1989
DOI: 10.1139/t89-018
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Geomembrane interface friction

Abstract: Interface friction between an HDPE geomembrane and an angular as well as a rounded sand, a gravel, and a geotextile was investigated in a ring shear apparatus. The results indicate development of peak resistance at small strain and constant residual interface friction angles at large strain. The magnitude and difference between peak and residual friction angles increase with angularity. Interface friction angles between a geotextile and geomembrane were very low with no distinction between peak and residual. A… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
7
0
2

Year Published

2001
2001
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
1
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 45 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
1
7
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…To fill this need, torsional ring shear and large-scale direct shear tests were conducted on a variety of PVC geomembrane-geosynthetic interfaces. These test results are summarized herein and complement/differ from the extensive information available on HDPE geomembranegeosynthetic and HDPE geomembrane-soil interfaces (Bove 1990;Dove and Frost 1999;Koerner et al 1986;Martin et al 1984;Mitchell et al 1990;Negussey et al 1989;O'Rourke et al 1990;Saxena and Wong 1984, Stark and Poeppel 1994, Stark et al 1996, Takasumi et al 1991, Williams and Houlihan 1987Yegian and Lahlaf 1992).…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 65%
“…To fill this need, torsional ring shear and large-scale direct shear tests were conducted on a variety of PVC geomembrane-geosynthetic interfaces. These test results are summarized herein and complement/differ from the extensive information available on HDPE geomembranegeosynthetic and HDPE geomembrane-soil interfaces (Bove 1990;Dove and Frost 1999;Koerner et al 1986;Martin et al 1984;Mitchell et al 1990;Negussey et al 1989;O'Rourke et al 1990;Saxena and Wong 1984, Stark and Poeppel 1994, Stark et al 1996, Takasumi et al 1991, Williams and Houlihan 1987Yegian and Lahlaf 1992).…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 65%
“…This can be attributed to the suction effect between the geotextile and GM interface. The shear stress vs. horizontal displacement did not display any noticeable peak resistance (Martin et al, 1984;Saxena and Wong, 1984;Negussey et al, 1989). The residual shear stress in wet condition was slightly higher than that in the dry condition, irrespective of the normal stress and this observation is in line with Negussey et al (1989).…”
Section: Geotextile (500 G/m 2 )-Gm Interfacementioning
confidence: 81%
“…It is widely used for the anti-seepage engineering of various domestic and solid waste residues because of its good resistance to low temperatures and good corrosion resistance [2][3][4][5][6]. The friction of the interface between the HDPE geomembrane and the solid waste under direct shear must be well considered to assess the stability of engineering structures [7][8][9][10][11]. According to the standard for pollution control on the storage and disposal of general industrial solid waste in the Guizhou province, the yard storing of slag from class II general industrial solid waste must use anti-seepage methods [12].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%