DESIGN A LEACHATE COLLECTION SYSTEM FOR A SMALL CAMP SANITARY LANDFILL

International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology (IJARET), ISSN 0976 –
6480(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6499(Online), Volume 6, Issue 1, January (2015), pp. 07-18 © IAEME
7
DESIGN A LEACHATE COLLECTION SYSTEM FOR A
SMALL CAMP SANITARY LANDFILL
Asst. Prof. Dr. Alaa H. Wadie Al-Fatlawi
Environmental Engineering Department, College of Engineering/Babylon University, Iraq,
ABSTRACT
Sanitary landfill is still the most cost-effective and appropriate method for waste disposal in
Iraq. The municipal solid waste has high moisture content of about 49.1% and density of 162.6
kg/m3. The organic fraction reaches about 79%. Based on the studies and reports of study area, the
average waste generation rate was 0.45 kg/capita/day.
The design of the base liner, leachate collection system, and final cover system for the study
area landfill is described in this paper. Since the landfill is located in an arid environment, leachate
generation is low and potential infiltration through the lining system is minimal. A 250 mm diameter
drainage pipes have longitudinal slope 1% to reduce sedimentation and allow adequate flow
capacity. Leachate will be collected through 10mm pipe perforations in four rows, set 900 apart on
the pipe circumference and spaced 300mm center to center. A minimum 500mm thick high-
permeability granular drainage blanket (anticipated to be 25 to 100mm in size) placed across the
entire base of the landfill. A leachate collection system is extending over the entire base of a landfill
and, if below ground, extends up its sloping side walls. The drainage layer is consisting of granular
materials at least 300mm thick and has a hydraulic conductivity of at least 1*10-3 m/s. HDPE liner
in bottom liner systems will be exposed to mechanical stress due to loading by the waste body and
also thermal, chemical and biochemical effects during the construction phase, the operating phase
and the post closure period.
Sumps were sized to handle a weekly flow from the maximum average monthly drainage
collected from the drainage layer. Two leachate collection and storage pit having a capacity of 520
m3 with dimensions of 10m x 20m x 2.6m. A storm water management unit within a space of 520
m3. This is meant to be a storage facility for the storm water collected during the monsoon month
and can be used for landfill operations and maintenance of green belt during the dry months. Two
evaporation pond of dimension 100m*100 m*2m with slope (not limit to) 53o (2/1.5) at permanent
landfill.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCED RESEARCH IN ENGINEERING
AND TECHNOLOGY (IJARET)
ISSN 0976 - 6480 (Print)
ISSN 0976 - 6499 (Online)
Volume 6, Issue 1, January (2015), pp. 07-18
© IAEME: www.iaeme.com/ IJARET.asp
Journal Impact Factor (2014): 7.8273 (Calculated by GISI)
www.jifactor.com
IJARET
© I A E M E

8
Key words: Leachate, Collection, Landfill, Drainage Layer, Storage Pit, Sump.
1. INTRODUCTION
More modern landfills in the developed world have some form of membrane separating the
waste from the surrounding ground and in such sites there is often a leachate collection series of
pipes lay on the membrane to convey the leachate to a collection or treatment location, [1].
Leachate is known as the liquid collected at the bottom of the landfill. It is a liquid consisting
of moisture generated from landfill during the waste degradation process. When leachate is produced
and moving inside the landfill, it dissolves and transports soluble heavy metals and acids from the
waste. Leachate has a high content of iron, chlorides, organic nitrogen, phosphate and sulphate.
When this highly contaminated leachate leaves landfill and reaches water resources, it will cause
surface water and ground water pollution [2; 3; 4; 5]. In general, leachate is a result of the
percolation of precipitation, uncontrolled runoff and irrigation water into the landfill, the water
initially contained in the waste and also infiltrating groundwater. It can usually contain both
dissolved and suspended material, [6]. As the liquid moves through the landfill many organic and
inorganic compounds, like heavy metals, are transported in the leachate [7].
The amount of leachate produced is directly linked to the amount of precipitation around the landfill.
The amount of liquid waste in the landfill also affects the quantity of leachate produced. A large
landfill site will produce greater amount of leachate than a smaller site. [8]
There have been several “generations” of leachate collection systems [1]. Prior to modern
landfill engineering, it consisted only of perimeter drains around the edge of the landfill. This was an
improvement in that it reduced the potential for lateral migration though the sidewalls of the landfill
but was unable to significantly reduce the leachate mound in the landfill and hence the vertical
advective migration (leakage) though the base of the landfill [9]. The second generation of leachate
collection system involved installing what are commonly called “French drains” or “finger drains”
which involved gravel drains, often with perforated drainage pipes (with or without a geotextile
wrapping).
For modern MSW landfills, the leachate head in leachate collection systems is normally
required to less than 0.3m, [10]. Thus the service life of the leachate collection system could be
defined as the time it takes before the design head is exceeded.
2. COMPOSITION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE IN THE STUDY AREA
Organic material forms 50-90% of urban refuse in many cities. The organic fraction in the
study area reaches about 79% includes raw kitchen waste generated in the preparation and
consumption of food: food leftovers, rotten fruit, vegetables, leaves, crop residues and animal excreta
and bones. The bulk quantity of organic wastes is commonly generated by households, restaurants
and markets. Analysis of waste composition of study area appears that the biodegradable organic
content is very high (Table 1).

9
Table 1: MSW wastes composition of study area, [11]
Component % By mass % Moisture content Dry mass* kg Density kg/m3
Volume** m3
Food wastes 68 66.1 23.05 262.4 2.59
Paper 3.4 9.77 3.06 46.1 0.73
Glass 1.1 0.65 1.09 128 0.08
Plastics 4.7 1.79 4.61 42.67 1.10
Textiles 3.2 12.95 2.78 85.61 0.37
Leather 1.5 11.18 1.33 295.8 0.05
Garden trim 5.8 40.41 3.45 79.56 0.73
Dirt ashes,etc. 12.3 6.48
11.50
253.31
0.48
Total = 50.9 6.15
*Based on 100kg sample waste for moisture content.
** Based on 1000kg sample waste for density.
%1.49100)
100
50.9-100
(contentMoisture ==
3
3
/6.162)
6.15m
1000kg
(Density mkg==
3. EXISTING LANDFILL LEACHATE SYSTEM
The municipal solid waste composition in study area is mainly organic in nature and has
moisture content at about 49.1% and density of 162.6 kg/m3. Due to lack of impermeable capping
system and runoff control, the storm water will percolate through the landfill and reach the waste. A
sanitary landfill should be constructed with proper liner system and installed with leachate collection
system in order to prevent or at least to minimize the negative environmental impacts that caused by
the current landfilling practice.
Majority of the landfills in study area are without leachate collection facilities. The lack of
leachate collection facilities coupled with the fact that most landfills do not have impermeable liner
system increases the risk that leachate will contaminate nearby water resources. In study area the
contamination of ground water by landfill leachate have been reported by several researchers [12;
13; 14] reported that the landfill is an open dump that does not have a proper leachate collection
system and lacks base liner to contain the leachate within the landfill.
Leachate problem could be minimized by limiting the water getting into the landfill through
surface water diversion to ensure no water can enter the landfill and also to ensure a low water table
within the landfill by frequent pumping that should be coupled with the daily soil cover.
4. ESTIMATION OF WASTE GENERATION RATE
The volume of waste generated in any given society, household or community increases with
population growth, urbanization, industrialization, economic activities and household consumption
levels. The mode of disposal of these wastes has a lot to do with the cultural practices of the people
who live within the society. Based on the studies and reports of study area, [12; 13; 14] the average
waste generation rate was 0.45 kg/capita/day.

10
5. LEACHATE GENERATION AT MSW
The leachate generated in such a landfill can be estimated by the following equations and
illustrated in schematic diagrams below:
L = P + S + G + R* - R + DUs + DUw - ET +b (1)
Where:
L = Leachate generated.
P = Precipitation (actually plus re circulated leachate and surface input).
S, G = infiltration from surface water or groundwater.
DUs = Change in moisture storage in top cover.
ET = Actual evapotranspiration.
R, R* = Surface runoff.
DUw = Change in moisture content of refuse.
b = biochemical water production or consumption.
I= P + R* - R + DUs – ET (2)
Surface runoff, R = C. P
Where:
R = surface runoff (mm/d)
C = runoff coefficient = a.bi
P = rainfall (mm/d)
a: depends on the presence of the final cover, on the kind of materials used and on the slope.
b: depends on soil moisture content in the different months.

11
Runoff coefficient, C = a.bi
Empirical value for "a"
Landfill Type of soil
Slope
<5% 5-10% >100%
Closed
Sandy 0.05-0.10 0.10-0.15 0.15-0.20
Clayey 0.13-0.17 0.18-0.22 0.25-0.35
In operation
Sandy 0.08-0.13 0.13-0.18 0.18-0.25
Clayey 0.16-0.20 0.21-0.25 0.27-0.38
Empirical value for "b"
Month Bi Month Bi
January 1.60 July 0.29
February 1.80 August 0.29
March 1.43 September 0.46
April 0.97 October 1.20
May 0.98 November 1.40
June 0.37 December 1.60
Evapotranspiration (ET)
• Potential Evapotranspiration (ETp): Maximal ET from surface covered with a homogeneous, green
crop with optimal water supply.
Potential evapotranspiration is given by Thorntwaite formula, 1932:
ETp = 16(10Ti/IT)a
(3)
Where:
ETp = potential evapotranspiration of the i-month (mm/month)
Ti = monthly average temperature (°C)
IT = annual thermal index = ∑ (Ti/5)1.514
a = 6.75 x10-7. IT3 – 7.71x 10-5. IT2 + 1.79 x 10-2. IT + 0.49239
The above equation depend on hypothesis that the number of days in the month (30) days,
and the number of hours of sunrise until sunset (12) hours. So can correct potential
evapotranspiration by the following relationship:
Actual evapotranspiration
ET = ETp (DT/360) (4)
Where:
ET: Actual evapotranspiration per month (mm/month)
D: Number of days in the month, (30)
T: the average number of hours of sunrise (h/day)

12
A rough estimation of leachate production may be given as a percentage of rainfall, as a function of
waste density in landfill:
Low compacted landfill: 25 - 50 % of rainfall
High compacted landfill: 15 - 25 % of rainfall
The weather conditions stated by study area are shown in table below:
Table 3: Weather conditions of the study area
Season
Parameter
Temperature Relative Humidity
Average Rainfall
Intensity
Summer 35o
C – 55o
C 15 % – 35 % –
Winter 4o
C – 16o
C 50 % – 85 % 147 mm/year
As a consequence, for an average precipitation of 147 mm/year the leachate production expected is:
• Low compacted landfill: 1 - 2 m³ / (ha.d)
• High compacted landfill: 0.7 - 1 m³ / (ha.d)
6. LEACHATE COLLECTION SYSTEM
6.1 Hydraulic Calculation of Drainage Systems
A leachate drainage system performs two key functions: to allow the leachate to be collected;
and to minimize through-liner seepage by controlling head. Various solutions are available in the
literature for calculating the head above the liner, depending on the geometry of the leachate drains.
A simple, commonly used method is adapted from [15]:
]
k
q
[h
0.5
L5.0=max
(5)
Where
hmax is the maximum mound height above the drain (m);
k is the hydraulic conductivity of the drainage media (or waste) (m/year);
q is the percolation rate to the bottom of the landfill (m3/ m2.year); and
L is the spacing between drains (m).
A variety of other methods may be used to estimate the head on the liner, including those
presented by [16; and 17].
Hydraulic calculations can be performed with a leachate discharge rate of 1 mm/d, because this value
covers most of the cases of practical interest. Using this value for steady state calculations longer
periods of higher discharges are covered, too.
Mound model gives mounding height for “saw-tooth” is given in equation 6:
]ctan
c
tan
1
c
tan
[
2
cL 2
2
hmax +−+= α
αα (6)

13
Where:
hmax is height of mound [L]
L is drain spacing [L]
c = q/k
q = infiltration rate [L/T]
k = hydraulic conductivity of drainage layer [L/T]
α = slope of ground surface between pipes
[17] Used Darcy’s law in conjunction with the law of continuity to develop an equation to
predict the leachate head on the liner based on anticipated infiltration rates, drainage material
permeability, distance from the drain pipe, and slope of the collection system. McBean’s equation is
very cumbersome and requires an iterative solution technique to determine the free surface profile.
Several EPA guidance documents have presented equation 7, [18] for use in predicting the
maximum saturated depth over the liner.














+−+





=
2
1
2
22
1
K
r
S
r
KS
1
r
KS
K
r
Ly max
(7)
Where:
Ymax = maximum saturated depth over the liner,
L = maximum distance of flow, L.
r = rate of vertical inflow to the drainage layer, LT-1.
K = hydraulic conductivity of the drainage layer, LT-1.
S = slope of the liner, dimensionless
[18] Used the extended Dupuit assumptions for unconfined flow to develop equations (8a, b,
and c) for the steady state saturated depth over a liner.
( ) ( )( )
( )( )
A2
1
2
1
22
RS2A1R2A1
RS2A1R2A1
SRRSR 





−−−+
−+−−
+−=Y max
8a
For R<1/4
( ) ( )
( )( )





−−
−
−
−
=
R21RS21
1SR2
exp
R21
RS21R
Y max
8b
For R = 1/4
( )
A2
1
11
2
1
22
B
1R2
tan
B
1
B
1RS2
tan
B
1
expSRRSR 










 −
−




 −
+−= −−
Y max
8c
For R>1/4

14
Where:
R = r/(Ksin2α) , unitless
A = (1-4R)1/2 , unitless
B = (4R -1)1/2 , unitless
S = tanα, slope of liner, unitless
Ymax = ymax/L, dimensionless maximum head on the linear
ymax = maximum head on the linear, L
L = horizontal drainage distance, L
α = inclination of liner from horizontal, degrees
K = Hydraulic conductivity of the drainage layer, LT-1
r = vertical inflow per unit horizontal area, LT-1
[17] developed in 1993 a dimensionless form of the equation recommended by the US EPA,
Equation 6 above. This dimensionless equation has the form shown below in Equation 9. [17]
compared Equation 9 to Equation 8 and found that for values of R less than one the EPA equation
significantly over-predicted Ymax.
( )







 −+
−=
R
1R1
1R
2
1
2
1
Y max
(9)
Where all variables were previously defined.
The equations for the calculation of the maximum head on the liner, presented above, may be
used by designers to calculate a maximum allowable pipe spacing based on the maximum allowable
design head, anticipated leachate loading rate, slope of the liner, and permeability of the drainage
materials.
6.2 Design calculations
Runoff coefficient,
a = (0.13 + 0.17)/2 = 0.15
baverage = 1.0325
C = a.bi = 0.15 * 1.0325 = 0.155
Surface runoff, R = C . P
= 0.155 * 147/365 = 0.4 mm/d
Evapotranspiration (ET)
ETp = 16(10Ti/IT)a
IT = ∑ (Ti/5)1.514
= 135.7
a = 6.75 x10-7
. IT
3
– 7.71x 10-5
. IT
2
+ 1.79 x 10-2
. IT + 0.49239
= 6.75 *10-7
* 135.73
– 7.71* 10-5
* 135.72
+ 1.79 * 10-2
* 135.7 + 0.49239 = 3.19
ETp = 16(10*28/135.7)3.19
= 162 mm/month
Actual evapotranspiration
ET = ETp(DT/360)
= 162 (30*12/360) = 162 mm/month
I= P + R* - R + DUs – ET
I= 147/365 + 0 - 0 + 5.1 – 162/30= 0.1

15
L = P + S + G + R* - R + DUs + DUw - ET +b
L = I + S + G + DUw +b
L = 0.1 + 0 + 0+ 0.02 +0.01=0.13mm/d
A rough estimation of leachate production may be given as a percentage of rainfall, as a
function of waste density in landfill:
= 0.25 * 147/365 = 0.1 mm/d
As a consequence, for an average precipitation of 147 mm/year the leachate production expected is:
= 0.1 mm/d
from Harr, 1962: hmax = 18 mm
Mound, 2002:hmax= 21 mm
U.S. EPA, 1989: ymax= 11mm
Dupuit R< 1/4 Ymax=14 mm
Dupuit R= 1/4 Ymax=13 mm
Dupuit R> 1/4 Ymax =11 mm
McEnroeymax = 17 mm
D = 300 mm from Leachate Collection Pipe Sizing Chart, [18].
The proposed design comprises eight landfill units as per following dimensions:
• The first four cells will be connected with leachate collection and storage tank, etc.
• Construct a storage facility in an area of 1000m2 to facilitate segregation, process and temporary
storage for waste during the monsoon months. (This could also be used to house a stationary
compactor which will be useful to compact the waste before actually spreading it on the landfill
unit.)
• Construct two leachate collection and storage pit having a capacity of 520m3 with dimensions of
10m x 20m x 2.6m. The leachate header pipe of 12" diameter would run along the boundary of
the landfill units to reach the Leachate collection pit.
• Construct a storm water management unit on the southern west side of the site within a space of
520m3. This is meant to be a storage facility for the storm water collected during the monsoon
month and can be used for landfill operations and maintenance of green belt during the dry
months.
6.3 Leachate Collection System
The proposed design comprises five landfill units as per following dimensions:
I. First landfill unit of dimension 90m * 45m*2m for domestic waste disposal
II. Second landfill unit of dimension 90m * 45m *2m for domestic waste disposal
III. Third landfill unit of dimension 90m * 45m * 2m for domestic waste disposal
IV. Fourth landfill unit of dimension 90m * 45m * 2m for plastic material disposal
V. Fifth landfill unit of dimension 90m * 45m *2m for papers & metals disposal
• The first three cells will be connected with leachate collection and storage tank, etc.
• A storage facility in an area of 400m2 to facilitate segregation, process and temporary storage
for waste during the monsoon months. (This could also be used to house a stationary compactor
which will be useful to compact the waste before actually spreading it on the landfill unit.)

16
• A leachate collection and storage pit on the south-west corner of the site having a capacity of
520 m3 with dimensions of 10m * 20m * 2.6m. The leachate header pipe of 300mm diameter
would run along the southern-boundary of the landfill units to reach the Leachate collection pit.
• A storm water management unit on the southern west side of the site within a space of 520 m3.
This is meant to be a storage facility for the storm water collected during the monsoon month
and can be used for landfill operations and maintenance of green belt during the dry months.
The evaporation ponds with aerator at permanent landfill are as follows:
I. Two evaporation pond of dimension 100m*100*2m with slope (not limit to) 53o (2/1.5) at
Permanent Landfill.
• HDPE liner: HDPE with specification (1mm) to cover the exaction of the pond.
7. CONCLUSIONS
The municipal solid waste composition in study area is mainly organic in nature and has high
moisture content at about 49.1% and density of 162.6 kg/m3. The organic fraction reaches about
79%. This waste has a high leachate production. Based on the studies and reports of study area, the
average waste generation rate was 0.45 kg/capita/day.
Based on the available data it is concluded that:
1. Leachate collection systems should be operated under unsaturated conditions as long as possible
to extend the service life of leachate collection systems.
2. A filter-separator layer between the waste material and drainage layer minimizes the physical
intrusion of waste material into the upper zone of drainage layer.
3. Management of surface water runoff into the pit by using drainage infrastructure along in pit
hauls roads and a temporary holding facility on the waste surface.
4. Minimum 500mm thick high-permeability granular drainage blanket (anticipated to be 25 to
100mm in size) placed across the entire base of the landfill.
5. A leachate collection system is extending over the entire base of a landfill and, if below ground,
extends up its sloping side walls.
6. The drainage layer is consisting of granular materials at least 300 mm thick and has a hydraulic
conductivity of at least 1*10-3 m/s.
7. The bottom liner has to be profiled to have sufficient gradient to promote efficient drainage to
the drainage pipes. A 250mm diameter drainage pipes have longitudinal slope 1% to reduce
sedimentation and allow adequate flow capacity.
8. Leachate will be collected through 10mm pipe perforations in four rows, set 900 apart on the
pipe circumference and spaced 300mm center to center.
9. Gravity drainage and discharge is much better than pumping and system is inspected regularly
and cleaned out accordingly.
10. HDPE liner in bottom liner systems will be exposed to mechanical stress due to loading by the
waste body and also thermal, chemical and biochemical effects during the construction phase,
the operating phase and the post closure period.
11. In particular, the grain size and shape of the drainage material should not damage the membrane.
12. Therefore it is necessary to construct a durable and effective protective layer between the HDPE
liner and the drainage layer.

17
13. In hydraulic terms, for a gravity system, the thickness of the protective layer can influence the
saturated thickness of leachate above the bottom liner. Therefore the protective layer only is as
thick as necessary to provide adequate protection of the HDPE liner.
14. Pipe size is designed based on Manning’s equation. Following design chart gives flow versus
slope for range of pipe diameters assuming n = 0.010.
REFERENCES
1. Rowe, R.K., Cooke, A.J., Rittmann, B.E., and Fleming, I.R.,"Modeling Biochemically
Driven Mineral Precipitation in Anaerobic Biofilms", Water Science & Technology, 1999,
39(7):57-64.
2. Olsson, S., et al., "Metal leaching from MSWI bottom ash as affected by salt or dissolved
organic matter", Waste Management, In Press, Corrected Proof, 2008.
3. Abdulhussain A. Abbas, G.J., Liu Zhi Ping, Pan Ying Ya, Wisaam S. Al-Rekabi, "Review on
Landfill Leachate Treatments", Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 5(5): 2009,p. 534-545.
4. Lou, Z., et al., "Size-fractionation and characterization of landfill leachate and the
improvement of Cu+2 adsorption capacity in soil and aged refuse", Waste Management,
29(1):2009, p. 143-152.
5. Kängsepp, P. and L. Mathiasson, "Performance of a full-scale biofilter with peat and ash as a
medium for treating industrial landfill leachate: a 3-year", J. Appl. Sci. Res., 6(11): 2010,
1880-1884, 2010 1884.
6. Henry, J.; Heinke, G.,''Environmental Science and Engineering'', Prentice Hall, 1996,ISBN 0-
13-120650.
7. Monroe, M.," Landfill leachate treatment: VSEP offers a revolutionary solution",
www.vsep.com/ company/articles/2.html, 2001,[Accessed 19.12.02]
8. www.foe.org/site1/ptp/chapter3.html [Accessed 05.12.02]
9. Rowe, R.K., and Cooke, A.J.,"2DModelling of Clogging in Landfill Leachate Collection
Systems", Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 45(10): 2008,1393-1409.
10. Rowe, R.K., and Fleming, I.R., "Laboratory Studies of Clogging of Landfill Leachate
Collection & Drainage Systems", Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 41(1): 2004,134-153.
11. Wadie, AlaaHusaeen, Abbood, JawadKadhim, Hadi, Riyadh Hassan, 2012,"Residential
Solid Wastes Characteristics And Energy Content In Al-Mussaib City In The Middle Of
Iraq", International Conference on Eco-systems and Biological Sciences (ICEBSS'2012),
Penangn (Malaysia)
12. Qasir, "Refuse Disposal of Baghdad City", M.Sc. Thesis Submitted to College of
Engineering, Baghdad University, Baghdad, Iraq, 1978.
13. Mohammad, Isam, "An Investigation Into Corrosion Problem of Baghdad Sewer Networks",
Ph. D. Thesis Submitted to Building and Construction Department, University of
Technology, Baghdad, Iraq, 2006,.
14. Mahmood, Mohammed Mustafa, "Digital Geotechnical Map of Bagdad City Al-Rasafah Side
Using GIS and Remote Sensing Technology", Ph. D. Thesis Submitted to Building and
Construction Department, University of Technology, Baghdad, Iraq, 2006.
15. Harr, M.E., "Groundwater and seepage", McGraw Hill, Toronto,Ont, 1962,.
16. McBean, E.A., Mosher, F.R., and Rovers, F.A.,"Reliability-Based Design for Leachate
Collection Systems", Proceedings Sardinia 93,3rd International Landfill Symposium, Santa
Margherita di Pula, Cagliari, Italy, 1993,Vol.3. pp.433-441.
17. McEnroe, B.M.,"Maximum Saturated Depth over Landfill Liner", Journal of Environmental
Engineering, 119(2): 1993, 262-270.

18
18. U.S. EPA,"Superfund Exposure Assessment Manual", EPA/540/1-88/001, 1988,Washington,
DC. NTIS No.PB89-135859.157 pp.
19. Sandip T. Mali, Kanchan C. Khare, A.H. Biradar, “Effect of Leachate Recirculation on
Organic Waste and Leachate Stabilization In Anaerobic Bioreactor” International Journal of
Civil Engineering & Technology (IJCIET), Volume 1, Issue 1, 2010, pp. 87 - 101, ISSN
Print: 0976 – 6308, ISSN Online: 0976 – 6316.
20. Kadhim Naief Kadhim, “Feasibility of Blending Drainage Water with River Water For
Irrigation In Samawa (IRAQ)” International Journal of Civil Engineering & Technology
(IJCIET), Volume 4, Issue 5, 2013, pp. 22 - 32, ISSN Print: 0976 – 6308, ISSN Online: 0976
– 6316.
21. Nitish Puri and Deepak Soni, “Utilization of Bentonite-Silt Mixtures as Seepage Barriers in
Liner Systems of Engineered Landfills” International Journal of Civil Engineering &
Technology (IJCIET), Volume 4, Issue 2, 2013, pp. 346 - 352, ISSN Print: 0976 – 6308,
ISSN Online: 0976 – 6316.

DESIGN A LEACHATE COLLECTION SYSTEM FOR A SMALL CAMP SANITARY LANDFILL

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

En vedette

En vedette (20)

Similaire à DESIGN A LEACHATE COLLECTION SYSTEM FOR A SMALL CAMP SANITARY LANDFILL

Similaire à DESIGN A LEACHATE COLLECTION SYSTEM FOR A SMALL CAMP SANITARY LANDFILL (20)

Plus de IAEME Publication

Plus de IAEME Publication (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

DESIGN A LEACHATE COLLECTION SYSTEM FOR A SMALL CAMP SANITARY LANDFILL