of barrIers made of claypolymer gel the authors are of the opInIon
that there Is no rIsk of polymer beIng washed out.

The authors recommend conductIng comparatIve InvestIgatIons about the bIologIcal, temperature related,
photooxIdatIve and chemIcal resIstance of the polymer In the claypolymer gel under fIeld condItIons and
In tImelapse laboratory tests. 8ased on the exIstIng InvestIgatIon results and the statement of the authors
It can be assumed that the polymer In the claypolymer gel wIll not be attacked or degraded on a
measurable level. ThIs means that they evaluate the claypolymer gel as a resIstant system for the base
and surface sealIng of waste dIsposal sItes.

7ery extensIve experIments were carrIed out by the Laboratory 0r. F. WIenberg In Hamburg, Cermany.
WIenberg labelled the fundamental chaIn and, In separate experIments, also the functIonal pendant
groups of the polymer radIoactIvely (
14
C Isotopes), subjected the samples to a varIety of mIcrobIologIcally
and chemIcally actIve envIronments In closed reactors and studIed the degradatIon of the chaIn or the
functIonal pendant groups by collectIng the labelled carbon. WIth thIs method It Is possIble to detect
extremely low degradatIon rates In short tImes. LIquId solutIons of the pure polymer, claypolymer
solutIons and complete TrIsoplast samples were tested. The samples were mIxed wIth sand or compost
and subjected to water at saturated and unsaturated condItIons, at varIous temperatures and pHvalues.
Also hydrolysIs of the materIal was studIed.

After EvaluatIng the results of the degradatIon tests carrIed out on TrIsoplast under varIous condItIons the
followIng conclusIons regardIng the degradatIon behavIour of the polymer used wIthIn TrIsoplast are
reported (0DC 200J04):
Almost 2 years of quantIfyIng degradatIon tests on 14C labelled polymers most experIments
showed that degradatIon rates are lImIted to around 4 up to a maxImum of 7. ThIs degradatIon
rate Is caused by the byproducts (monomers, shortchaIn olIgomers and pollutIon of the raw
materIal caused by the radIoactIve labellIng process) that remaIn In the 14Clabelled polymer
after the polymerIsatIon reactIon.
FadIographIc analysIs showed comparable values for the byproduct of 5 - 6. n thIs respect It
should be noted that the measured amount of byproducts could be a lIttle hIgher quoted due to
relatIvely hIgh detectIon lImIts of the chosen test method for synthetIc polymers.
0egradatIon tests on a cleaned polymer solutIon only showed about 1 degradatIon. ThIs confIrms
that the actual polymer Is margInally or totally nondegradable for a very long tIme even under
extreme mIcrobIologIcal condItIons (as has been reported In lIterature so far).
The varIous tested relevant boundary condItIons have no sIgnIfIcant Influence on the degradatIon
In the reactor tests.
The degradatIon rates (degradatIon/tIme) decrease In all tests after a certaIn whIle, followed by a
phase of longer lastIng but very lIttle mIcrobIologIcal degradatIon actIvIty. ThIs most lIkely Is not a
result of degradIng byproducts but Is caused by the conversIon of mIcrobIologIcal bIomass, whIch

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
J0
has grown on the substrate (endogenous respIratIon). FInally the sum curves seams to flatten off
reachIng a plateau value.
As the orIgInal polymer used In the productIon of TrIsoplast

Is synthesIzed accordIng to a dIfferent
recIpe on a larger scale (the 14ClabelIng step Is not necessary In the raw materIals) It contaIns
smaller amounts of byproducts. ThIs means that the mIcrobIologIcal degradatIon of the polymer
and Its byproducts In the orIgInally produced TrIsoplast are not relevant and are no rIsk for the
use of TrIsoplast as sealIng materIal.
The very small amount of released 14CCD2 after the InItIal degradatIon of the byproducts and
olIgomers confIrms the hIgh durabIlIty of the polymer used wIthIn TrIsoplast . The degradatIon
rates are so low, that a bIochemIcal durabIlIty can be calculated exceedIng 100 years.

Dn the basIs of these hIghly accurate and sophIstIcated experIments the polymer Is regarded as durable by
an Independent Cerman expert group. The requIrements of the 0eutsches nstItut fur 8autechnIk (Cerman
nstItute for ConstructIon Technology) concernIng the durabIlIty of landfIll barrIers are fulfIlled.

5.2.2 VegetatIon
The effect of plant roots on a TrIsoplast barrIer was InvestIgated by means of tImelapse laboratory tests
In comparIson to a conventIonal clay barrIer (glacIal marl, IdentIcal wIth the materIal examIned by
|elchIor et al. In the test fIelds on the waste dIsposal sIte HamburgCeorgswerder). ntermedIate reports
on these InvestIgatIons are avaIlable (0DC 200006 und 200107). A publIcatIon on these trIals has been
entered as contrIbutIon to the LandfIll SymposIum SardInIa 01 (|elchIor et al. 2001, 0DC 200112, see
also 0DC 200204).

A total of 4 test boxes (42cm x 60 cm) were prepared, In whIch two TrIsoplast and two glacIal marl
barrIers (each 7 cm thIck) were Installed on a sand bed (5 cm sand 0/2). The water content of TrIsoplast
durIng compactIon was 9 by dry mass, the dry densIty was 1.6JJ g/cm`, the saturated water
permeabIlIty was 1.7 x 10
11
m/s. The glacIal marl was Installed wIth a water content of 12.8 by dry
mass and a dry densIty of 1.9J1 g/cm`. Under these condItIons the glacIal marl has a mean permeabIlIty
coeffIcIent of 2 x 10
10
m/s, as documented In many laboratory tests and also In fIeld tests conducted In
Ceorgswerder. Two root penetratIon tests were conducted over a perIod of 180 days, the other tests
lasted J20 days.

From August 1999 to January 2000 the barrIers were covered wIth a 5 cm draInage layer (gravel 1/J) and
2J cm topsoIl. 8arley was sown on the topsoIl. n January 2000 the coverIng soIl layers above the barrIer
were replaced by a 10 cm topsoIl layer dIrectly applIed to the barrIer and once agaIn sown wIth barley, as
a measure to speed up the tests. Dnce the seed was sown the boxes were IntensIvely watered so that the
seeds were able to sprout and the plants could start to grow. Then the waterIng was completely stopped
as a measure to generate desIccatIon stress and to force the plants to search for water In deeper regIons
of the soIl, I.e. In the barrIers.

FIg. 8 shows the development of water tensIon as a measure for the desIccatIon of the barrIers, measured
wIth tensIometers In the mIddle of the barrIer. n the glacIal marl layer the water tensIon Increases
approxImately three tImes as fast as In TrIsoplast. At approx. 850 hPa the methodIcally lImIted measurIng
range of the tensIometers Is exceeded, so that the water tensIon can no longer be measured. The
extrapolatIon of the water tensIon data Is speculatIve, on the other hand, due to the almost lInear course
of values It seems to Imply the assumptIon that at the end of the second desIccatIon phase the water
tensIon In TrIsoplast has been at least 1200 hPa.

0urIng the 2
nd
wettIng phase the water tensIon In the glacIal marl barrIer drops abruptly down to 0 hPa.
The water rIsIng above the barrIer very quIckly percolates along preferred water routes Into the barrIer. n
contrast to thIs the water tensIon In TrIsoplast

drops very slowly. |oreover, thIs decrease In water tensIon

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
J1
stIll contInues after waterIng has been stopped. The water InfIltrated through the upper edge of the
barrIer Into the barrIer durIng the wettIng phase and Is slowly dIstrIbuted In the barrIer a proof that the
barrIer Is not damaged.


FIgure 8: Water tensIon durIng root penetratIon tests wIth TrIsopIast and gIacIaI marI barrIers In the
Iaboratory

The fIrst boxes to be tested were dug out and examIned In February 2000, the other two boxes at the
end of the 2
nd
desIccatIon phase In July 2000:

The water content of the glacIal marl (InItIally 12.8 by dry mass) had dropped down to 8.9
by February and down to 2.6 by July. Already In February the marl was very solId, brIttle
and oxIdIzed over the entIre layer thIckness and It had come approx. 1 cm off the wall of the
test box. 1120 fIne roots were counted per dm on the upper edge of the marl; several roots
had grown up to J cm Into the barrIer. 8y July some roots had penetrated the complete
barrIer down to the sand bed and the materIal had broken along the shrInkage cracks.
WIth TrIsoplast the water content Increased untIl February from 9.0 by dry mass to 11.7. The
top 1 cm of the barrIer was slIghtly hardened, the bottom 6 cm were stIll plastIc. The surface of
the barrIer showed root growth as found wIth the glacIal marl. Some of the roots had penetrated
max. 2 cm Into the barrIer. 8y July 2000 the water content at the surface of the barrIer had
dropped to J.8 by dry mass, In the mIddle of the barrIer to 7.J and at the bottom edge of the
barrIer to 7.9. The top 2 cm were hardened and apparently drIer, the bottom 5 cm seemed to be
unchanged. NeIther shrInkage cracks, nor separatIons from the box wall were detected. A sample
taken at the end of the 2
nd
desIccatIon perIod and tested accordIng to 0N 181J01 showed the
same water permeabIlIty coeffIcIent as durIng InstallatIon of the barrIer.

0urIng the tests both barrIers were subjected to an extreme drought stress (very shallow soIl cover,
extremely long, absolutely dry perIods). Foots had penetrated Into both barrIers, however In a hIgher
number Into the glacIal marl than Into the TrIsoplast barrIer. t Is assumed, that the IncentIve to grow Into
the TrIsoplast barrIer Is consIderably lower, because of very lImIted amounts of plant avaIlable water In
thIs materIal. Apart from that, there are no haIrlIne cracks caused by desIccatIon, as can be found In the
glacIal marl, whIch promote the growIng of plant roots. WhIle the glacIal marl was almost fully desIccated
after the 1
st
and even more after the 2
nd
desIccatIon phase and showed damage caused by shrInkage,

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
J2
TrIsoplast remaIned plastIc even after the 2
nd
desIccatIon phase and was fully effectIve In Its functIon as a
barrIer.

5.2.3 SoII fauna and burrowIng anImaIs
nvestIgatIons concernIng the resIstance of TrIsoplast barrIers agaInst rodents or other anImals lIvIng under
ground have not yet been carrIed out. Also for other clay barrIers no specIfIc approvals are known. n the
resIstance to vermIn no dIfferences to other compacted clay or soIl barrIers are to be expected (suffIcIent
soIl cover, protectIon through a geomembrane, etc.).

5.3 PesIstance agaInst physIcaI Impact
5.3.1 Temperature
The effect of frost on the permeabIlIty of TrIsoplast barrIers was examIned In 0DC 200105. The
examInatIon was carrIed out In the trIaxIal cell by applIcatIon of the methods accordIng to 0N 181J0 and
AST|5084 usIng samples that had been compacted to 96 of the Proctor densIty, as In the Proctor test.
The frost phases lasted J days each, the thawIng phase 1 day. At the base the samples were connected to
free water. The hydraulIc conductIvIty of the sample was determIned after each freezIngthawIng cycle.
For the determInatIon of the kvalue the cell pressure was 100 kPa. 0urIng the freezIngthawIng phases
the cell pressure was reduced to 20 kPa. The saturated hydraulIc conductIvIty developed as follows:
after the fIrst freezIngthawIng change: J.5 x 10
11
m/s
after the second freezIngthawIng change: 2.2 x 10
11
m/s
after the thIrd freezIngthawIng change: 1.8 x 10
11
m/s

Dn the basIs of these laboratory tests no harmful Impact of frost on the sealIng effect of TrIsoplast can be
recognIzed. However, any frost effects on the TrIsoplast barrIer should be avoIded by quIck coverIng wIth
soIl. 0ue to the normally present thIckness of soIl layers above landfIll barrIers a permanent exposure of
the TrIsoplast barrIer to frost Is ruled out.

0DC 199J01 contaIns InvestIgatIons concernIng the resIstance of the TrIsoplast clay gel made of bentonIte
and polymer (wIthout granular materIal) agaInst hIgher temperatures. J00 g clay gel wIth a water content
of 70 was sealed and stored aIrtIght for 4 weeks at a temperature of 70`C. A comparIson of thIs sample
wIth other, untreated control samples dId not provIde any InformatIon on structural, morphologIcal or
rheologIcal changes to the clay gel caused by thIs thermal stress.

0DC 199701 contaIns several permeabIlIty tests of a sample wIth a dry densIty of 1.56 g/cm, whIch was
heated up from InItIally 20`C to J0`C over a perIod of 100 days. After raIsIng the temperature the
hydraulIc conductIvIty dropped from 4.2 x 10
11
m/s to 1.2 x 10
11
m/s.

5.3.2 Weather
Apart from frost (see above) the Impact of weather on the TrIsoplast barrIer Is only restrIcted to the
constructIon phase. ThIs subject Is supported by extensIve experIence from the projects already
completed. 0ue to Its stIckIness TrIsoplast Is InsensItIve to wInd. As long as the mIxture Is only loosely
spread and has not yet been compacted, mInor precIpItatIon Is harmless. Long term exposure to heavy
raInfalls and raIn on compacted TrIsoplast barrIers can, as wIth other clay barrIers, cause unacceptable
softenIng, requIrIng complete removal of the barrIer from the covered area. AgaInst desIccatIon TrIsoplast
Is much more InsensItIve than most other clay barrIers. |oreover, due to the hIgh area output In
productIon of the TrIsoplast barrIer, the barrIer can be quIckly covered wIth the geomembrane or the
draInage layer, wIthout any constructIon related urges.


TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
JJ
0DC 199701 contaIns permeabIlIty tests carrIed out on a sample wIth a dry densIty of 1.56 g/cm, after
beIng subjected to U7radIatIon (750 J/cm) over a perIod of J months. The detected hydraulIc
conductIvIty was 5.9 x 10
12
m/s.
TrIsoplast barrIers damaged by the Impact of weather (precIpItatIon, surface water, desIccatIon, frost,
IntroductIon of dust) must be removed agaIn.

5.3.3 Changes In water content
0esIccatIon and the related formatIon of shrInkage cracks Is a real threat for compacted clay barrIers
used for landfIll covers. For the examInatIon of the sensItIvIty of TrIsoplast desIccatIon tImelapse
laboratory tests were performed under condItIons as close as possIble to the boundary condItIons on waste
dIsposal sItes In the fIeld (0DC 200006 and 200107 as well as 0DC 200112, 0DC 200204 and 0DC 200J
07). n these tests TrIsoplast was examIned comparatIvely wIth the cohesIve mIneral seal "glacIal marl"
tested by |elchIor et al. In the test fIelds on the waste dIsposal sIte In HamburgCeorgswerder and
comparatIvely wIth the cohesIve mIneral seal "SchlIeperclay" and two types of CCL (Na8ento FLC and
8entofIx 8FC 7000). The fIeld test wIth glacIal marl revealed that InItIal desIccatIon related damage
occurs at water tensIon values between 200 hPa and 500 hPa. UsIng the same materIal In the laboratory
provIded the possIbIlIty to fInd out whether the equIpment and test method chosen was suItable to
reproduce the performance of the glacIal marl that was detected In the fIeld, and to assess the TrIsoplast
barrIer In comparIson to thIs conventIonal barrIer materIal.

The test cells correspond wIth fIxed wall cells, In whIch samples of 10 cm In dIameter and 7 cm In heIght
are compacted on a ceramIc plate and laterally bonded to an acrylIc glass cylInder, In order to sImulate
the cohesIon to the laterally connected barrIer materIal that Is normally present In the fIeld. n the
apparatus the samples are subjected to wet and dry phases of dIfferent length. 0urIng the wet phases the
surface of the samples Is covered wIth water rIch In Ions (In thIs case: electrIc conductIvIty -1100 S/cm,
pH -8, -200 mg/l Ca, -15 mg/l |g), In order to test the water InfIltratIon and leakage of the samples,
whIle the exchange of Ions Is possIble. 0urIng the desIccatIon phases aIr unsaturated wIth steam Is
ventIlated across the sample surface (In thIs case: ventIlatIon wIth aIr havIng a relatIve humIdIty of 75,
whIch would, In equIlIbrIum, correspond wIth a water tensIon In the soIl of J80,000 hPa). The samples are
contInuously subjected to load (In thIs case 16 kN/m) durIng the complete duratIon of the test, whIle the
uplIft and the lowerIng of the upper edge of the sample Is detected by a dIal gauge wIth a resolutIon of
0.01 mm.

FIg. 9 shows the measured water tensIon courses. The tests have been In progress sInce the 27
th
of August
1999 and are stIll goIng on. Two TrIsoplast samples have already been Installed In the wetdrycells for J
respectIvely 4 years. 0urIng the fIrst waterIng phase the correct InstallatIon of the samples was tested,
before the samples were desIccated to a water tensIon of 650 hPa durIng the 1
st
desIccatIon phase. n the
2
nd
waterIng phase the InfIltratIon of water Into the TrIsoplast sample was very low and not at all
measurable In the apparatus ( 1 x 10
10
m`/(mxs)), the barrIer was not leakIng and the water tensIon
decreased only very slowly and, due to the slow water dIstrIbutIon In the sample, stIll contInued to
decrease after the end of the waterIng phase. n contrast to thIs, the water tensIon In the glacIal marl
barrIer ImmedIately dropped to 0 hPa when waterIng had started, because shrInkage cracks had formed In
the barrIer and acted as preferentIal flow paths. The leakage was 6 x 10
6
m`/(mxs) and dropped very
slowly over a few days to values around 1x 10
7
m`/(mxs). The desIccatIon behavIour of the glacIal marl
barrIer detected In the fIeld could thereby be completely reproduced In the laboratory. 0urIng the 2
nd

desIccatIon phase the barrIer was more excessIvely drIed (about 850 hPa). Also In thIs case TrIsoplast

remaIned unharmed, whIle the permeabIlIty of the glacIal marl barrIer had Increased once agaIn. After
thIs the marl sample was removed and a saturatIon of the TrIsoplast sample wIth a hydraulIc gradIent of 5
was started, In order to start the followIng desIccatIon phase from a condItIon at whIch the TrIsoplast
sample had reached maxImum saturatIon wIth water. The water absorptIon of the TrIsoplast sample Is
very slow. The saturatIon was not reached even after months. There are stIll negatIve pressures In the
sample. The swellIng lIft of the sample Is also very low. From the end of the 1
st
waterIng phase to the end

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
J4
of the 2
nd
desIccatIon phase the upper barrIer edge had settled by 0.9 mm. 0urIng the 8 followIng months
of the J
rd
waterIng phase It has rIsen agaIn by about 0.2 mm.

FIgure : Water tensIons In gIacIaI marI and TrIsopIast barrIers durIng dry-wet cycIes In the
Iaboratory test

The results regardIng the dryIng behavIour of TrIsoplast In comparIson to other sealIng materIals In dry
wetcells are evaluated and summarIsed by |elchIor et al. (0DC 200J07) as follows:
TrIsoplast drIes out sIgnIfIcantly slower when subjected to the same desIccatIon condItIons as
glacIal marl and SchlIeperClay.
The glacIal marl looses Its low permeabIlIty as a result of shrInkage and crack formatIon at metrIc
potentIals of 400 hPa to 600 hPa. The permeabIlIty Increases IrreversIbly by several orders of
magnItude.
The glacIal marl sample showed dIstInctly vIsIble cracks In the centre of the sample after the test.
The SchlIeperClay loses Its low permeabIlIty already after the fIrst dryIng perIod at approxImately
600 to 800 hPa. t shows an extremely hIgh InItIal permeabIlIty when rewettIng. FeswellIng of
the clay takes place but It takes several days up to several weeks. The low permeabIlIty of the
freshly Installed SchlIeperClay Is not met agaIn after reswellIng.
TrIsoplast does not even lose Its low permeabIlIty at hIgher water tensIons. UntIl now water
tensIons up to about 1500 hPa have been tested.
The saturatIon and desIccatIon of TrIsoplast

takes extraordInary long.
The CCL show, same as the SchlIeperClay, an extremely hIgh permeabIlIty that gradually goes
back after several days and weeks due to the swellIng processes. The low permeabIlIty of the
freshly swollen mats Is not reached agaIn.
At a statIc surcharge of 16 kN/m the glacIal marl, the SchlIeperClay and TrIsoplast

only show
lIttle settlement and swellrIsIng. The maxImum settlement of the 7 cm thIck TrIsoplast

layer
durIng the desIccatIon phase was 1.5 mm and the swell even durIng the long hydratIon phases
reached no more than J mm. The SchlIeperClay showed the maxImum settlement of Jmm.
The settlement and swellIng behavIour of the two CCL dIffers sIgnIfIcantly. The CCL contaInIng
natural sodIum bentonIte (8entofIx 8FC 7000) settled 5 mm showIng stronger settlement than the

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
J5
calcIum bentonIte contaInIng CCL (Na8ento FLC, settlement 1.5 mm). CCL showed hardly any
swellIng back whereas the swellIng back of CCL was InItIally sIgnIfIcant, but got less wIth every
rehydratIon phase. The shrInkage supersedes the swellIng back sIgnIfIcantly.
The drywetphases sImulated In the laboratory can also be expected to occur In the fIeld wIthIn
several years underneath a soIl cover wIth a thIckness of approxImately 1 m (combIned thIckness
of recultIvatIon and draInage layer, typIcal clImatIc condItIons of central Europe assumed) ThIs
statement Is confIrmed by the fIeld studIes on landfIll cover systems at the landfIll Hamburg
Ceorgswerder.

The tests show that TrIsoplast

loses and absorbs water very slowly. Up to now It has not been possIble to
desIccate TrIsoplast to such an extent that shrInkage cracks occurred, even though the boundary
condItIons were far more severe than the fIeld condItIons. The tests are beIng contInued.

5.3.4 hechanIcaI effects
n theIr expertIse (0DC 200008) the Cerman 8A| raIsed the questIon of whether TrIsoplast would have a
longterm vIscoelastIc performance and whether creepIng of sand graIns, whIch would possIbly be coated
completely wIth a bentonIte smear when fully swollen, could occur on steep embankments. The 8A|
recommended the performance of shearIng tests wIth varyIng shearIng speeds. n dependence on the
shearIng speed, creepIng would then become apparent by dIfferent frIctIon angles. n order to be able to
answer thIs questIon "force controlled" shearIng tests and "dIstance controlled" shearIng tests In the box
shearIng unIt were performed at dIfferent shearIng speeds and documented In 0DC 20000J. 0DC 200104
contaIns a summary of the results concernIng the longterm strength performance of TrIsoplast.

The dIstance controlled shearIng tests were performed wIthout consolIdatIon - both durIng the slow test
(shearIng speed 0.006 mm/mIn) as well as durIng the fast test (fast test: 5 mm/mIn). Three dIfferent
water contents (w = 6 dry of optImum water content, 17 wet of optImum, 26 fully saturated)
were examIned.

The frIctIon angles determIned In the slow test are generally larger than J0` and In part even reach 40`.
They clearly IndIcate a noncohesIve materIal behavIour (stabIlIty of the sand), Independently from the
InItIal water content. n addItIon to thIs, cohesIons were found, havIng a maxImum of 40 KN/m at a water
content of 17, but can be neglected In almost dry condItIon (analogue to pure sand) and havIng the
magnItude (on average 22 KN/m) of natural cohesIve materIals (clays + loams) when saturated.

The results of the tests wIth hIgh shearIng speed generally revealed the same trends. For water contents
between 6 and 17 the detected frIctIon angles are even solely above J9`, whIch Is most lIkely caused by
the InsuffIcIent shapIng of the shearIng crevIce (no optImal partIcle rearrangement) as a result of the hIgh
shearIng speed. FrIctIon angles complyIng wIth the ones of natural cohesIve materIals (19` 27`) are only
found after saturatIon (water content of 26). The cohesIon values are generally wIthIn the range of
cohesIve materIals (on average 17 kN/m).

n the force controlled shearIng tests the load applIcatIon speeds were varIed between 17 kN/(m x mIn)
to 27 kN/ (m
2
x mIn). The examIned water contents were 6 and 26.

The results generally confIrm the statements on the dIstancecontrolled tests: The frIctIon angles are at
least 28` (almost a noncohesIve stabIlIty behavIour analogue sand). WIth saturatIon and quIck load
applIcatIon the frIctIon angle of 18` enters Into the range of natural cohesIve materIals. The cohesIons
were found to be between 20 KN/m and J0 KN/m, wIthout any apparent dependence on the load
applIcatIon speed or the water content.


TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
J6
Further tests wIth changed mIxIng ratIos showed a slIght Increase of the frIctIon angle, but no apparent
reductIon In cohesIon, as the proportIon of sand was Increased. t can fInally be concluded that TrIsoplast
under "normal" test condItIons unIfIes the posItIve stabIlIty characterIstIcs of sand (hIgh frIctIon) and clay
(suffIcIent cohesIon). When changIng the boundary condItIons of the test to very fast load applIcatIon or
fast offsettIng by shearIng, only saturated TrIsoplast wIll respond wIth materIal strengths comparable wIth
the ones that can be achIeved by natural cohesIve soIl materIals only under "normal" test condItIons. ThIs
"advanced" strength performance of TrIsoplast In comparIson to natural soIl materIals - unIfIcatIon of the
benefIts of cohesIve and noncohesIve strength performance - therefore eradIcates especIally the questIon
of InsuffIcIent longterm strength In comparIson to the prevIously used cohesIve barrIer materIals.

The questIon of whether the addItIon of water wIll cause the bentonIte to Increase Its volume to such an
extent that the avaIlable pore volume In the TrIsoplast barrIer Is not hIgh enough to absorb the swellIng
bentonIte, Is closely lInked wIth thIs subject. Subsequently the respectIve swellIng pressures would have
an Impact on the sand partIcles and cause swelllIftIng of the barrIer, durIng whIch the contact poInts of
the mIneral addItIve could be lost. Furthermore, bentonIte could squeeze out of the pores In the barrIer,
formIng a potentIal slIdIng crevIce. Water tensIon and applIed load counteract thIs swelllIftIng.

The InvestIgatIons avaIlable up to now have not revealed any IndIcatIon concernIng consIderable swelllIfts
and pore water pressures. The tests concernIng the performance of TrIsoplast durIng drywet cycles (0DC
200006 and 200107) were carrIed out In fIxed wall cells (restrIcted lateral expansIon) and under
applIcatIon of a load of 16 kN/m wIth contInuous monItorIng of the heIght change of the sample surface
by means of a hIgh resolutIon dIal gauge. After 2 desIccatIon cycles the sample TrIsoplast was re
saturated over several months. Water tensIons could stIll be measured, even after soakIng the sample for
eIght months In water, and no swellIng related water pressures had occurred (FIg. 7). WIthIn these eIght
month the top edge of the sample had only lIfted by 0.2 mm (0.J of the sample heIght of 70 mm). A
second sample (TrIsoplast ) was watered ImmedIately after InstallatIon In the test cell (InstallatIon water
content 8 by dry mass, InItIal water tensIon 50 kPa), wIthout InItIal desIccatIon. The fIrst pore water
pressures occurred after about one month, whIch then stabIlIzed between 5 kPa and 10 kPa. Dver the
course of these eIght months the top edge of the sample was only lIfted by 0.25 mm.

However, such long wet phases wIth banked up water cannot be expected In the landfIll covers. t seems
as If both the swellIng behavIour of the bentonItepolymer mIxture In TrIsoplast as well as the catIon
exchange capacIty are lImIted because of the InteractIons between the functIonal pendant groups of the
polymer and the clay mIneral surface, so that TrIsoplast behaves relatIvely InactIve In thIs respect. ThIs Is
supported by the swellIng test wIth TrIsoplast under very low load applIcatIon (1.5 kN/m) documented In
0DC 199702, In whIch the upper edge of the sample was lIfted by 1.8 mm (after all 18.2 of the sample
heIght of 1 cm), the swellIng, however, developed much slower than Is known wIth unrefIned bentonIte.

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
J7
6 UALITY hANACEhENT
The qualIty management for TrIsoplast Includes all qualItyaffectIng actIvItIes, from the selectIon of
producers or supplIers of the TrIsoplast components, up to the subsequent InspectIon of selected
applIcatIon examples by excavatIon and examInatIon. The qualIty assurance for the manufacturIng of
TrIsoplast barrIers Is descrIbed In the |anual whIch are updated at regular Intervals.

Requred mctercl propertes: The functIonal requIrements for a TrIsoplast mIxture as well as the raw
materIals must meet the requIrements descrIbed In the latest versIon of the |anual.

Proyrcmme o] tests: Dn the basIs of the general specIfIcatIons, the necessary tests are descrIbed or
reference Is made to common tests descrIbed In the lIterature or standards.

Proyrcmme o] constructon: CuIdelInes for the ImplementatIon are formulated In the programme
descrIbed In the |anual. The structure of the prelImInary InvestIgatIon and the constructIon of the
testfIeld as well as the productIon method for the mIxture and the processIng method are also descrIbed.

Quclty cssurcnce system: The qualIty assurance system Is aImed at obtaInIng a product whIch complIes
wIth the general specIfIcatIons. n thIs way certaInty Is obtaIned that an effectIve contaInment facIlIty Is
achIeved. The qualIty assurance system Includes the receIvIng InspectIon of the raw materIals, productIon
control of the processIng of the materIal and acceptance InspectIon of the completed layer.

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
J8
7 FIEL0 STU0IES DN THE PEPFDPhANCE DF TPISDPLAST

APPIEPS


7.1 ConstructIon test fIIIs
Dn landfIlls or contamInated sItes, where TrIsoplast barrIers are to be constructed, test fIelds are made
prIor to the routIne constructIon of the barrIer In order to test and prove the suItabIlIty of the
constructIon technIque and sequences proposed by the executIng contractor for the project. The
constructIon technIque used In the test fIeld and test fIeld results are documented In project reports.


7.2 LysImeter studIes
SInce 2002 TrIsoplast barrIers are examIned at three locatIons In Cermany In a total of J largescale
lysImeters ("test fIelds") wIth areas of 200 m to 250 m (waste dIsposal sIte 0eetz In 8randenburg, waste
dIsposal sIte Hamberg In 8adenWurttemberg, slag dIsposal sIte In the Saarland). n these largescale
lysImeters the effectIveness of the TrIsoplast

barrIers Is measured under waste dIsposal sIte condItIons by


collectIng the annual leakage rates through the barrIers.


7.3 ExcavatIon of compIeted systems
n September 2001 several TrIsoplast barrIers have been excavated about sIx years after theIr
constructIon. The excavated barrIers are part of the cover system of four sItes In the Netherlands. At
these four locatIons altogether sIx pIts were opened In order to examIne the barrIer systems by
Independent experts (0DC 200205, 0DC 200J01). The locatIons were waste dIsposal sItes for constructIon
debrIs, munIcIpal waste and hazardous waste as well as a petrol storage sIte. n two excavated pIts the
TrIsoplast barrIer was part of a composIte barrIer system wIth a coverIng geomembrane, In the four other
cases the TrIsoplast barrIer was the only barrIer layer In the system. n fIve of the sIx pIts the barrIers
were covered by a draInage and recultIvatIon layer. n the sIxth case the TrIsoplast barrIer was only
covered by a layer of coarse gravel. The thIckness of the coverIng layers above the barrIers varIed from
0.J to 1.4 m.

All the examIned TrIsoplast barrIers were stIll Intact. The water permeabIlIty had not changed and was
stIll at a low level (2.2 to J.1 x 10
11
m/s). No cracks or other faults were dIscovered In the barrIers. The
barrIers were homogeneous, moIst and the plastIcIty had not changed. Plant roots had penetrated Into one
of the barrIers, whIch had only been covered by 0.6 m of topsoIl. However, at the tIme of excavatIon
these plant roots have not caused any damage (desIccatIon, cracks) to the barrIer. Also In thIs partIcular
case the barrIer was stIll plastIc and the permeabIlIty as low as rIght after constructIon.

At one locatIon two excavatIon pIts were dIrectly adjacent. n both cases the total thIckness of the
coverIng draInage and topsoIl layers was about 0.6 m. However, In pIt E1 the TrIsoplast barrIer was
covered wIth a geomembrane, In contrast to pIt E2, where the draInage materIal lay dIrectly on the
surface of the TrIsoplast barrIer. n pIt E1 the barrIer had a thIckness of 7 cm and In E2 a thIckness of 1J
cm.

FIgure 10 shows the water content of both barrIers durIng constructIon and sIx years later durIng the
excavatIon of the barrIers. n pIt E1 water content has homogeneously Increased approx. J of water
under the coverIng geomembrane. The same applIes for the bottom half of the barrIer In pIt E2. However,
In the top 5 cm of the barrIer In E2 water content Is consIderably hIgher. ThIs depth dIstrIbutIon reveals
that the barrIer In E2 (despIte root penetratIon!) has such a low water permeabIlIty that the water from
the draInage layer was only able to percolate 5 cm deep Into the barrIer layer. The results from laboratory
tests on water permeabIlIty are thereby confIrmed In the fIeld.

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
J9

FIgure 10: 0IstrIbutIon of water content In TrIsopIast barrIers after constructIon and sIx years Iater
(thIckness of draInage Iayer and topsoII above barrIer app. 0.6 m; IocatIon E1: composIte
barrIer system wIth geomembrane above TrIsopIast

barrIer, E2: onIy TrIsopIast barrIer
wIthout geomembrane).

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
40
8 PPDJECT PEFEPENCES
The most Important and most sIgnIfIcant applIcatIon examples of TrIsoplast wIth respect to the covered
areas are located In the Netherlands, 8elgIum, FInland, the UK, reland, Cermany, France, taly, FomanIa,
CroatIa, SIngapore and |alaysIa.

A full lIst of reference projects can be found on our websIte www.trIsoplast.com.



TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
41
PEPDPTS AN0 PULICATIDNS DN TPISDPLAST
Year 0ocument
number
TItIe
13 199J01 Van der Zee, M., 0. de Wt, H. Tournos (1993): The bIologIcal and chemIcal
stabIlIty of a specIal claypolymer gel. FInal report. ATD0LD - AgrIcultural Fesearch
ServIce nst. for AgrotechnologIcal Fesearch. 21 S. + annex
14 199401 Envronmental Manayement 0rectorate-Ceneral, Sol Protecton 0eartment
(1994): SuItabIlIty of TrIsoplast as a landfIll barrIer. Letter from L.J. CravesteIjn to
F.P. van Schagen (Water |anagement, EnvIronment and Transport 0epartment). 2 S.
199402 Crondmechanca 0eljt - Sol Structure 0eartment (1994): 7ertIcal loadbearIng
capacIty and slope stabIlIty of a specIal clay gel. FInal report. Projekt |anager H.
Larsen. KerkdrIel. 25 S. + annex
15 199501 TN0 Kunststojjen en Rubber lnsttuut (1995): 0urabIlIty of the polymer In a clay
polymer gel. Stellungnahme von J. 8reen an ND7E|. 5 S.
199502 Venmans, A.A.M. (1995): EnglIsche Ubersetzung eInes SchreIbens an C..0., J.
Wammes. TrIsoplast squeezIng behavIor. CrondmechanIca 0elft. 2 S.
19950J Starny Centre (SC-0L0) (1995): nvloed percolaat op doorlatendheId TrIsoplast.
SchreIben vom 24.01.1995 an Ceneral ndustrIal 0evelopments 8enelux 8.7., 8oels, 0.
2 S.
16 199601 Crontm (1996): TrIsoplast Protocols for landfIll covers and lIners. 0e 8Ilt,
NIederlande. 8earbeItet durch K. van der Wal. J2 S. + annexes
199602 oels, 0., C.J. Veerman (1996): 0oorlatenheId van TrIsoplast voor verschIllende
vloeIstoffen. 0LD StarIng Centrum, Fappert 487. WagenIngen. 21 S.
19960J Starny Centre (SC-0L0) (1996): FunctIonalIty/QualIty of TrIsoplast. Feport from 0.
8oels. WagenIngen. 7 S.
17 199701 Wetz, A.M., 0. oels, H.J.J Weyers, J.J. Evers-Vermeer (1997): ApplIcatIon of
TrIsoplast for lInIng of landfIlls. StarIng Centre (SC0LD), Feport 142. WagenIngen. 50
S. + Anlage. (TranslatIon of Feport J00, 1994)
199702 0der, C., V. Norotte (1997): 0urchlassIgkeIt und Quellvermogen von TrIsoplast.
NSALyonUFCCCotechnIque. 5 S. + annexes
19970J K0AC-Vuyht (1997): Het onderzoeck naar de Invloed van een gesImuleerde zettIng
van TrIsoplast op de Invloed van de waterdoorlatenheId. 5 S. + annex
199704 Zon, W.H. van der (1997): WrIjvIngsweerstand TrIsoplast/folIe. Factual Feport.
CrondmechanIca 0elft. J S. + annex
199705 oels, 0 (1997): SchreIben vom 19.12.1997 an Ceneral ndustrIal 0evelopments
|IlIeutechnIek 8.7., Head of PhysIcal SoIl ConservatIon 0epartement. 1 S. + annex
18 199801 Cl0 Mleutechnek (1998): TrIsoplast LIst of references. 7elddrIel, Netherlands. 6 S.
199802 CjL Planunys- und lnyeneuryesellschajt (1998): 7erbesserte mIneralIsche
AbdIchtungen aus eInem polymerverguteten 8entonItSandCemIsch. 8remen. 20 S.
19980J Zon, W.H. van der (1998): SchuIfweerstandsproeven TrIsoplast/H0PEflex. Feport
981012. CrondmechanIca 0elft. 4 S. + annexes
199804 uhck-Crue (1998): StandardLastenheft fur das Anlegen eIner TrIsoplast
SperrschIcht, Hamburg. 15 S.
199901 0cker lCT (1999): KurzberIcht zur EIgnungsbewertung von TrIsoplast als
0IchtungsmIttel Im 0eponIebau 7oruntersuchungen. Neuss. 10 S.
199902 Ruard, P. (1999): Use of TrIsoplast. Faxreport to |r. FIsto KuusInIemI. |InIsterIe van
7olkshuIsvestIng, FuImtelIjke DrdenIng en |IlIeubeheer, 1 S.

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
42
Year 0ocument
number
TItIe
19990J oels, 0. (1999): Theory of the evolutIon of permeabIlIty of TrIsoplast In a lIner
constructIon combIned wIth H0PE geomembrane. 0LDWInand StarIng Centre
WagenIngen. 17 S.
199904 oels, 0. 8 K. van der Wal (1999): TrIsoplast: New 0evelopments In SoIl ProtectIon.
ProceedIngs SardInIa 99, 7
th
ntern. Waste |anagement and LandfIll SymposIum, 4
8.10.99 In CaglIarI, taly, S. 7784.
199905 oels, 0, 8 0. Schreber (1999): Effecten van alzIjdIge rek op de waterdoorlatendheId
van mInerale afdIchtIngmaterIalen. 0LD StarIng Centre, Fapport 681. WagenIngen. 25
S.
2000 200001 Khle-Wedemeer, M., oyon, H. (2000): LeIstungsfahIgere und kostengunstIge
mIneralIsche AbdIchtungen. |ull und Abfall, 4/00, 19219
200002 0cker lCT (2000): 7ermerk Nr. 4: Q| TrIsoplast - Probefeldbau mIt TrIsoplast. Neuss.
9 S
20000J 0cker lCT (2000): 7ermerk Nr. 6: Q| TrIsoplast - 7erformungs und
FestIgkeItseIgenschaften (1). Neuss. 11 S.
200004 0cker lCT (2000): 7ermerk Nr.7: Q| TrIsoplast - Wasserspannung als FunktIon des
Wassergehaltes. Neuss. 4 S.
200005 0cker lCT (2000): 7ermerk Nr. 9: Q| TrIsoplast - 0ruck und ZeItsetzung (1). Neuss.
J S. + annexes
200006 lC (2000): Untersuchung von TrIsoplast fur den EInsatz als DberflachenabdIchtung -
Laborversuche zum Austrocknungsverhalten. ZwIschenberIcht. Hamburg 20 S. +
annexes
200007 0cker lCT (2000): SchreIben vom 20.07.2000 an C8, 0r. |elchIor. Neuss 5 S.

200008 undesanstalt jr Materaljorschuny und -Prjuny (2000): CutachtlIche
Stellungnahme zu TrIsoplast als mIneralIsche AbdIchtungsschIcht von 0eponIen. 8erlIn,
15.05.2000, 8 S. + 1 annex
2001 200101 lSlS CmbH (2001): 7ermerk Nr. 10: Q| TrIsoplast - 7erdIchtbarkeIt und
0urchlassIgkeIt. Neuss. J S. + annexes

200102 lSlS CmbH (2001): 7ermerk Nr. 11: Q| TrIsoplast - Auswertung 0urchlassIgkeIt. Neuss.
J S.

20010J lC CmbH (2001): |erkblatt QualItatssIcherung beI AbdIchtungen aus TrIsoplast. 5
TeIle mIt dIversen Anlagen und 2 Anhangen. Hamburg, Stand: 01.02.2001.

200104 lSlS CmbH (2001): CeotechnIsche Stellungnahme zum
LangzeItscherfestIgkeItsverhalten von TrIsoplast. Neuss, 07.02.2001, 6 S.

200105 Jaakko Poyry lnjra - Ceocenter (2001): The effect of freezethaw cycles on
permeabIlIty of TrIsoplast. 7antaa, FInnland, 07.02.2001, 1 S.

200106 lSlS CmbH (2001): CeotechnIsche Stellungnahme zur Herstellung eInes Probefeldes auf
der 0eponIe Fothenbach. Neuss, 27.02.2001, 5 S.

200107 lC (2001): Untersuchung von TrIsoplast fur den EInsatz als DberflachenabdIchtung -
Laborversuche zum Austrocknungsverhalten. 2. ZwIschenberIcht. Hamburg, |arz 2001,
22 S. + 9 annexes

200108 Nedersachssches Landesamt jr 0koloye(2001): 0eponIeabdIchtung -
EIgnungsbeurteIlung alternatIver AbdIchtungselemente - Fachgesprach TrIsoplast.
Protokolle der Cesprache am 14. und 15.0J.2001 In HIldesheIm. 9 S.

200109 Unverstat Hannover - lnsttut jr Crundbau, odenmechank und
Eneryewasserbau (2001): FeIbungsversuche TrIsoplast. Hannover, 25.04.2001, J S. +
4 annexes.

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
4J
Year 0ocument
number
TItIe

200110 lSlS CmbH (2001): 7ermerk Nr. 12: |aBnahme Q| TrIsoplast: LaborergebnIsse. Neuss,
8 S.

200111 oels, 0. (2001): ComparIng Performance of TrIsoplast wIth 0Ifferent |Ineral LIner
|aterIals. ProceedIngs SardInIa 01, 8
th
ntern. Waste |anagement and LandfIll
SymposIum, 15.10.01 In CaglIarI, taly, S. 4554

200112 Melchor, S., . Stenert 8 0. Floter (2001): A ComparIson of TradItIonal Clay
8arrIers and the Polymer|odIfIed |aterIal TrIsoplast In LandfIll Covers. ProceedIngs
SardInIa 01, 8
th
ntern. Waste |anagement and LandfIll SymposIum, 15.10.01 In
CaglIarI, taly, S. 5564

20011J Ceotechnsches ro Proj. 0r.-lny. H. 0llmann (2001): KonformItatsnachweIs
TrIsoplast. FIngversuch. 8erIcht. Aachen, 7.S. + annexes

200114 Landesyewerbeanstalt ayern (2001): KonformItatsnachweIs TrIsoplast: ErgebnIsse
der Laboruntersuchungen. ZwIschenberIcht. Nurnberg, J S. + annexes

200115 lSlS CmbH (2001): LaborprufberIcht TrIsoplastFIngversuch. |onchengladbach, J5 S.

200116 melchor + wttohl lnyeneuryesellschajt (2001): FIngversuch: NachweIs der
KonformItat von TrIsoplast|Ischgut. ZwIschenberIcht. Hamburg, 6 S. + annexes

200117 Ceotechnsches ro Proj. 0r.-lny. H. 0llmann (2001): CeotechnIsche
Zusatzuntersuchungen (Quellhebungs und Quelldruckversuche) zum
AbdIchtungssystem TrIsoplast. Aachen, 20.12.2001, 22 S. + 5 annexes

200118 MRM- mark radon mlo (2001): nvestIgatIon of effects of repeated freezIng and
thawIng on the characterIstIcs of TrIsoplast mIxtures. Lule, Schweden, 2J.10.2001,
11 S. + 5 annexes
2002 200201 ehrens, W. 8 M. Neumann (2002): UntersuchungsergebnIsse zu eInIgen
mechanIschen EIgenschaften von TrIsoplast. |ull + Abfall, 2, 14 S.

200202 melchor + wttohl lnyeneuryesellschajt (2002): Erganzung des ZwIschenberIchts
zu den FIngversuchen TrIsoplast (0okument F_0J6_011015). 1 S. + 2 annexes

20020J melchor + wttohl lnyeneuryesellschajt (2002): |esswerte zur Quellhebung unter
Auflast. Hamburg 16.01.2002, 9 S.
200204 Stenert, , 0. Floter 8 S. Melchor (2002): 7ergleIchende Laboruntersuchungen des
Austrocknungsverhaltens von bIndIgen mIneralIschen 0Ichtungen aus CeschIebemergel
und aus TrIsoplast. 8eItrag zum Workshop ,Austrocknungsverhalten von mIneralIschen
AbdIchtungsschIchten In DberflachenabdIchtungssystemen" der 0eutschen Cesellschaft
fur CeotechnIk am J1.1. bIs 1.2.2002 In Hoxter. 12 S.

200205 Melchor, S., . Stenert 8 0. oels (2002): Aufgrabungen von Dberflachenab
dIchtungen mIt TrIsoplast ZwIschenergebnIsse. 8eItrag zum Workshop ,Austrock
nungsverhalten von mIneralIschen AbdIchtungsschIchten In
DberflachenabdIchtungssystemen" der 0eutschen Cesellschaft fur CeotechnIk am J1.1.
bIs 1.2.2002 In Hoxter. 8 S.

200206 Ceotechnsches ro Proj. 0r.-lny. H. 0llmann (2002): CeotechnIsche
Zusatzuntersuchungen (Quellhebungs und Quelldruckversuche) zum
AbdIchtungssystem TrIsoplast. 7arIante: Na8entonIt ohne Polymer. Aachen, Im
Januar 2002, 4 S. + 5 annexes

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
44


200207 Ceotechnsches ro Proj. 0r.-lny. H. 0llmann (2002): SchreIben zu den
ErgebnIssen zweIer weIterer Quellversuche nach HU0EF/A|8EFC. Aachen, 2J.01.2002,
2 S.

200208 Ceotechnsches ro Proj. 0r.-lny. H. 0llmann (2002): CeotechnIsche
Zusatzuntersuchungen zum AbdIchtungssystem TrIsoplast: TeIlweIse behInderte
Quellung. Aachen, Im Januar 2002, 2 S. + 2 annexes

200209 Landesyewerbeanstalt ayern (2002): KonformItatsnachweIs TrIsoplast: ErgebnIsse
der Laboruntersuchungen. Nurnberg, 6 S. + annexes

200210 Unverstat Hannover - lnsttut jr Crundbau, odenmechank und
Eneryewasserbau (2002): FeIbungsversuche TrIsoplast. Hannover, 25.04.2002, J S. +
4 annexes

200211 lSlS CmbH (2002): KurzberIcht zum AK TrIsoplast: Auswertung relevanter 0aten zum
Projekt PrItzwalk. |onchengladbach, 4 S. + 4 annexes

200212 melchor + wttohl lnyeneuryesellschajt (2002): |erkblatt QualItatssIcherung beI
AbdIchtungen aus TrIsoplast. 4 TeIle mIt dIversen Anlagen und 2 Anhangen. Hamburg,
Ausgabe 2.2, released on 10.07.2002

20021J Mll und Abjall 2, 2002, ehrens 8 Neumann: UntersuchungsergebnIsse zu eInIgen
mechanIschen EIgenschaften von TrIsoplast

200214 Cl0 Mleutechnek V(2002): 0ocumentatIon TrIsoplast 7ersIon 1.1, September 2002

200215 0r. Fntelmann 8 0r. Meyer (2002): Test Feport No 082181

200216 Cround Enyneerny (0ecember 2002), N. Robnson 8 M. Nasmth: ArtIcle "Cream
of the barrIers"

200217 Alterra: ComparIson of dIfferent lIner materIals - attenuatIon from mIneral lIners
2003
200J01 oels, 0, S. Melchor 8 . Stenert (2003): Are TrIsoplast barrIers sustaInable: An
evaluatIon of old landfIll caps

200J02 ASt (undesanstalt jr Stra6enwesen) (2003):Anwendung von TrIsoplast Im
Stra8enbau. Ausfuhrung von 7ersuchen Im Erdbaulabor der 8ASt

200J0J Melchor + Wttohl lnyeneuryesellschajt (2003): Untersuchung von TrIsoplast fur
den EInsatz als DberflachenabdIchtung - Laborversuche zum Austrocknungsverhalten.
AbschlussberIcht 0urchwurzelungsversuche

200J04 Umwelttechnsches Labor 0r. Renhard Wenbery (2003): 8erIcht uber
Untersuchungen zur 8estandIgkeIt von 0eponIeabdIchtungen aus TrIsoplast gegenuber
mIkrobIeller 8eeInfussung

200J05 Cl0 Mleutechnek V (2003): TrIsoplast |anual 7ersIon 1.0, AprIl 200J

200J06 Trsolast Mneral Lners (2003): 8rIef descrIptIon E HandlIng InstructIons TrIsoplast

200J07 Stenert, . 8 S. Melchor (2003): Untersuchungen von TrIsoplast fur den EInsatz als
DberflachenabdIchtung Laborversuche zum Austrocknungsverhalten
ZwIschenberIcht TrockenNassPrufzellen

200J08 oels, 0., eest, H. te, Zweers, H. 8 Croeneveld, P. (2003): InvestIgatIon of the
functIonaI IIfetIme of TrIsoplast In relatIon to chemIcal composItIons of pore water
solutIons In barrIers

200J09 Trsolast Mneral Lners (2003): TrIsoplast LIst of references.

TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon EnglIsh (versIon 1.2c)
45


200J10 Proceednys Sardna (2003), Nnth lnternatonal Waste Manayement and Landjll
Symosum, M.Nasmth, J. Wammes, E. Tmmermans and W. ehrens (2003):
Latest research regardIng durabIlIty and performance on the polymerenhanced
mIneral barrIer TrIsoplast
2004
20041 oels, 0., Letter jrom Alterra (2004): FunctIonal LIfetIme TrIsoplast for a specIfIc
landfIll leachate water

20042 Trsolast Mneral Lners (2004): TrIsoplast

|anual 7ersIon 1.1

2004J oels, 0., Letter jrom Alterra (2004): ToetsIng TrIsoplast aan 8ouwstoffen 8esluIt op
onderlaag van A7 bodemas

20044 RS Rjut Sold (March-Arl 2004), Mar A., Schonajjnyer, 0. 8M. Nasmth:
ArtIcle TrIsoplast

L'alternatIva nnovatrIce FIspetto All'mpermeabIlIzzazIone
|Inerale TradIzIonale

20045 Schanz, T. et al. auhaus-Unvertat Wemar, Laboratory oj Sol Mechancs
(2004): TrIsoplast 0etermInatIon of HydromechanIcal PropertIes of TrIsoplast


2006
20061 Trsolast Mneral Lners (2006): TrIsoplast 0ocumentatIon versIon 1.1
2007
20071 Wenbery, R. (2007): |odelberechnungen zur Fuckhaltung des |onomers In TrIsoplast

20072 oels, 0. (2007): DptIons for reuse of draInage water In arId urban areas

2007J Mulleneers, H. 8 E. Tmmermans (2007): 0uurzaamheId van een
zandbentonIetpolymeergel

20074 Kresc, K. (2007):Nove vrste brtvenIh slojeva za odlagalIsta komunalnog I opasnog
otpada
2008
20081 Stax, L. (2008): CelIjkwaardIgheId van enkellaags TrIsoplast In afdIchtIngsconstructIes
- beoordelIng voor het 8ouwstoffenbesluIt en het 8esluIt 8odemkwalIteIt

20082 ehrens, W. (2008): StabIlIty assessment of mIneral cappIng systems for landfIlls
IncludIng the use of TrIsoplast

2008J Schanz, T. auhaus-Unvertat Wemar, Laboratory oj Sol Mechancs (2008): Zu
7erformungsverhalten und FIssgefahrdIgung eIner mIneralIschen AbdIchtung Im
0eponIebau

20084 Fuyro (2008): ExcavatIon and testIng TrIsoplast from tank park Pulles DIl

20085 Cuyonnet, 0., 0. Cazaux, . Chever 8 M. Camet RCM (2008): TrIsolIx - LysImeter
experIments wIth TrIsoplast (fInal report)

20086 Cuyonnet, 0., 0. Cazaux, . Chever 8 M. Camet RCM (2008): TrIsolIx -
compatIbIlIty testIng of TrIsoplast (fInal report)

20087 Cuyonnet, 0., 0. Cazaux, . Chever 8 M. Camet RCM (2008): TrIsolIx - rsIstance
du TrIsoplast l'agressIon catIonIque
200
20091 LACA Ad-hoc-AC (2009): EIgnungsbeurteIlung von TrIsoplast

zur Herstellung von


mIneralIschen 0Ichtungen In DberflachenabdIchtungen von 0eponIen

20092 Mnstre de l'Ecoloye, de l'Enerye, du 0veloement durable et de
l'Amnayement du Terrtore (2009): CuIde de recommandatIons pour l'valuatIon
de l'quIvalence en tanchIt passIve d'InstallatIon de stockage de dchets

2009J Ejjects Nederland: Temperature of burnIng oIl In a tank park - safety of the
TrIsoplast constructIon

You might also like