Accurate assessment of the dynamic strength characteristics of mechanically–biologically treated (MBT) waste is crucial for the construction and safe operation of landfill sites. Herein, samples of MBT waste from the Hangzhou Tianziling landfill were collected and subjected to consolidated undrained cyclic triaxial tests under four confinement levels and six cyclic stress ratios (CSRs). Under cyclic loading, the MBT waste exhibited a critical CSR. If the CSR exceeds the critical value, the MBT waste specimen rapidly undergoes deformation and failure. Dynamic strength of MBT waste decreases with an increase in the number of cyclic vibrations and increases with an increase in confining pressure. Considering the influence of cyclic vibrations and confining pressure, a formula for dynamic strength in terms of cyclic vibrations and confining pressure has been established. The dynamic shear strength parameter ranges for MBT waste were obtained under different seismic magnitudes. We compared the dynamic and static shear strength parameters of MBT waste and municipal solid waste. These study findings can serve as a reference for the dynamic stability analysis of MBT waste landfills.
AbreuAESVilarOM (2017) Influence of composition and degradation on the shear strength of municipal solid waste. Waste Management68: 263–274.
2.
AliMZhangJRagaR, et al. (2018) Effectiveness of aerobic pretreatment of municipal solid waste for accelerating biogas generation during simulated landfilling. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering12: 1–9.
3.
AlidoustPKeramatiMShariatmadariN (2018) Laboratory studies on effect of fiber content on dynamic characteristics of municipal solid waste. Waste Management76: 126–137.
4.
ArcherESchwagerJWhitingK (2005) Could MBT become the most significant waste management option? In: Proceedings of International Symposium MBT. Karlsruhe: ICP Wasteconsult International, pp.16–23.
5.
AugelloAJBrayJDAbrahamsonNA, et al. (1998) Dynamic properties of solid waste based on back-analysis of OII landfill. Journal of Geotechnical Geoenvironmental Engineering124: 211–222.
6.
AugelloAJBrayJDLeonardsGA, et al. (1995a) Response of landfills to seismic loading. In: Proceedings Geoenvironment 2000, ASCE Specialty Conference, New Orleans, LA, 22–24 February 1995.
7.
AugelloAJMatasovicNBrayJD, et al. (1995b) Evaluation of solid waste landfill performance during the Northridge earthquake. In: Proceedings of the Geotechnical Engineering Division of the ASCE in Conjunction with the ASCE Convention. New York: ASCE, pp.17–50.
8.
Awad-AllahMF (2019) Shear strength characteristics of fibrous solid waste materials in landfill sites. Journal of Al-Azhar University Engineering Sector14: 47–56.
9.
BabuGLSLakshmikanthanPSanthoshLG (2015) Shear strength characteristics of mechanically biologically treated municipal solid waste (MBT-MSW) from Bangalore. Waste Management39: 63–70.
10.
BareitherCABensonCHEdilTB (2012) Effects of waste composition and decomposition on the shear strength of municipal solid waste. Journal of Geotechnical Geoenvironmental Engineering138: 1161–1174.
11.
BhandariARPowrieW (2013) Behavior of an MBT waste in monotonic triaxial shear tests. Waste Management33: 881–891.
BrayJDZekkosDKavazanjianE, et al. (2009) Shear strength of municipal solid waste. Journal of Geotechnical Geoenvironmental Engineering135(6): 709–722.
14.
CoxJTYesillerNHansonJL (2015) Implications of variable waste placement conditions for MSW landfills. Waste Management46: 338–351.
15.
EskandariMHomaeeMFalamakiA (2016) Landfill site selection for municipal solid wastes in mountainous areas with landslide susceptibility. Environmental Science and Pollution Research23: 12423–12434.
16.
FalamakiAGharehSHomaeeM, et al. (2020) Laboratory shear strength measurements of municipal solid waste at room and simulated in situ landfill temperature, Barmshoor Landfill, Iran. International Journal of Civil Engineering18: 185–197.
17.
FalamakiAShahinS (2019) Determination of shear strength parameters of municipal solid waste from its physical properties. Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering43: 193–201.
18.
FanGZhangZZhangJ, et al. (2022) Effect of loading rate on shear strength parameters of mechanically and biologically treated waste. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering16: 1–12.
19.
FengSJGaoGYChenYM, et al. (2007) Experimental study on dynamic strength of municipal solid waste. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering2007: 560–566 (in Chinese).
20.
FengSJShiJLShenY, et al. (2021) Dynamic shear behavior of GMB/CCL interface under cyclic loading. Geotextiles and Geomembranes49: 657–668.
21.
FernandoSPowrieWWatsonGVR, et al. (2009) The Impact of the Reinforcing Content on the Shear Strength of Mechanically Biologically Treated Waste, vol. 3. Braunschweig, Germany: Hydro-Physico-Mechanics of Landfills.
22.
FinnWDLLeeKWMartinGR (1977) An effective stress model for liquefaction. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division103: 517–533.
23.
FucaleSJucáJFTMuennichK (2015) The mechanical behavior of MBT waste. Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering20: 5927–5937.
24.
GabrMAValeroSN (1995) Geotechnical properties of municipal solid waste. Geotechnical Testing Journal18: 241–251.
25.
Karimpour-FardMMachadoSLShariatmadariN, et al. (2011) A laboratory study on the MSW mechanical behavior in triaxial apparatus. Waste Management31: 1807–1819.
26.
KavazanjianEMatasovicNBonaparteR, et al. (1995) Evaluation of MSW properties for seismic analysis. In: Proceedings of the specialty conference on geotechnical practice in waste disposal. Part 1 (of 2), New Orleans, LA, USA. ASCE, pp.1126–1141.
27.
KavazanjianNMatascovicRBonaparteGR, et al. (2000) Evaluation of evaluation of MSW properties for seismic analysis. Geotechnical Special Publication, ASCE, New Orleans, USA, vol. 46, pp.1126–1141.
28.
KazaSYaoLBhada-TataP, et al. (2018) What a Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050. Washington, DC: World Bank Publications.
29.
KeramatiMShariatmadariNSabbaghiM, et al. (2018) Effect of confining stress and loading frequency on dynamic behavior of municipal solid waste in Kahrizak landfill. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology15: 1257–1264.
30.
Kuehle-WeidemeierMDoedensH (2004) Landfilling of mechanically-biologically pretreated municipal solid waste. In: International symposium waste management. Zagreb, VIII.
31.
LakshmikanthanPSughoshPBabuGLS (2018) Studies on characterization of mechanically biologically treated waste from Bangalore city. Indian Geotechnical Journal48: 293–304.
32.
LandvaAKnowlesGD (1990) Geotechnics of Waste Fills: Theory and Practice. West Conshohocken: ASTM International.
33.
Lapeña-MañeroPGarcía-CasusoCCañizalJ, et al. (2022) Shear strength characterization of fresh MBT and MSWI wastes from a Spanish treatment facility. Waste Management154: 15–26.
34.
LouZChaiXZhaoY, et al. (2014) Indicating landfill stabilization state by using leachate property from Laogang Refuse Landfill. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering8: 405–410.
35.
LiJC (2019) Study on Static and Seismic Stability of Landfills with High Water Level by Centrifugal Model Tests. Hangzhou: Zhejiang University (in Chinese).
36.
LiuJYuSShangY (2020) Toward separation at source: Evolution of municipal solid waste management in China. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering14: 1–3.
37.
LiuY (2019) Fundamentals of Soil Dynamics. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press (in Chinese).
38.
LuWHuoWGulinaH, et al. (2022) Development of machine learning multi-city model for municipal solid waste generation prediction. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering16: 119.
39.
LuoYYangCZhouW, et al. (2023) Discrete element numerical simulation of dynamic strength characteristics of expanded polystyrene particles in lightweight soil. Geomechanics and Engineering34: 577–595.
40.
MachadoSLCarvalhoMFVilarOM (2002) Constitutive model for municipal solid waste. Journal of Geotechnical Geoenvironmental Engineering128: 940–951.
41.
MachadoSLVilarOMCarvalhoMF (2008) Constitutive model for long term municipal solid waste mechanical behavior. Computers and Geotechnics35: 775–790.
42.
MatasovićNKavazanjianEJr (1998) Cyclic characterization of OII landfill solid waste. Journal of Geotechnical Geoenvironmental Engineering124: 197–210
43.
MatasovicNKavazanjianEJrAugelloAJ, et al. (1995) Solid waste landfill damage caused by 17 Jan 1994 Northridge earthquake. In: WoodsMCSeipleRW (eds) The Northridge, California Earthquake of 17 January 1994. California: Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication, pp.43–51.
44.
MatasovicNKavazanjianEJrAndersonRL (1998) Performance of solid waste landfills in earthquakes. Earthquake Spectra14: 319–334.
45.
NandaSBerrutiF (2021) Municipal solid waste management and landfilling technologies: A review. Environmental Chemistry Letters19: 1433–1456.
46.
NieCZhangZLiT (2023) Laboratory studies of the dynamic characteristics of mechanically–biologically treated waste. Waste Management160: 135–145.
47.
PengXHan-longLYuZ, et al. (2021) Dynamic strength of temperature-controlled MICP-treated calcareous sand. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering43: 511–519. (In Chinese).
48.
PetrovicI (2016) Mini-review of the geotechnical parameters of municipal solid waste: Mechanical and biological pre-treated versus raw untreated waste. Waste Management & Research34: 840–850.
49.
PulatHFYukselen-AksoyY (2017) Factors affecting the shear strength behavior of municipal solid wastes. Waste Management69: 215–224.
50.
PulatHFYukselen-AksoyY (2019) Compressibility and shear strength behaviour of fresh and aged municipal solid wastes. Environmental Geotechnics9: 55–63.
51.
QiangYWangJCChenW (2013) An experimental study on the dynamic strength of earth-rock aggregate. Applied Mechanics and Materials353: 597–601.
52.
RavitejaKMunwarBashaB (2017) Probabilistic Back Analysis of Koshe Landfill Slope Failure. Indian Geotechnical Conference, ResearchGate.
53.
ReddyKRGangathulasiJParakallaNS, et al. (2009) Compressibility and shear strength of municipal solid waste under short-term leachate recirculation operations. Waste Management & Research27: 578–587.
54.
ReddyKRHettiarachchiHGangathulasiJ, et al. (2011) Geotechnical properties of municipal solid waste at different phases of biodegradation. Waste Management31: 2275–2286.
55.
SahadewaAZekkosDLobbestaelA, et al. (2011) Shear wave velocity of municipal solid waste in Michigan landfills. In: Proceedings of 14th Pan-American conference on soil mechanics and geotechnical engineering and 64th Canadian geotechnical conference on geo-innovation addressing global challenges. Richmond: The Canadian Geotechnical Society.
56.
SeedHBIdrissIM (1971) Simplified procedure for evaluating soil liquefaction potential. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division97: 1249–1273.
57.
ShiJQianXLiuX, et al. (2016) The behavior of compression and degradation for municipal solid waste and combined settlement calculation method. Waste Management55: 154–164.
58.
SiegelRARobertsonRJAndersonDG (1990) Slope stability investigations at a landfill in Southern California. In: Landva A and Knowles GD (eds) Geotechnics of Waste Fills – Theory and Practice. Pennsylvania: ASTM International, pp.259–284.
59.
StegmannR (2005) Mechanical biological pretreatment of municipal solid waste. In: 10th International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium, vol. 27. Cisa University of Cagliari Sardinia, pp.1479–1485.
60.
VilarOMCarvalhodMF (2004) Mechanical properties of municipal solid waste. Journal of Testing and Evaluation32: 438–449.
ZekkosDAthanasopoulosGABrayJD, et al. (2010) Large-scale direct shear testing of municipal solid waste. Waste Management30: 1544–1555.
63.
ZekkosDMatasovicNEl-SherbinyR, et al. (2010) Dynamic properties of municipal solid waste. In: Zekkos D (ed.) Geotechnical Characterization, Field Measurement, and Laboratory Testing of Municipal Solid Waste. New Orleans, LO: Geo-Institute of ASCE, pp.112–134.
64.
ZekkosDP (2005) Evaluation of Static and Dynamic Properties of Municipal Solid-Waste. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley.
65.
ZhangJRYangZJiangT (2023) Dynamic strength characteristics and microscopic analysis of silt improved by xanthan gum. Journal of Basic Science and Engineering32: 900–909 (in Chinese).
66.
ZhangZWangYFangY, et al. (2020) Global study on slope instability modes based on 62 municipal solid waste landfills. Waste Management & Research38: 1389–1404.
67.
ZhangZYYanLJWuDZ, et al. (2015) Study on the variation of shear strength parameters of fresh domestic waste. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 37(3): 432–439 (in Chinese).
68.
ZhangZZZhangJHWangQN, et al. (2021) Research on direct shear strength characteristics of mechanically biologically treated waste. Environmental Science and Pollution Research28: 59844–59857.
69.
ZhuangXSZhuangTTaoGL, et al. (2020) Experimental study on dynamic deformation and dynamic strength of expansive soil modified by phosphorus tailings. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering39(Suppl 1): 3032–3038 (in Chinese).
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
