Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Catolica De La Santisima Concepcion on 04/04/16. Copyright ASCE.

For personal use only; all rights reserved.

GRI-18 Geosynthetics Research and Development in Progress

On the Creep Reduction Factors for Geotextile Puncture Protection of

Geomembranes
R. M. Koerner1 and G. R. Koerner2
1

Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA 19104 and Geosynthetic Institute, Folsom, PA

19033; PH (610) 522-8440; FAX (610) 522-8441; email:
robert.koerner@coe.drexel.edu
2
Geosynthetic Institute, 475 Kedron Avenue, Folsom, PA 19033; PH (610) 522-8440;
FAX (610) 522-8441; email: gkoerner@dca.net
Abstract
This short paper presents revised information on the creep reduction factors used in
the widely accepted method for geotextile mass per unit area design to prevent
geomembrane puncture. The laboratory tests have been ongoing for 6-years and have
not failed to date, leading to the tentative conclusion that published values of RFCR
are quite conservative.
Background of Geotextile Puncture Protection Design
There are many circumstances where geomembranes are placed on or beneath soils
containing relatively large-sized stones, for example poorly prepared soil subgrades
with stones protruding from the surface or resting on the surface, soil subgrades over
which geomembranes (particularly textured) have been dragged dislodging nearsurface stones, and cases where crushed-stone drainage layers are to be placed above
the geomembrane. All of these situations, particularly the last (which is unavoidable
since it is a design situation), should use a protective geotextile to avoid puncturing
the geomembrane. For the drainage layer case, which is common to all landfills, a
nonwoven needle-punched geotextile can provide significant puncture protection
(Koerner, 1998). The issue of required mass per unit area of the geotextile becomes
critical.
In a series of three related papers, Wilson-Fahmy, Narejo, and Koerner (1996) have
presented a design method that focuses on the protection of 1.5 mm thick HDPE
geomembranes. The method uses the conventional factor of safety equation as
follows.

Copyright ASCE 2005

Geosynthetic Research and Development

Geosynthetics Research and Development in Progress

GRI-18 Geosynthetics Research and Development in Progress

FS =

pallow
pact

(1)

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Catolica De La Santisima Concepcion on 04/04/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

where
FS
pact

= factor of safety (against geomembrane puncture),

= actual pressure imposed on the geomembrane, e.g., landfill or reservior,
and
pallow = allowable pressure using different types of geomembranes, geotextiles and
site-specific conditions

Based on a large number of ASTM 5514 experiments (using truncated rigid plastic
cones applying stress on the geotextile, then on the geomembrane) an empirical
relationship for pallow has been obtained, Eq. (2). It requires the use of modification
factors and reduction factors to adjust the truncated and isolated cones to the reality of
the site-specific situation, see Table 1.
M

p allow = 50 + 0.00045 2
H

1
1

MFS MFPD MFA RFCR RFCBD

(2)

where
pallow
M
H
MFS
MFPD
MFA
RFCR
RFCBD

=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=

allowable pressure (kPa),

geotextile mass per unit area (g/m2),
protrusion height (m),
modification factor for protrusion shape,
modification factor for packing density,
modification factor for arching in overlying solids,
reduction factor for long-term creep, and
reduction factor for long-term chemical/biological degradation.

Note that in Eq. 2, all MF values 1.0 and all RF values 1.0.
The design situation can be approached from a given geotextile mass per unit area to
determine an unknown FS value, or from a given FS value to determine an unknown
mass per unit area geotextile. The following example uses the latter approach.
Numeric Example
Given a coarse gravel (subrounded with d50 = 38 mm) leachate collection layer to be
placed on a 1.5 mm HDPE geomembrane under a 50 m high landfill, what geotextile
mass per unit area is necessary for a FS value of 3.0? Assume that the solid waste
weighs 12 kN/m3.

Copyright ASCE 2005

Geosynthetic Research and Development

Geosynthetics Research and Development in Progress

GRI-18 Geosynthetics Research and Development in Progress

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Catolica De La Santisima Concepcion on 04/04/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Table 1. Modification factors and reduction factors for geomembrane protection

design using nonwoven needle-punched geotextiles (after Koerner, 1998).
Modification Factors
MFs
Angular
1.0
Subrounded
0.5
Rounded
0.25

MFPD
Isolated
Dense, 38 mm
Dense, 25 mm
Dense, 12 mm

1.0
0.83
0.67
0.50

MFA
Hydrostatic
Geostatic, shallow
Geostatic, mod.
Geostatic, deep

1.0
0.75
0.50
0.25

Reduction Factors
RFCBD
Mild leachate
Moderate leachate
Harsh leachate

1.1
1.3
1.5

Mass per unit area

(gm/m2)
Geomembrane alone
270
550
1100
>1100

RFCR
Protrusion Height (mm)
38
25
12
N/R
N/R
N/R
N/R
N/R
>1.5
N/R
1.5
1.3
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.1
1.0

N/R = Not recommended

Solution
Use H = 25 mm = 0.025 m, which is an estimate since the gravel particles are not
isolated, but are adjacent to one another, MFS = 0.5 for shape, MFPD = 0.83 for
packing density, MFA = 0.25 for arching, RFCR = 1.5 for creep, and RFCBD = 1.3 for
long-term degradation from moderate leachate.
First, calculate the value of pallow using Eq. (1).
FS

3.0 =

pallow
pact
pallow
(50)(12)

pallow = 1800 kN/m 2

Second, calculate the required mass per unit area of geotextile using Eq. (2).

Copyright ASCE 2005

Geosynthetic Research and Development

Geosynthetics Research and Development in Progress

GRI-18 Geosynthetics Research and Development in Progress

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Catolica De La Santisima Concepcion on 04/04/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1
1
M

p allow = 50 + 0.00045 2

H MFS MFPD MFA FS CR FS CBD

M
1
1
1800 = 50 + 0.00045
2
(0.025) 0.5 0.83 0.25 1.5 1.3

M = 436 g/m 2 ; use a 500 g/m 2 geotextile

Current Testing Status

The modification factors and the reduction factors in Table 1 have all been
experimentally obtained and are available in the references cited previously, except
for the creep reduction factors.
Due to the long testing time required to obtain creep data, the values in Table 1 for
RFCR were originally estimated. Subsequent to the publication of the design
method in 1996, we configured long-term creep puncture laboratory setups
(beginning on June 15, 1998) to assess the estimates that were originally made. This
paper describes these tests and the information gained to date.
The laboratory test setup for these creep tests is according to ASTM D5514, which is
the same test used to generate the original data presented in Table 1 and the
development of the entire design method. The data for the four creep tests that are
currently ongoing is given in Table 2 and shown in Figure 1.
Table 2. Long-term creep puncture test details.
Item and Description
geomembrane type
geomembrane thickness (mm)
geotextile type (all PET)
geotextile mass (g/m2)
puncture cone height (mm)
applied normal pressure (kPa)
percent short term failure (%)
start date of tests
current test status

1
HDPE
1.5
NP-NW
600
12
430
25
6/15/98
ongoing

Test Setup Number

2
3
HDPE
HDPE
1.5
1.5
NP-NW
NP-NW
600
600
12
38
580
52
33
50
6/15/98
6/15/98
ongoing
ongoing

4
HDPE
1.5
NP-NW
600
38
34
33
6/15/98
ongoing

Results-to-Date
After 6-years of creep puncture testing, none or the four samples have failed.
Considering that Test Setup No. 2 is at a relatively high normal pressure (equivalent
to approximately 50-m of solid waste) and that Test Setup #3 is at a relatively high
cone height (equivalent to a dense layer of stones, as in a leachate collection system,
of approximately 58 mm), these are very impressive and favorable results.

Copyright ASCE 2005

Geosynthetic Research and Development

Geosynthetics Research and Development in Progress

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Catolica De La Santisima Concepcion on 04/04/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

GRI-18 Geosynthetics Research and Development in Progress

(a) Truncated cone and geomembrane

puncture pattern

(c) Single pressure chamber

for long-term testing

(b) Isolated cone array using truncated

cones (general test configuration)

(d) Two of four identical pressure

chambers with readout boxes

Figure 1. Laboratory setups per ASTM D5514 for long term creep behavior of
geotextiles used for puncture protection of geomembranes.
Tentative Summary
It appears to the writer that the values of RFCR in Table 1 are quite conservative.
The 1.5 mm thick HDPE geomembranes used in these tests do not appear to be
deforming over the peaks of the truncated cones at all. Whether this is due to creep
deformations within the 600 g/m2 geotextiles, or not, is not known. Upon dismantling
the test setups this will be investigated.
The significance of the results-to-date is important. This can be shown by
recalculating the numeric example using a RFCR = 1.1, instead of the 1.5 that was
used. This results in a 301 g/m2 geotextile necessary for a FS = 3.0, instead of the
calculated value of 436 g/m2 (thus a, reduction of 31%). Needless to say, the tests
will be continued.

Copyright ASCE 2005

Geosynthetic Research and Development

Geosynthetics Research and Development in Progress

GRI-18 Geosynthetics Research and Development in Progress

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Catolica De La Santisima Concepcion on 04/04/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Acknowledgements
The financial assistance of the member organizations of the Geosynthetic Institute
and its related institutes for research, information, education, accreditation and
certification is sincerely appreciated. Their identification and contact member
information is available on the Institutes web site <<geosynthetic-institute.org>>.
References
Koerner, R. M. (1998). Designing with geosynthetics, 4th Edition, Prentice-Hall Book
Co., Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 761 pgs.
Koerner, R. M., Wilson, R. F., and Narejo, D. (1996). Puncture protection of
geomembranes. Part III: Examples. Geosynthetics Intl., Vol. 3, No. 5, pp.
655-676.
Narejo, D., Koerner, R. M., and Wilson-Fahmy, R. F. (1996). Puncture protection of
geomembranes. Part II: Experimental. Geosynthetics Intl., Vol. 3, No. 5, pp.
629-653.
Wilson-Fahmy, R. F., Narejo, D., and Koerner, R. M. (1996). Puncture protection of
geomembranes. Part I: Theory. Geosynthetics Intl., Vol. 3, No. 5, pp. 605628.

Copyright ASCE 2005

Geosynthetic Research and Development

Geosynthetics Research and Development in Progress