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 %).

Men's Modesty, Religion, and the State: Spaces of Collision

This article examines religious practices in the United States, which govern modesty and other dress norms for men. I focus both on the spaces within which they most collide with regulatory regimes of the state and the legal implications of these norms, particularly for observant Muslim men. Undergirding the research are those ‘‘gender equality’’ claims made by many religious adherents, that men are required to maintain proper modesty norms just as are women. Also undergirding the research is the extensive anti-Islam bias in American culture today. The spaces within which men’s religiously proscribed dress and grooming norms are most at issue—indicated by First Amendment legal challenges to rights of religious practice—are primarily those state-controlled, total institutions Goffman describes, such as in the military and prisons. The implications of gendered modesty norms are important, as state control over religious expression in prisons, for example, is much more difficult to contest than in other spaces, although this depends entirely on who is doing the contesting and within which religious context. In American society today—and particularly within the context of growing Islamaphobia following the 9/11 attacks—the implications are greatest for those men practicing ‘‘prison Islam.’’