Hydraulic Conductivity of Model Soil-Bentonite Backfills Subjected to Wet-Dry Cycling

The potential for changes in hydraulic conductivity, k, of two model soil-bentonite (SB) backfills subjected to wet-dry cycling was investigated. The backfills were prepared with the same base soil (clean, fine sand) but different bentonite contents (2.7 and 5.6 dry wt %). Saturation (S), volume change, and k of consolidated backfill specimens (effective stress = 24 kPa) were evaluated over three to seven cycles in which the matric suction, Ym, in the drying stage ranged from 50 to 700 kPa. Both backfills exhibited susceptibility to degradation in k caused by wet-dry cycling. Mean values of k for specimens dried at Ym = 50 kPa (S = 30-60 % after drying) remained low after two cycles, but increased by 5- to 300-fold after three or more cycles. Specimens dried at Ym ≥ 150 kPa (S < 30 % after drying) were less resilient and exhibited 500- to 10 000-fold increases in k after three or more cycles. The greater increases in k for these specimens correlated with greater vertical shrinkage upon drying. The findings suggest that increases in hydraulic conductivity due to wet-dry cycling may be a concern for SB vertical barriers located within the zone of a fluctuating groundwater table.

Compressibility and Hydraulic Conductivity of Zeolite-Amended Soil-Bentonite Backfills

The effect of zeolite amendment for enhanced sorption capacity on the consolidation behavior and hydraulic conductivity, k, of a typical soil-bentonite (SB) backfill for vertical cutoff walls was evaluated via laboratory testing. The consolidation behavior and k of test specimens containing fine sand, 5.8 % (dry wt.) sodium bentonite, and 0, 2, 5, or 10 % (dry wt.) of one of three types of zeolite (clinoptilolite, chabazite-lower bed, or chabazite-upper bed) were measured using fixed-ring oedometers, and k also was measured on separate specimens using a flexible-wall permeameter. The results indicated that addition of a zeolite had little impact on either the consolidation behavior or the k of the backfill, regardless of the amount or type of zeolite. For example, the compression index, Cc, for the unamended backfill specimen was 0.24, whereas values of Cc for the zeolite amended specimens were in the range 0.19 ≤ Cc ≤ 0.23. Similarly, the k for the unamended specimen based on flexible-wall tests was 2.4 x 10-10 m/s, whereas values of k for zeolite amended specimens were in the range 1.2 x 10-10 ≤ k ≤ 3.9 x 10-10 m/s. The results of the study suggest that enhancing the sorption capacity of typical SB backfills via zeolite amendment is not likely to have a significant effect on the consolidation behavior or k of the backfill, provided that the amount of zeolite added is small (≤ 10 %).