Evaluation of Pore Size Distribution for Controlled Permeability Formwork Liner


Article Preview

Controlled permeability formwork liner (CPFL) is the functional material similar to nonwoven fabrics and its filtration and drainage performance is dominated by the pore size distribution (PSD) of matrix. In this paper, suction table method, generally used to measure soil pore diameter, is improved for testing PSD of CPFL and experimental data was compared to the results from four other normal experimental methods, i.e., wet sieving method, bubble point method, mercury intrusion porosimetry (MIP) method and image analysis. The comparison indicates that PSD of CPFL obtained from suction table show good accuracy and repeatability. Furthermore, a modified mathematical model derived from Rawal model and Fature model is proved to be suitable for determinating PSD of the matrix of CPFLwith bilayer structure, and have a good agreement with the experimental data from suction table.



Edited by:

Ford Lumban Gaol, Marcus P. Rutner, Mehdi Setareh and Keshav Narain Shrivastava




Z. H. Tian and X. D. Wang, "Evaluation of Pore Size Distribution for Controlled Permeability Formwork Liner", Applied Mechanics and Materials, Vol. 534, pp. 53-62, 2014

Online since:

February 2014




* - Corresponding Author

[1] T. Harrison, Introducing controlled permeability formwork, Aberdeen's Concrete Construction, v 36, n 2, pp.198-200, Feb (1991).

[2] B. Price, Recent developments in the use of controlled permeability formwork, Concrete (London), v 32, n 3, pp.8-10, Mar (1998).

[3] M.G. Sorensen, Controlled permeability formwork for improved durability, Concrete (London), v 37, n 3, pp.34-35, March (2003).

[4] Z.H. Tian, C.S. Gu, Experimental research on concrete durability under controlled permeability formwork liner, Earth and Space Conference 2008: Proceedings of the 11th Aerospace Division International Conference on Engineering, Science, Construction, and Operations in Challenging Environments, v 323, (2008).

DOI: 10.1061/40988(323)39

[5] A. Patanaik, R.D. Anandjiwala, Water flow through the polypropylene-based geotextiles, Journal of Applied Polymer Science, v 108, n 6, pp.3876-3880, June 15, (2008).

DOI: 10.1002/app.28050

[6] S.K. Bhatia, J.L. Smith, Comparative study of bubble point method and mercury intrusion porosimetry techniques for characterizing the pore-size distribution of geotextiles, Geotextiles and Geomembranes, v 13, n 10, pp.679-702, (1994).

DOI: 10.1016/0266-1144(94)90068-x

[7] S.K. Bhatia, J.L. Smith, Geotextile characterization and pore-size distribution. I. A review of manufacturing processes, Geosynthetics International, v 3, n 1, pp.85-105, (1996).

DOI: 10.1680/gein.3.0055

[8] S.K. Bhatia, J.L. Smith, Geotextile characterization and pore-size distribution: part II. A review of test methods and results, Geosynthetics International, v 3, n 2, pp.155-180, (1996).

DOI: 10.1680/gein.3.0058

[9] S.K. Bhatia, J.L. Smith, Geotextile characterization and pore-size distribution. III. Comparison of methods and application to design, Geosynthetics International, v 3, n 3, pp.301-328, (1996).

DOI: 10.1680/gein.3.0064

[10] Y.H. Faure, J.P. Gourc, P. Gendrin, Structural study of porometry and filtration opening size of geotextiles, ASTM Special Technical Publication, n 1076, pp.102-119, Aug (1990).

DOI: 10.1520/stp23500s

[11] B.S. Gerry, G.P. Raymond, Equivalent opening size of geotextiles, Geotechnical Testing Journal 6, pp.53-63, (1983).

[12] Y. Faure, J.P. Gourc, F. Millot, S. Sunjoto, Theoretical and experimental determination of the filtration opening size, In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Geotextiles, Vienna, pp.1275-1280, (1986).

[13] G. Lombard, A. Rollin, C. Wolff, Theoretical and experimental opening sizes of heat-bonded geotextiles, Textile Research Journal, v 59, n 4, pp.208-217, (1989).

DOI: 10.1177/004051758905900404

[14] A. Rawal, Structural analysis of pore size distribution of nonwovens, Journal of the Textile Institute, v 101, n 4, pp.350-359, (2010).

DOI: 10.1080/00405000802442351

[15] A. Rawal, P.V.K. Rao, S. Russell, A. Jeganathan, Effect of fiber orientation on pore size characteristics of nonwoven structures, Journal of Applied Polymer Science, v 118, n 5, pp.2668-2673, December 5, (2010).

DOI: 10.1002/app.32608

[16] E. Mayer, J. Warren, Evaluating filtration media: A comparison of polymeric membranes and nonwovens, Filtration and Separation, v 35, n 10, pp.912-914, (1998).

DOI: 10.1016/s0015-1882(98)80059-1

[17] C.F. Wu, Measurement of pore size of geotextile under different pressures, Yantu Gongcheng Xuebao/Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, v 28, n 4, pp.495-503, (2006).

[18] G.R. Fischer, R.D. Holtz, B.R. Christopher, Evaluating geotextile pore structure, ASTM Special Technical Publication, n 1281, pp.3-18, (1996).

[19] A. H. Aydilek, Filtration performance of geotextile-wastewater sludge systems, PhD thesis, Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wis, (2000).

[20] T.C. Kenney, R. Chahal, E. Chiu, G.I. Ofoegbu, G.N. Omange, C.A. Ume, Controlling Constriction Sizes of Granular Filters, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 22, pp.32-43, (1985).

DOI: 10.1139/t85-005

[21] G.R. Fischer, The influence of fabric pore structure on the behavior of geotextile filters, Doctoral dissertation, University of Washington, p.502, (1994).

Fetching data from Crossref.
This may take some time to load.