United States
                     Environmental Protection
                     Agency	
 Risk Reduction
 Engineering Laboratory
 Cincinnati. OH 45268
                     Research and Development
 EPA/600/SR-92/069  July 1992^
«rEPA        Project Summary
                     Evaluation  of  the  Chemical
                     Resistance  of Geotextiles,
                     Geonets,  and  Pipe


                     Patrick E. Cassidy, Matthew W. Adams, and David F. White
                      A technological base was sought for
                    determining the chemical resistance
                    and long-term durability of geotextiles,
                    geonets, and pipe exposed  to liquids
                    representative of those in a waste con-
                    tainment facility. A desired end prod-
                    uct was to develop and validate gener-
                    alized  test  methods  assessing  the
                    chemical resistance of these products
                    in  a  laboratory setting. Although the
                    methods have produced valuable Infor-
                    mation when a high level  of expertise
                    has been applied, the fingerprinting
                    techniques do not offer clear-cut means
                    to  discriminate subtle differences in
                    polymer structure.
                      This Project Summary was developed
                    by EPA's Risk Reduction  Engineering
                    Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH,  to announce
                    key findings of  the research  project
                    that is fully documented In a separate
                    report of the same title (see  Project
                    Report ordering Information at back).

                    Introduction
                     The increasing amounts of solid waste
                    being generated as the result of the United
                    States being  an industrialized nation are
                    dealt  with in  many ways—from illegal
                    dumping to incineration. The intermediate
                    practice of landfill disposal  has become
                    the method of choice among manufactur-
                    ers, governments, and the private sector.
                    Unfortunately, the advances in landfill tech-
                    nology have  not  been  able to keep up
                    with the increasing amounts and variety
                    of wastes the landfills are required to iso-
                    late. The most significant breakthrough,
                    however, occurred  about 10 years ago
                    when  synthetic   materials  (termed
                    geosynthetics) began to compliment natu-
 ral materials  in the construction of dis
 posal sites.
  Research on these materials has, thus
 far, been limited to generating data appli
 cable to the materials' engineering abili
 ties.  Data such as ultimate strength, tea
 resistance, and sheer strength have long
 been determined for the use of designer;
 and  engineers planning  the landfill. A!
 though these data are satisfactory for ap
 plications such as drainage ditches,  rein
 forced embankments, and paved surfaces
 they are not sufficient for hazardous waste
 containment designs. The importance of
 physical data is not diminished in sue!
 cases, but the importance of chemical re
 sistance becomes crucial.

 Project Objectives
  The experimental program was intended
to provide a means to verify that the pro
posed generalized test program can, in
fact,  identify plastic that is  unacceptable
for the waste chemical to  be contained.
  Specific objectives were as follows:

   • Recommend tests for geosynthetics
     Physical testing  procedures were
     chosen from those currently being
     employed  by chemical  resistance
     testing laboratories.  Further, analyti-
     cal testing procedures were chosen
     from those commonly used in ana-
     lytical chemical laboratories.  The
     sensitivity of selected  test methods
     to degradation induced by chemical
     exposure was evaluated,
   • Correlate analytical and mechanical
     test data
     Analytical and microstructural data
     were compared with mechanical in-
                                                                     Printed on Recycled Paper

-------
     dex property data to evaluate pro-
     posed fingerprinting or equivalency
     testing procedures.  Relationships
     between physical property and ana-
     lytical data are required to relate
     molecular changes to bulk physical
     property losses. This relationship is
     essential if such  practices are to
     play  a significant  role in chemical
     resistance evaluations.

     Establish guidelines for evaluation
     and failure criteria
     Evaluation of chemical  resistance
     data requires clear understanding
     of the test methods used and sound
     judgment to properly distinguish ran-
     dom variability from  degradation
     caused by chemical attack.
Experimental Procedures
  The materials to be tested  were se-
lected according to current trends in de-
sign and use. The exposure matrix was
based on findings of earlier work in these
laboratories with an emphasis on inducing
failure. These failures  are not to occur for
the purpose  of invalidating  the use of
geosynthetics, but  rather  to  assess the
ability of the proposed immersion proce-
dures and test  methods to identify resis-
tance of materials to  immersion media.
Additionally, analytical tests  common to
the chemical sciences were employed to
monitor changes on a molecular level.
  The experiments followed  the general
guidelines outlined in the  EPA's prelimi-
nary guidance so that the program would
assess  the extent  to which those proce-
dures would accomplish the intended pur-
pose. This involved a  120-day exposure
period; two exposure temperatures (23 and
50  °C); and 30-day property monitoring
intervals, in accordance with EPA Method
9090  for geomembranes. It was believed
that the chemical resistance program rec-
ommendations for  textiles,  net, and pipe
should  parallel those  already  employed
for  geomembranes. Products representa-
tive of  the most  commonly  specified
geotextiles, geonet, and pipe were needed
to provide  an  experiment  that  evaluated
materials representative of current indus-
try  design  practice for waste facility de-
sign (Table 1).
  Two geotextile products represented the
principal classes of nonwoven geotextiles
currently available: polyethylene tereph-
thalate (PET) and polypropylene (PP). One
product representing  each material was
tested. Nominal fabric weights were 112 g/
m2 (3.3  oz/yd2) for  PET and 214 g/m2 (6.3
oz/yd2) for PP.
  Because a survey of the geosynthetics
industry indicated that high-density poly-
ethylene (HOPE) is predominantly used in
the manufacture of drainage net, one rep-
resentative HOPE net product was tested.
    One smooth  interior/profiled  exterior
HOPE pipe product was tested. Although
many  diverse kinds of plastic pipe are
available in the marketplace and many of
these have found application in waste con-
tainment facility design, this program did
not permit evaluation of multiple products.
It was believed that the project objectives
could be met by selecting one representa-
tive pipe material. Polyethylene pipe was
selected because it  has been widely used
in constructing leachate collection systems.

Test Selection
  We sought index physical property tests
consistent with the  EPA's  interim  guid-
ance  and  representing common,  well-ac-
cepted  standard methods that could be
easily  reproduced. At the same time, at-
tention was given to evaluating alternative
tests, e.g., single-fiber tests for geotextiles
and arc bend tests for pipe sections. The
requirement of exposing samples in labo-
ratory  baths for extended periods of time
ruled out tests requiring unusually large or
bulky specimens.
  Fourier transform infrared  spectroscopy
(FTIR) was used because it can  indicate
oxidative  degradation and qualitatively
characterize polymer surfaces by measur-
ing a wide range of chemical structures.
Thermal analysis was applied because of
its ability to detect changes in crystallinity
of polymeric materials.
  As  tools for fingerprinting and equiva-
lency testing  geosynthetics, the evaluated
analytical techniques presented some
problems. First, the lack of test standard-
ization and technical documentation hin-
dered efforts to provide consistent, repeat-
able results.  It was  necessary to  develop
individual sampling methods for each ma-
terial  examined.  Although  the  methods
employed are by no means definitive, they
helped to solve the problems encountered
when  applying analytical techniques  to
geosynthetics.
  Second, the equipment used is not nec-
essarily representative of that available to
other laboratories and manufacturers. Be-
fore applying a technique,  the limits  of
each machine must be assessed and then
taken into account when interpreting data.
Each experiment must be carefully moni-
tored for sources of  interference, and ex-
perience must be  applied  to  individual
methods.  Such expertise comes from a
learned researcher who  is able to  apply
polymer chemistry in conjunction with ana-
lytical instrumentation.
  The third consideration  is that of inter-
preting  analytical data. The microstruc-
tural changes being investigated are very
minuscule, and therefore  even sensitive
methods may  provide data that are diffi-
cult to interpret (Figure 1).
  Presently, the fingerprinting techniques
that were evaluated do not offer a clear-
cut, readily-applied means to discriminate
subtle differences in polymer  structure.
Further,  minute changes  in bulk proper-
ties cannot yet be detected using analyti-
cal methods. Without significant attention
to method development,  laboratory tech-
nique, and interpretation, the development
of useful results is difficult. The potential
usefulness of  these  methods should  not
be discounted  since they have  already
produced valuable information when a high
level  of  expertise has  been  applied  to
experimental design  and evaluation crite-
ria.  With respect to fingerprinting, this
project has better defined  set-up, test  ap-
plication,  and  data  evaluation  problems
so that future  research will have a more
defined approach.


Outlook
  The largest problem now facing wide
acceptance and use of fingerprinting tech-
niques is the lack of uniform,  repeatable
test  procedures.  The  level of accuracy
and  repeatability  remain  in question as
does the proper interpretation of data. The
technology base  needs to be  expanded
so that analytical tests of demonstrated
value can be  specified with confidence,
regardless of  who  performs the test  or
interprets the results.
  Although  some methods (mechanical
and analytical) have been identified here
as useful, this should not be taken as a
complete list. Rather, it should be consid-
ered a foundation for further work.  Other
tests  are available to complement those
performed here. As geosynthetics experi-
ence  greater applications in waste con-
tainment, such work is  needed to fully
develop chemical resistance testing.
  Analytical testing is believed capable of
indicating deterioration before physical
methods can,  and, therefore, these more
sensitive, molecular-level indicators should
receive principal  attention. For example,
the  field of reflectance spectroscopy can
provide an experienced spectroscopist a
wide  range  of techniques from which to
choose;  this technology must  be  further
examined. Further, thermal analysis has
been  shown to indicate degradation both
quantitatively  and qualitatively; thermal
analysis  should be continually  applied to
geosynthetic studies.

-------
Table 1. Exposure Matrix
                                     Exposure Conditions
Tests
Geosynthetic
Material
Geotextile 1
(PP*)



Geotextile II
(PET")


Geonet
(HOPE"')



Pipe
(HOPE***)

Water H2SO4
(50%)
23 °C
50 °C 50 °C



	
50 °C


23 °C
50 °C 50 °C



23 °C
50 °C 50 °C

Ca(OH)2 Physical
(replicates)
Grab Tensile (10)
Mullen Burst (10)
Permittivity (10)
Melt Flow Index (3)
Specific Gravity (3)
23 °C Grab Tensile (10)
50 °C Mullen Burst (10)
Permittivity (10)
Specific Gravity (3)
Transmissivity (2)
Net Compression (3)
Tensile Strength (3)
Melt Flow Index (3)
Gradient Density (3)
Pipe Stiffness (3)
Gradient Density (3)
Melt Flow Index (3)
Analytical
FTIFP
TGA*
DSC*


FTIFP
TGA*
DSC"

FTIFT
TGA*
DSC*


FTIFP
TGA*
DSC*
 'Polypropylene; "polyethylene terephthalate; ***high-density polyethylene; Courier transform infrared spectroscopy;
 *thermogravimetric analysis; 'differential scanning calorimetry.
                                                     Exposed to Ca(OH)2 for 120 Days at50°C
                     102.2 —
                      76.6
                           4000
                                                    Wavelength (cm '')
Figure 1. Fourier transform infrared spectra of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) exposed to base solution (top) and unexposed
          PET.
                                                                                     •U.S. Government Printing Office: 1992— 64S-080/60031

-------
  Additional analytical techniques to be
evaluated include gel permeation chroma-
tography, rheology, nuclear magnetic reso-
nance (NMR) spectroscopy, etc. A broader
recommendation is to establish a continu-
ing program of evaluating existing  landfill
facilities to identify field failures and to
assess the condition of installed materi-
als.
  The full report was submitted in fulfill-
ment  of Cooperative  Agreement Number
CR815495 by Southwest Texas State Uni-
versity under the sponsorship of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.
    Patrick E. Cassidy and Matthew W. Adams are with Polymer Research Group of
      Southwest Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, and David F. White is with
      TRI Environmental, Inc., Austin, TX.
    Robert E. Landreth is the EPA Project Officer (see below)
    The complete report, entitled "Evaluation of the Chemical Resistance of Geotextiles,
      Geonets,  and Pipe," (Order No. PB92-170 562/AS; Cost: $19.00, subject to
      change) will be available only from:
            National Technical Information Service
            5285 Port Royal Road
            Springfield, VA 22161
            Telephone: 703-487-4650
    The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
            Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
            U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
            Cincinnati, OH 45268
 United States
 Environmental Protection
 Agency
 Center for Environmental
 Research Information
 Cincinnati, OH 45268
               BULK RATE
         POSTAGE & FEES PAID
                  EPA
            PERMIT No. G-35
 Official Business
 Penalty for Private Use $300
 EPA/600/SR-92/069

-------