*1.3.4. Effects of chemical and biological degradation*

**3.4 Effects of Chemical and Biological Degradation**  Figure 1.9 shows the tensile strength retention of both the nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles before/after immersion in the leachate solution. Tensile strength and strain retention of both types of polyester nonwoven geotextiles (FGTs and GTs) show the similar tensile property and decrease with temperature. These phenomena are shown very clearly at 80°C, and this result would be due to the hydrolysis effect of both polyesters under high temperature in the alkaline state. (*Gugumus, F., 1996*) In addition, the strength retention of polyester nonwoven geotextiles Figure 9 shows the tensile strength retention of both the nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles before/after immersion in the leachate solution. Tensile strength and strain retention of both types of polyester nonwoven geotextiles (FGTs and GTs) show the similar tensile property and decrease with temperature. These phenomena are shown very clearly at 80°C, and this result would be due to the hydrolysis effect of both polyesters under high temperature in the alkaline state. (*Gugumus, F., 1996*) In addition, the strength retention of polyester nonwoven geotextiles before/after leachate immersion state in the waste landfill site was examined. Figure 10 shows the tensile strength retention in order to explain the biological resistance.

**Figure 1.9. Chemical resistance by tensile property retention of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles. Figure 9.** Chemical resistance by tensile property retention of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles.

**Figure 1.10. Biological resistance by tensile strength retention of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles.** 

The nanoclay-blended polyester nonwoven geotextiles (i.e., the FGTs) show lower tensile strength retention than the traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles (i.e., GTs). It is assumed that this means the FGTs were influenced by the components of the leachate solutions in a greater or less amount because of the nanoclay component. However, this does not mean that fungi and bacteria can attack these geotextiles. Figure 1.11 shows the values of cumulative reduction factors and the allowable

tensile strengths of all of these nonwoven geotextiles.

Nanotechnology Formulations and Modeling of Hydraulic Permeability Improvement for Nonwoven Geotextiles http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/61997 305

**Figure 1.9. Chemical resistance by tensile property retention of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles.** 

**Figure 10.** Biological resistance by tensile strength retention of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles. The nanoclay-blended polyester nonwoven geotextiles (i.e., the FGTs) show lower tensile strength

The nanoclay-blended polyester nonwoven geotextiles (i.e., the FGTs) show lower tensile strength retention than the traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles (i.e., GTs). It is assumed that this means the FGTs were influenced by the components of the leachate solutions in a greater or less amount because of the nanoclay component. However, this does not mean that fungi and bacteria can attack these geotextiles. Figure 11 shows the values of cumulative reduction factors and the allowable tensile strengths of all of these nonwoven geotextiles. retention than the traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles (i.e., GTs). It is assumed that this means the FGTs were influenced by the components of the leachate solutions in a greater or less amount because of the nanoclay component. However, this does not mean that fungi and bacteria can attack these geotextiles. Figure 1.11 shows the values of cumulative reduction factors and the allowable tensile strengths of all of these nonwoven geotextiles.

**Figure 1.11. Allowable tensile strength of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester Figure 11.** Allowable tensile strength of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles.

#### **nonwoven geotextiles.**  *1.3.5. Hydraulic properties due to clogging phenomena*

*1.3.3. Tensile properties*

(*Jewell, R. A., 1996; Holtz, R. D. et al. 1995*)

**3.4 Effects of Chemical and Biological Degradation** 

mean the machine and cross machine directions, respectively).

*1.3.4. Effects of chemical and biological degradation*

tensile strength retention in order to explain the biological resistance.

geotextiles.

the biological resistance.

**3.3 Tensile Properties** 

304 Non-woven Fabrics

Figure 8 shows the tensile strength of both the nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles. For the two types (i.e., FGTs and GTs), tensile strengths in both directions (machine direction (MD) and cross machine direction (CMD)) increased with weight but tensile strains decreased with weight. This is a very common trend in tensile properties of

**Figure 1.8. Tensile properties of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles (where MD, CMD mean the machine and cross machine directions, respectively).** 

**Figure 8.** Tensile properties of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles (where MD, CMD

Figure 1.9 shows the tensile strength retention of both the nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles before/after immersion in the leachate solution. Tensile strength and strain retention of both types of polyester nonwoven geotextiles (FGTs and GTs) show the similar tensile property and decrease with temperature. These phenomena are shown very clearly at 80°C, and this result would be due to the hydrolysis effect of both polyesters under high temperature in the alkaline state. (*Gugumus, F., 1996*) In addition, the strength retention of polyester nonwoven geotextiles before/after leachate immersion state in the waste landfill site was examined. Figure 1.10 shows the

**Figure 1.9. Chemical resistance by tensile property retention of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles.** 

**Figure 9.** Chemical resistance by tensile property retention of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven

**Figure 1.10. Biological resistance by tensile strength retention of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles.** 

The nanoclay-blended polyester nonwoven geotextiles (i.e., the FGTs) show lower tensile strength retention than the traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles (i.e., GTs). It is assumed that this means the FGTs were influenced by the components of the leachate solutions in a greater or less amount because of the nanoclay component. However, this does not mean that fungi and bacteria can attack these geotextiles. Figure 1.11 shows the values of cumulative reduction factors and the allowable

tensile strengths of all of these nonwoven geotextiles.

Figure 9 shows the tensile strength retention of both the nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles before/after immersion in the leachate solution. Tensile strength and strain retention of both types of polyester nonwoven geotextiles (FGTs and GTs) show the similar tensile property and decrease with temperature. These phenomena are shown very clearly at 80°C, and this result would be due to the hydrolysis effect of both polyesters under high temperature in the alkaline state. (*Gugumus, F., 1996*) In addition, the strength retention of polyester nonwoven geotextiles before/after leachate immersion state in the waste landfill site was examined. Figure 10 shows the tensile strength retention in order to explain

Figure 1.8 shows the tensile strength of both the nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles. For the two types (i.e., FGTs and GTs), tensile strengths in both directions (machine direction (MD) and cross machine direction (CMD)) increased with weight but tensile strains decreased with weight. This is a very common trend in tensile properties of nonwoven geotextiles.

nonwoven geotextiles. (*Jewell, R. A., 1996; Holtz, R. D. et al. 1995*)

**3.5 Hydraulic Properties due to Clogging Phenomena**  Clogging means a channel blocking in the nonwoven geotextiles and this is an important cause of decreasing water permeability among soil particles. Usually, AOS does not decrease while clogging has not occurred in the nonwoven geotextiles. Figure 12 shows AOS values of polyester nonwoven geotextiles before/after immersion in the waste landfill site. The nanoclayblended polyester nonwoven geotextiles (the FGTs) showed relatively small AOS values than the traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles, which indicates that a significant clogging was formed in the FGTs. Hence, toxic, organic, and floating components in the leachate solution could be simply adsorbed to the nanoclay-blended polyester nonwoven geotextiles.

**Figure 12.** AOS of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles before/after immersion (where A, B mean before and after immersion, respectively).

**Figure 13.** Permittivity of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles before/after immersion (where A, B mean before and after immersion, respectively).

Figure 13 shows the permittivity of the polyester nonwoven geotextiles before/after leachate solution in the waste landfill site. As shown in the case of biological resistance, AOS, and permittivity, the FGTs showed smaller permittivity values than traditional polyester nonwo‐ ven geotextiles because of clogging effects of FGTs. Figure 14 shows strength retention of the polyester nonwoven geotextiles before/after clogging and the same result was observed. The nanoclay-blended polyester nonwoven geotextiles (the FGTs) show smaller tensile strength retention than the traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles (the GTs). Figure 15 shows the values of cumulative reduction factors and the allowable permittivity of all of these nonwoven geotextiles.

**Figure 14.** Tensile Strength retention of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles after clog‐ ging. **Figure 1.14. Tensile Strength retention of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles after clogging.** 

**Figure 1.15. Allowable permittivity of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven Figure 15.** Allowable permittivity of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles after clogging.

**geotextiles after clogging.** 

#### *1.3.6. Adsorption efficiency*

the traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles, which indicates that a significant clogging was formed in the FGTs. Hence, toxic, organic, and floating components in the leachate solution

**Figure 12.** AOS of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles before/after immersion (where A,

**Figure 13.** Permittivity of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles before/after immersion

Figure 13 shows the permittivity of the polyester nonwoven geotextiles before/after leachate solution in the waste landfill site. As shown in the case of biological resistance, AOS, and permittivity, the FGTs showed smaller permittivity values than traditional polyester nonwo‐ ven geotextiles because of clogging effects of FGTs. Figure 14 shows strength retention of the

B mean before and after immersion, respectively).

306 Non-woven Fabrics

(where A, B mean before and after immersion, respectively).

could be simply adsorbed to the nanoclay-blended polyester nonwoven geotextiles.

**3.6 Adsorption Efficiency**  Figure 1.16 shows the adsorption efficiency of hazardous and heavy metal components of nanoclay-Figure 16 shows the adsorption efficiency of hazardous and heavy metal components of nanoclay-blended polyester nonwoven geotextiles. Here, FGTs showed excellent adsorption efficiency compared to the traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles.

blended polyester nonwoven geotextiles. Here, FGTs showed excellent adsorption efficiency compared to the traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles. Finally, further study must be conducted to generate a detailed, clear, and quantitative adsorption effect with various nonwoven geotextiles, which have different fiber compositions.

**Figure 16.** Component adsorption of nanoclay-blended and traditional polyester nonwoven geotextiles.

#### **1.4. Future of nanotechnology applications in geoenvironmental engineering**

The following was suggested by Dr. Ian D. Peggs in his article "The Future of Geosynthetics – One Opinion" regarding the manufacturing capabilities for use by the geosynthetics community: (*Peggs, I. D., 2008*)


**•** The technology presents an opportunity to make a significant step (not just a small one) toward more specialty products that will be accepted and utilized accordingly
