Waste Management xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Waste Management
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/wasman

Mechanical characterization of municipal solid waste from two waste

dumps at Delhi, India
B.J. Ramaiah ⇑, G.V. Ramana, Manoj Datta
Civil Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, Hauz Khas, New Delhi 110016, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The article presents the physical and mechanical properties of the emplaced municipal solid waste
Received 16 February 2016 (MSW) recovered from different locations of the Ghazipur and Okhla dumps both located at Delhi,
Revised 31 May 2017 India. Mechanical compressibility and shear strength of the collected MSW were evaluated using a
Accepted 31 May 2017
300
300 mm direct shear (DS) shear box. Compression ratio (Cc0 ) of MSW at these two dumps varied
Available online xxxx
between 0.11 and 0.17 and is falling on the lower bound of the range (0.1–0.5) of the data reported in
the literature for MSW. Low Cc0 of MSW is attributed to the relatively low percentages of compressible
Keywords:
elements such as textiles, plastics and paper, coupled with relatively high percentages of inert materials
Municipal solid waste
Compressibility
such as soil-like and gravel sized fractions. Shear strength of MSW tested is observed to be displacement
Constrained modulus dependent. The mobilized shear strength parameters i.e., the apparent cohesion intercept (c0 ) and friction
Compression ratio angle (/0 ) of MSW at these two dumps are best characterized by c0 = 13 kPa and /0 = 23° at 25 mm dis-
Shear strength placement and c0 = 17 kPa and /0 = 34° at 55 mm displacement and are in the range reported for MSW
in the literature. A large database on the shear strength of MSW from 18 countries that includes: the
experimental data from 277 large-scale DS tests (in-situ and laboratory) and the data from back analysis
of 11 failed landfill slopes is statistically analyzed. Based on the analysis, a simple linear shear strength
envelope, characterized by c0 = 17 kPa and /0 = 32°, is proposed for MSW for preliminary use in the
absence of site-specific data for stability evaluation of the solid waste landfill under drained conditions.
Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Rapid economic growth coupled with increased urbanization
has resulted in a phenomenal increase in the generation of munic-
ipal solid waste (MSW) in most of the metropolitan cities of India.
Although landfilling of solid waste is suggested as the least pre-
ferred option in waste management hierarchy (Cossu, 2009), it is
still the primary method of managing the MSW in most parts of
the world and will remain so for the foreseeable future in develop-
ing economies. However, acquiring a suitable land, within an urban
area or at the outskirts, for setting up of new waste disposal facil-
ities is increasingly becoming difficult due to many factors associ-
ated with socio-economic-cultural-hydro-geological-seismic
aspects. This has necessitated increasing the height of existing dis-
posal sites further, but within their initial footprint area, thus
resulting in steep slopes. For example, at Delhi, the national capital
of India, the solid waste dumps are typically 45–65 m high with
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: janakiramsvu@gmail.com (B.J. Ramaiah), ramana@civil.iitd.ac.
in, gvramanaiitdelhi@gmail.com (G.V. Ramana), mdatta@civil.iitd.ac.in, mdat-
ta55@gmail.com (M. Datta).
steep slopes, posing a threat of slope instability under both static
and earthquake loading conditions.
Stability and integrity of waste mass and waste containment
system must be ensured during the operation and post closure.
Mechanical properties of the emplaced solid waste are required
for the stability assessment of solid waste landfills. Significant
insights have been gained on the mechanical response of MSW
from the dedicated efforts of several researchers across the globe
(Landva and Clark, 1990; Jessberger and Kockel, 1991; Grisolia
and Napoleoni, 1996; Jones et al., 1997; Kavazanjian et al., 1999;
Thomas et al., 1999; Gotteland et al., 2000; Zhan et al., 2008;
Bray et al., 2009; Reddy et al., 2009; Singh et al., 2009;
Karimpour-Fard et al., 2011; Bareither et al., 2012b; Gomes et al.,
2013 among others). Database on the mechanical properties of
MSW representative of Indian conditions is very limited (Babu
et al., 2015) and none is available for the emplaced MSW from
the dump sites/landfills at Delhi.
A comprehensive field and large-scale laboratory studies were
conducted to evaluate the physical properties, strength and stiff-
ness of solid waste required for the stability evaluation of existing
old dumps at Delhi. This article presents the mechanical compress-
ibility and shear strength properties of MSW collected from two

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.055
0956-053X/Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: Ramaiah, B.J., et al. Mechanical characterization of municipal solid waste from two waste dumps at Delhi, India. Waste
Management (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.055
2 B.J. Ramaiah et al. / Waste Management xxx (2017) xxx–xxx
dumps at Delhi. Based on the statistical analysis of the shear
strength data obtained from this study as well as the extensive
data reported in the literature, a simple linear shear strength
envelope is proposed for MSW that can be useful for preliminary
stability evaluation of MSW landfills in engineering practice.
2. Background
Mechanical properties of the solid waste play a crucial role dur-
ing the operation, closure and post-closure phases of the waste
containment facilities. Several researchers investigated the influ-
ence of various factors such as the composition, density, age or
degradation, rate of loading, confining stress, moisture content
etc. on the strength and stiffness of MSW. It is well recognized that
the mechanical response of MSW is significantly influenced by the
composition or the fibrous materials such textiles, plastics, paper
and wood (Zhan et al., 2008; Reddy et al., 2009; Bray et al., 2009;
Karimpour-Fard et al., 2011; Yuan et al., 2011; Ramaiah et al.,
2014, 2015) and fibrous inclusions induce the anisotropic behavior
to MSW (Zekkos et al., 2010b, 2013). Additionally, it is reported
that the shear strength of MSW is dependent on the relative orien-
tation of the fibrous materials with respect to the shearing direc-
tion and is a function of the apparatus employed for testing
(Ramaiah and Ramana, 2017).
Shear strength of MSW is evaluated using several techniques
including: (1) the back analysis of failed or stable slopes, (2)
large-scale in-situ testing (direct shear or load bearing tests) and
(3) laboratory testing of intact or reconstituted MSW. Triaxial com-
pression (TXC), simple shear (SS) and direct shear (DS) apparatus
are used for evaluating the shear strength and stiffness parameters
of MSW. However, DS apparatus is the most popular one employed
for the shear strength characterization of solid waste (Stark et al.,
2009; Bareither et al., 2012b) due to simplicity in the specimen
preparation and testing procedure compared to other devices.
Shear strength of MSW measured using DS apparatus is generally
conservative compared to that measured using TXC apparatus. This
is because of the predominant orientation of fibrous elements par-
allel to the shearing direction in DS device, wherein the reinforce-
ment action from fibrous elements is not significantly engaged
(Bray et al., 2009). Shear strength of MSW evaluated using the DS
apparatus is reported to be similar to that estimated from the back
analysis of stable and failed landfill slopes (Kavazanjian et al.,
1995; Eid et al., 2000).
Stress-strain or stress-displacement behavior of MSW is strain
hardening without a definite peak stress (rupture or failure) both
in the field (in-situ DS tests) and laboratory tests (DS, TXC or SS).
Hence, the shear strength parameters i.e., the apparent cohesion
(c0 ) and friction angle (/0 ) are computed at a specified level of strain
or displacement to limit the excessive deformations in the contain-
ment system (Jessberger and Kockel, 1991; Grisolia et al., 1991;
Pelkey et al., 2001; Reddy et al., 2009; Stark et al., 2009; Bray
et al., 2009; Karimpour-Fard et al., 2011; Gomes et al., 2013;
Babu et al., 2015). Stark et al. (2009) recommend using 10% axial
strain for TXC tests or 25 mm horizontal displacement for DS tests
as the limiting strain criteria to maintain strain compatibility
between MSW and other components of landfill system exhibiting
strain-softening behavior (geosynthetic interfaces and foundation
soils). Several empirical shear strength envelopes for MSW are rec-
ommended in the literature beginning 1995 and are summarized
in Table 1. The most recent strength envelope is a non-linear model
proposed by Bray et al. (2009) and Zekkos et al. (2010b) based on
the statistical analysis of 109 large-scale DS tests.
Effect of age or degradation of MSW on shear strength parame-
ters reported in the literature is contradictory. Some researchers
reported a decrease in both c0 and /0 with decomposition (Landva
Please cite this article in press as: Ramaiah, B.J., et al. Mechanical characterization of municipal solid waste from two waste dumps at Delhi, India. Waste
Management (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.055
Table 1
Summary of the shear strength envelopes recommended for MSW by different
researchers.
Reference Envelope Strength envelope details
type
Kavazanjian et al. Bi-linear c0 = 24 kPa, /0 = 0° for rn < 30 kPa and
(1995) c0 = 0 kPa, /0 = 33° for 30 < rn < 300 kPa
Manassero et al. Tri-linear c0 = 20 kPa, /0 = 0° for rn < 20 kPa,
(1996) c0 = 0 kPa, /0 = 38° for 20 < rn < 60 kPa and
c0 = 20 kPa, /0 = 30° for 60 < rn < 250 kPa
Jones et al. (1997) Linear c0 = 5 kPa, /0 = 25° for rn < 400 kPa
Eid et al. (2000) Linear c0 = 25 kPa, /0 = 35° for rn < 400 kPa
Stark et al. (2009) Bi-linear c0 = 6 kPa, /0 = 35° for 0 < rn < 200 kPa and
c0 = 30 kPa, /0 = 30° for 200 < rn < 500 kPa
Bray et al. (2009) Non-linear c0 = 15 kPa, /0 = /0 o  D/0 [log(rn/pa)]
and Zekkos where: /0 o = 36° and D/0 = 5° and
et al. (2010b) pa = 101.3 kPa
and Clark, 1990; Konig and Jessberger, 1997). Caicedo et al.
(2002) observed a decrease in /0 and insignificant change in c0 with
the aging of MSW. Bareither et al. (2012b) reported an increase in /0
with an increase in the degree of decomposition and did not find
any conclusive correlation between c0 and decomposition of the
waste. An increase in /0 and a decrease in c0 with the aging of
MSW were reported by some other researchers (Zhan et al., 2008;
Gomes et al., 2013). On the other hand, a decrease in /0 and increas-
ing trend in c0 with increasing age or degree of degradation is
observed by some researchers (Gabr et al., 2007; Reddy et al.,
2015). Contradictory observations related to the effect of age or
degradation on the shear strength of MSW requires further
investigations.
The purpose of this article is to evaluate the compressibility and
shear strength of emplaced MSW collected from two waste dumps
at Delhi and to contribute to the database on mechanical proper-
ties. Data from the large-scale DS tests conducted on MSW from
this study is analyzed to examine the influence of various param-
eters such as the composition or fibrous materials, normal stress,
age or degradation, density and horizontal displacement on the
shear strength of MSW.
3. Dump sites for the present study
The Ghazipur dump site and the Okhla dump site, both located
in Delhi, are unlined facilities and have been receiving the MSW
and construction and demolition waste (often co-disposed
together) since last three decades. The tipping over method of dis-
posal is practiced at these dumps and results in a relatively loose
state of MSW. Slopes forming the periphery of the dumps are rel-
atively steep. The repose angles of the slopes are in the order of
38–47°. Vertical cuts ranging from 3 to 5 m, which are made for
providing/widening the access roads or for making the benches
are observed to remain stable for long periods. Occasional fires
and smoldering at some locations were also observed mainly dur-
ing summer seasons.
The Ghazipur dump site (Fig. 1a), covering an area of about
28 hectares (283,578 m2), is about 680 m long and 360 m wide.
The dump is underlain by the fluvial deposits of sandy silt to silty
sand. Disposal operations at this site began in 1984 and at present,
the site receives about 2600 Metric tons of solid waste per day. Sig-
nificant ponding of leachate at the southern side of the dump was
observed during field visits. The base of the dump is about 3 m
below the surrounding ground level. The total height of the dump
from its base to the crest varied between 45 and 47 m as on August
2012. Slopes forming the periphery of dump varied between 37°
and 75° with horizontal. The Okhla dump site (Fig. 1b), covering
 B.J. Ramaiah et al. / Waste Management xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 3

(a)
&
F arm
iry ion
Da bitat
Ha

GP3 P1
G

P2
G

l
na
GP4

Ca
on
nd
Hi
N
ESI
Hospital
(b)
o t
Bus
Dep

OP1

OP4 3
OP3
OP

actory er Yard
ment F
Closed Ce Contain

Fig. 1. Approximate locations of the large test pits at: (a) the Ghazipur dump site and (b) the Okhla dump site. (Satellite images source; Google Earth).

an area of about 16.2 hectares (162,000 m2), is about 705 m long
and 303 m wide. The dump is located on a rock outcrop. Disposal
operations started in 1994 and at present, this site receives about
1100 Metric tons of solid waste per day. The base of the dump is
about 5 m below the surrounding ground level. The total height
of the dump from its base to the crest varied between 60 and
65 m as on December 2012. Slopes forming the periphery of the
dump varied between 36° and 46°.
4. In-situ unit weight through large test pits
Unit weight (ct) of MSW is an important material property
required for any engineering analysis of the landfill (Fassett
et al., 1994; Dixon and Jones, 2005; Zekkos et al., 2006). Field tech-
niques such as the large size test pits and the large size bucket
auger borings that involve the sampling of a large volume of mate-
rial are observed to be more reliable (Landva and Clark, 1990;
Zekkos et al., 2006; Morris et al., 2006). In the present study, the
in-situ total unit weight of solid waste near the surface was mea-
sured through large test pits. Test pits of 2.5
1.5
2.0 m in size
were excavated at different locations/benches corresponding to
different ages of solid waste at the two dump sites. The weight
of the solid waste excavated at a pit was determined using the
weighing scales available at the dump sites. The volume of the
pit was determined using the Water Replacement Method that is
adopted at several other MSW landfills (Gachet et al., 1998;
Santos et al., 1998; Gotteland et al., 2000; Shariatmadari et al.,
2015). Approximate locations of the test pits excavated at each
dump are shown in Fig. 1. From each pit, a representative bulk
MSW sample was collected for subsequent physical and mechani-
cal characterization of MSW in the laboratory.
In-situ total unit weight measured at the two dumps is given in
Table 2. Measured unit weight varied between 11 and 12.5 kN/m3

Please cite this article in press as: Ramaiah, B.J., et al. Mechanical characterization of municipal solid waste from two waste dumps at Delhi, India. Waste
Management (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.055
4 B.J. Ramaiah et al. / Waste Management xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

Table 2
Composition and physical properties of MSW samples collected from the Ghazipur and Okhla dumps at Delhi.

Pit Composition (percentage by dry weight) Approximate Total unit Moisture TOC Specific
ID age (years) weight (kN/m3) content (%) (%) gravity
<20 mm Gravel Textile Plastic Wood & Paper Glass Miscellaneous
sized wood-like
GP1 72.6 16.7 4.5 3.3 1.1 0.6 0.4 0.8 3–3.5 11.4 71.8 29.0 2.10
GP2 70.3 21.0 2.0 3.8 1.0 0.1 0.4 1.4 9–10 12.5 81.3 20.7 2.05
GP3 74.9 17 2.2 2.9 1.3 0.2 0.6 0.9 10–12 12.0 65.3 20.0 2.15
GP4 70.8 20.8 2.3 4.2 0.7 0.1 0.5 0.4 12+ 11.0 46.3 23.8 1.90
OP1 80.2 17.1 0.8 1.0 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 4.5–5.5 13.5 20.1 15.9 2.40
OP2 72.8 18.9 2.8 3.0 1.0 0.3 0.6 0.7 3–4 11.5 35.8 21.1 2.00
OP3 60.3 23.9 6.2 4.0 2.0 1.0 1.6 1.0 2–2.5 10.5 43.9 33.1 1.95
OP4 80.3 15.5 1.8 1.6 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.1 10+ 14.0 35.3 15.4 2.55

at the Ghazipur dump and between 10.5 and 14.0 kN/m3 at the
Okhla dump. The solid waste collected from OP1 and OP4 con-
tained significantly high soil-like or soil-sized fractions compared
with that collected from OP2 and OP3. This may be the reason
for relatively high ct values at OP1 and OP4. The range of ct mea-
sured at the Ghazipur and Okhla dumps is in the range of the near
surface ct reported for several other MSW landfills worldwide as
shown in Fig. 2. A preferential horizontal to sub-horizontal orienta-
tion of fibrous waste components (textiles, plastics, wires etc.) in
the waste mass was observed at all the test pits, similar to the
observations reported at several landfills worldwide (Grisolia
et al., 1991; Zekkos et al., 2010a; Gomes and Lopes, 2012).
5. Composition and physical properties
5.1. Composition analysis
Composition analysis of MSW in this study was carried out as
per the procedure outlined by Zekkos et al. (2010a). As the col-
lected MSW samples were slushy, the composition of all the sam-
ples was determined after air drying them in an open space under
sunlight until to a constant dry mass. The air dried MSW sample
was first sieved through a large size sieve having 20 mm square
openings for separating the sample into the <20 mm (soil-like or
soil-sized) and the >20 mm (fibrous) fractions. Fraction >20 mm
was then manually sorted into different constituents such as
gravel, textile, plastic, paper, wood & wood-like, glass and miscel-
laneous items. The quantity of dry MSW sample used for the com-
positional analysis varied between 140 and 180 kg. This quantity is
more than the minimum quantity (91–136 kg) recommended in
ASTM D 5231 (2008) for the determination of the composition of
unprocessed MSW.
Composition details of each MSW sample are given in Table 2
along with the approximate age of collected waste samples. Age
of the samples was estimated using the manufactured and or expi-
ration dates printed on some of the waste constituents (newspa-
pers, biscuit packets, milk packets etc.) as well as the information
provided by the operator of the dump sites. The >20 mm fraction
of all the MSW samples at the two dumps primarily composed of
gravel sized, textile and plastics materials. It should be noted that,
due to their low particle density, the textile and plastic compo-
nents form considerable volume even if their weight percentages
are less compared to the gravel sized components. It was noted
that the <20 mm fraction of MSW samples also contained small
sized pieces of textile, plastic, paper, wood, leather, wires etc. A
very low quantity of paper (Table 2) in the fibrous fraction
observed at the dump sites in Delhi, compared to that reported
for MSW landfills in developed economies, is not surprising as
these items are the most common recycled materials. Rag pickers
at the disposal site play a significant role in recycling materials
such as metals (iron, aluminum, and copper from circuit boards),
certain plastics items (Figs. S1a-c), wood, leather (Fig. S1d), usable

3
Total Unit weight (kN/m ) References:
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 1: Canada - Calgary landfill
0 2: Canada - Edmonton landfill
1 3: Canada - Vancouver landfill
2 4: Canada - Don Deer landfill
3 5: Canada - Winninpeg landfill
4 6: Canada - Mississauga landfill (Landva and Clark 1986)
5
6 7: Canada - Waterloo landfill
7 8: Canada - Reston landfill
8 9: Canada - Ottawa landfill
9 10: Canada - Edmonton, N.B. landfill
Reference number

10 11: Canada - Halifax landfill

11 12: USA - Central Maine landfill (Richardson and Reynolds 1991)
12 13: Brazil - Muribeca landfill (Santos et al. 1998)
13
14: France - Torcy landfill (Gotteland et al. 2000)
14
15 15: France - Montec landfill (Gotteland et al. 2000)
16 16: Spain - Valdemingomez landfill (Pereira et al. 2002)
17 17: Canada - Brock West landfill (Singh et al. 2010)
18 18: Canada - Spadina landfill (Singh et al. 2010)
19 19: USA - Austin Community landfill (Sahadewa 2014)
20 20: USA - Lamb Canyon Sanitary landfill (Sahadewa 2014)
21 21: USA - Los Reales landfill (Sahadewa 2014)
22
22: Iran - Kahrizak Landfill (Shariatmadari et al. 2015)
23
24 23: India - Ghazipur dump site (This study)
25 24: India - Okhla dump site (This study)

Fig. 2. Comparison of the in-situ unit weight obtained from present study with data reported for near surface waste at several MSW landfills worldwide. (See above-
mentioned references for further information.)

Please cite this article in press as: Ramaiah, B.J., et al. Mechanical characterization of municipal solid waste from two waste dumps at Delhi, India. Waste
Management (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.055
 B.J. Ramaiah et al. / Waste Management xxx (2017) xxx–xxx
bricks or any other item having economic value in the recycling
market.
5.2. Physical properties
Physical properties of MSW, from the geotechnical perspective,
include: the moisture content, total organic content (TOC), grain
size analysis, specific gravity and Atterberg limits. Currently, there
is no standard of practice for the quantity and drying temperature
to be considered for measuring these physical properties of MSW.
Literature review indicates a wide range of drying temperatures
(55–105 °C) adopted for the determination of the moisture content
of MSW (Gabr and Valero, 1995; Zornberg et al., 1999; Reddy et al.,
2009; Zekkos et al., 2010a; Gomes and Lopes, 2012; Shariatmadari
et al., 2015). Several researchers employed lower temperatures
(55–60 °C) to prevent the possible volatilization of the organic por-
tion. In this study, the moisture content of the collected MSW sam-
ples was determined by drying two – 2.5 kg samples from each pit
at 55 °C in an oven until to a constant dry mass. The water content
(w) is defined on the dry mass basis, consistent with the geotech-
nical practice, as: w = 100
(mw/md) (where mw = mass of water
removed by drying the sample in oven at 55 °C and md = mass of
the dried MSW sample). After drying the MSW samples at 55 °C,
they were further dried at 105 °C until to a constant dry mass.
Additional loss of the moisture due to raise in temperature from
55 to 105 °C was insignificant. Measured in-situ water content var-
ied between 46.3–81.3% and 17.8–43.9% at the Ghazipur and Okhla
dumps respectively (Table 2).
The total organic content (TOC) of an MSW sample was deter-
mined through the loss on ignition (LOI) method in accordance
with ASTM D2974 (2007) using a muffle furnace. Multiple samples
of individual constituents of a given MSW sample were separately
incinerated at 440 °C until to a constant dry mass. For each waste
constituent, five samples weighing 15 g (textiles, plastics and
paper) to 50 g (<20 mm fraction, gravel, wood, glass and miscella-
neous materials) were incinerated and the percentage LOI of each
constituent was evaluated. Finally, the TOC of an MSW sample was
computed by the weighted averaging method based on the
Proposed lower & upper ranges by Jessberger and Kockel (1991)
Bandeirantes landfill, Brazil - Range - Vilar and Carvalho (2004)
Sto Tirso landfill, Portugal - Range - Gomes and Lopes (2012)
Kahrizak landfill - Range - Shariatmadari et al. (2015)
sized
Clay
Silt sized
100
90 Ghazipur
Okhla
80
Percentage finer (%)
GP1-dry sieving
70 GP1-wet sieving
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
-3 -2
10 10
Fig. 3. Grain size distribution of the collected MSW samples from the Ghazipur and the Okhla dump sites.
Please cite this article in press as: Ramaiah, B.J., et al. Mechanical characterization of municipal solid waste from two waste dumps at Delhi, India. Waste
Management (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.055
5
percentage by dry weight of individual constituents given in
Table 2. The TOC varied between 20–29% and 15–33% at the Gha-
zipur and Okhla dumps respectively (Table 2). The TOC of MSW at
these two dumps is relatively low due to the presence of higher
percentages of inert materials such as soil-like and gravel-sized
fractions and low percentages of paper, textiles, plastics, rubber
and food waste (organic waste).
Grain size analysis of MSW samples was carried out after they
were dried at 105 °C. Initially, both dry and wet sieve analyses
were carried out on MSW sample from GP1. These results indicated
that wet sieving method resulted in higher finer fraction than dry
sieving method (Fig. 3), which is consistent with observations of
Gabr and Valero (1995). The higher finer fraction from wet sieve
analysis is due to better break down of lumps of waste particles.
Hence, subsequently the wet sieving method was adopted for all
the MSW samples and the obtained grain size distribution curves
of MSW samples from this study are shown in Fig. 3, along with
the range of the curves reported for the emplaced MSW from dif-
ferent countries (Jessberger and Kockel, 1991; Vilar and Carvalho,
2004; Gomes and Lopes, 2012; Shariatmadari et al., 2015). Fig. 3
shows that MSW at these two dump sites is a well-graded material.
The specific gravity of MSW samples was determined using a large
pycnometer of 1000 ml capacity and the results are given in
Table 2. For the characterization from the geotechnical perspective,
the Atterberg limit tests were performed on the material passing
the less than 425 lm sieve fraction of MSW samples. Based on
the tests, all the samples are classified as non-plastic. However,
the applicability of the geotechnical practice for measuring the
Atterberg limits of MSW (or fibrous peats) is debatable (O’Kelly,
2015) and needs further research.
6. Mechanical characterization
Compressibility and shear strength characterization of MSW
was carried out in the laboratory using an automated large-scale
direct shear (DS) apparatus. The size of the DS box is
304.8 mm
304.8 mm
203.2 mm (length
width
height).
Sand sized Gravel sized
ze le
ze r
si lde
si bb
d
F M C
u
o
F C
Bo
C
OP4
OP1
F: Fine
M: Medium
C: Coarse
-1 0 1 2 3
10 10 10 10 10
Grain size (mm)
6 B.J. Ramaiah et al. / Waste Management xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

6.1. Specimen preparation 6.2. Mechanical compression testing

A repeatable and reproducible specimen reconstitution proce-
dure using a drop weight rammer was employed in this study on
the similar lines of Zekkos et al. (2010b) and Yuan et al. (2011). Lit-
erature review indicates that there is no general consensus on the
maximum size of each waste constituent to be used for the
mechanical characterization of MSW. In this study, the maximum
particle size criterion adopted by Zekkos et al. (2010b) was
employed. The maximum size of granular type materials such as
gravel sized materials was limited to 40 mm. The maximum size
of fibrous elements such as plastics and textiles was limited to
80 mm as these materials are flexible, soft and elongated and can
be folded during specimen preparation. The specimen in the shear
box was compacted in eight layers, each 25.4 mm thick. Initially,
attempts were made to prepare the specimen at in-situ water con-
tents. However, when the dry constituents of the waste mass were
mixed at the in-situ water contents (mainly at the Ghazipur
dump), the specimen became slushy and the compaction was not
possible as these water contents are relatively high (Table 2).
Hence, based on several trails, a water content of 25–30% was
observed to be a maximum manageable water content for speci-
men preparation. Although, the water content adopted for the
specimen preparation is not representative of field measured water
contents, the adopted dry densities of the specimens are close to
in-situ dry densities. Besides, as the tested MSW samples are
non-plastic, it is assumed that the effect of water content on the
mechanical response of MSW should not be too critical as long as
the dry density is maintained. However, this assumption needs fur-
ther research for MSW materials.
The mass of each waste constituent required in a layer is
weighed (based on the composition and target dry density) from
the air dried sample and then mixed thoroughly all the constituents
with the required quantity of water based on the target water con-
tent (25–30%). The specimen in each layer was then compacted
using a rammer of 8 kg mass (78.5 N) dropped from a constant
height. Blows were applied at nine blow spots on the surface of each
layer such that the entire surface is uniformly compacted. Depend-
ing upon the target density and composition of the specimen, the
height of fall and number of blows were adjusted to achieve the tar-
get dry density. Measured in-situ water content, field observations
(seeping of leachate along the slope faces and ponding of leachate at
the base of the dumps) and cone penetration tests (Ramaiah and
Ramana, 2014) indicated the MSW at these two dump sites is at rel-
atively high water content. Hence, all the mechanical compression
and DS tests were conducted on soaked specimens by filling the
rectangular chamber around the DS box with water.
The reconstituted MSW specimen was subjected to one-
dimensional (1D) compression under vertical stress increments
to evaluate the mechanical compressibility (immediate compres-
sion) of MSW. Evaluation of the compressibility properties associ-
ated with secondary compression due to mechanical creep and
biodegradation is outside the scope of this study. The 1D compres-
sion tests were conducted on MSW specimens reconstituted at in-
situ dry densities (Table 2). Four tests were conducted using the
MSW from GP1, GP3, OP2 and OP3. Each MSW specimen was sub-
jected to vertical stress (rv) increments of 12.5, 25, 50, 100, 200
and 400 kPa and each vertical stress increment was maintained
for 10 h. Results from initial compression tests as well as the liter-
ature review indicated that immediate compression of MSW is
instantaneous and completed within one hour of load increment
(Olivier and Gourc, 2007; Reddy et al., 2008; Bareither et al.,
2012a; Castelli and Maugeri, 2014) and subsequent deformation
occurs at diminishing rate. As the primary purpose of compression
tests in this study was to evaluate only the mechanical compres-
sion characteristics of MSW, a duration of ten hour under each ver-
tical stress increment is considered adequate.
6.3. Direct shear testing
The DS tests were conducted on reconstituted MSW to study
the effect of composition, age and density on the shear strength
of MSW in the normal stress range of 7–400 kPa. The specimen
was sheared at a constant horizontal displacement rate of
0.3 mm/min to ensure fully drained condition during shearing. Pre-
liminary tests indicated that MSW specimens did not exhibit a def-
inite peak stress even up to 55 mm horizontal displacement which
is the maximum displacement possible with the shear box used
(edge thickness of DS box is 55 mm). Hence, in this study, shearing
was continued up to 55 mm horizontal displacement. A total of 49
DS tests were conducted and the details are summarized in Table 3.
7. Results and discussion
7.1. Mechanical compressibility
Typical vertical strain-time histories from compression tests on
MSW from GP2 and OP3 are presented in Fig. 4. It can be observed
that MSW exhibited an instantaneous compression upon load
application. Immediate compression was completed within 40–
50 min followed by a decreasing compression rate which is typical
of a creep compression behavior. Settlement of MSW associated

Table 3
Details of the direct shear tests conducted in this study and shear strength parameters at 25 mm and 55 mm horizontal displacements.

Specimen ID Compacted dry density (kN/m3) Composition (percentage by dry weight) Normal stress At 25 mm At 55 mm
displacement displacement
<20 mm fraction Gravel Textile Plastic (kPa) c0 (kPa) /0 (°) c0 (kPa) /0 (°)
GP1-IC 7.5 75.5 16.7 4.5 3.3 7, 25, 50, 100, 200, 400 14.5 22.2 16.6 33.4
GP2-IC 7.5 73.2 21 2 3.8 25, 50, 100, 200 6.2 26.0 14.4 34.6
GP3-IC 7.5 77.9 17 2.2 2.9 10, 25, 50, 100, 200 10.0 23.0 11.1 35.4
GP3-IC-HD 10 77.9 17 2.2 2.9 25, 50, 100, 200, 400 27.5 27.1 28.8 40.4
OP1-IC 11.3 81.1 17.1 0.8 1 25, 50, 100, 200 20.7 25.8 22.7 38.5
OP2-IC 7.5 75.4 18.8 2.8 3 25, 50, 100, 200 9.9 25.1 16.2 37.4
OP3-IC 7.5 65.9 23.9 6.2 4 25, 50, 100, 200, 300 18.5 21.5 21.3 33.5
GP1-20 mma 11.5 100 0 0 0 25, 50, 100, 200 0 31.0 0 39.1
GP2-20 mma 11.5 100 0 0 0 25, 50, 100, 200 0 33.0 0 40.1
OP2-20 mma 11.5 100 0 0 0 25, 50, 100, 200 0 32.7 0 41.3
OP3-20 mma 11.5 100 0 0 0 25, 50, 100, 200 0 30.8 0 38.8

Note: IC = In-situ composition; HD = High density.

a
DS tests performed on specimens prepared with only the <20 mm fraction; R2 values for the mobilized shear strength data at 25 mm and 55 mm displacements varied
between 0.96 and 0.99.

Please cite this article in press as: Ramaiah, B.J., et al. Mechanical characterization of municipal solid waste from two waste dumps at Delhi, India. Waste
Management (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.055
 B.J. Ramaiah et al. / Waste Management xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 7

Time (minutes) adopted by several other researchers (Landva et al., 2000; Singh,
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 2008; Bareither et al., 2012a; Zekkos et al., 2016). The Cc0 varied
0 between 0.13–0.16 and 0.11–0.17 for MSW at the Ghazipur and
4 (a) MSW from GP1 (kPa)
Okhla dumps respectively as shown in Fig. 5. These values are fall-
v
8 12.5 ing towards the lower bound of the range (0.1–0.5) of the literature
Vertical strain (%)

25 data recently compiled by Basha et al. (2015).

12
The constrained modulus (Ds) computed from 1D compression
16 50
tests from this study are shown in Fig. 5 along with the published
20 100 data reported for MSW from different countries. It can be observed
24 that the Ds of MSW at the Ghazipur and Okhla dumps are falling
200
28 towards the upper range of the literature data. Relatively low Cc0
400 and high Ds of MSW at these two dumps are attributed to the rel-
32
atively low percentages of compressible constituents such as plas-
36
tics, rubber, and paper, coupled with high percentages of soil-like
Time (minutes) and gravel materials (Table 2). This is consistent with the observa-
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 tions reported by other researchers that MSW with higher percent-
0 ages of soil-like fraction or inert materials generally exhibits lower
4 (b) MSW from OP3 compressibility (lower Cc0 and higher Ds) compared to MSW with
(kPa) higher percentage of compressible elements such as paper, plas-
8 v
Vertical strain (%)

12.5 tics, cork, rubber etc. and biodegradable organic waste

12
25 (Kavazanjian et al., 1999; Chen et al., 2009; Bareither et al.,
16
50 2012a; Gomes et al., 2014; Zekkos et al., 2016). The relatively
20
100 low compressibility of MSW from this study also corroborates with
24 the measured low total organic content of the collected waste
28 200 samples.
32
400
36 7.2. Stress-displacement response and shear strength
Fig. 4. Vertical strain-time history curves from 1D mechanical compression tests on
MSW from: (a) GP1 and (b) OP3. Typical results from the DS tests are shown in Fig. 6a–h for the
solid waste from GP1 and OP3. The results from all the DS tests are
given in supplementary material in Figs. S3–S8. MSW prepared
with the mechanical compression is evaluated using the modified with in-situ composition exhibited a continuous increase of shear
compression index, also called the compression ratio (Cc0 ). In this stress without exhibiting any definite peak stress up to the end
study, the Cc0 was computed based on the vertical strain data as of the test (55 mm horizontal displacement) and is consistent with

Canada (Landva et al. 1984) Canada (Singh 2008)

UK (Beaven and Powrie 1995) USA (Reddy et al. 2008)
Brazil (Carvalho 1999) Brazil (Karimpour-Fard and Machado 2012)
France (Gotteland et al. 2000) USA (Bareither et al. 2012a)
Canada (Landva et al. 2000) Portugal (Gomes et al. 2014)
UK (Dixon et al. 2004) Italy (Castelli and Maugeri 2014)
Germany, data range (Jessberger and Kockel 1991)
5000
Delhi, India (present study)
4500
GP1; GP3
4000 OP2; OP3
Constrained modulus, Ds (kPa)

3500

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Vertical stress, v (kPa)

Fig. 5. Constrained modulus of MSW from this study and a comparison with data reported from several MSW landfills worldwide. (Note: A close up view of data at low
vertical stress is presented in Fig. S2). (See above-mentioned references for further information.)

Please cite this article in press as: Ramaiah, B.J., et al. Mechanical characterization of municipal solid waste from two waste dumps at Delhi, India. Waste
Management (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.055
8 B.J. Ramaiah et al. / Waste Management xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

300 300
Normal stress Normal stress
7 kPa
(a) GP1-IC (c) GP1-20mm
250 25 kPa 250
25 kPa 50 kPa
50 kPa

Shear stress (kPa)

Shear stress (kPa)
100 kPa
200 100 kPa 200
200 kPa
200 kPa
150 400 kPa 150

100 100

50 50

0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
4 4
(b) GP1-IC (d) GP1-20mm
3 3
Dilation

Vertical strain (%)

Vertical strain (%)

2 2
1 1
0 0
-1 -1
Compression

-2 -2
-3 -3
-4 -4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Horizontal displacement (mm) Horizontal displacement (mm)
250 250
Normal stress Normal stress (g) OP3-20mm
(e) OP3-IC
25 kPa 25 kPa
200 50 kPa 50 kPa 200

Shear stress (kPa)

100 kPa
Shear stress (kPa)

100 kPa
200 kPa 200 kPa
150 300 kPa 150

100 100

50 50

0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
2 2
(f) OP3-IC (h) OP3-20mm
Dilation

1 1
Vertical strain (%)
Vertical strain (%)

0 0

-1 -1
Compression

-2 -2

-3 -3

-4 -4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Horizontal displacement (mm) Horizontal displacement (mm)

Fig. 6. Typical results from direct shear tests on MSW with fibrous fraction (in-situ composition) and without fibrous fraction (<20 mm only). (Note see Figs. S3–S8 for the
results from DS tests on all the specimens).

the behavior of MSW in DS reported by other researchers with other studies. However, the magnitude of mobilized shear
(Edincliler et al., 1996; Jones et al., 1997; Thomas et al., 1999; stress differs, which could be due to the difference in composition,
Pelkey et al., 2001; Kavazanjian et al., 1999; Gabr et al., 2007; density and applied normal stress. Effect of parameters such as
Singh et al., 2009; Zekkos et al., 2010b; Arif, 2010; Bareither composition or fibrous materials, age or degradation and density
et al., 2012b; Reddy et al., 2015). Fig. 7 presents a qualitative com- on the shear behavior of MSW in DS is further discussed below.
parison of the stress-displacement response of MSW from this
study with that reported by other studies that employed the DS 7.2.1. Effect of composition
box of similar size as used in this study. It can be seen that the The effect of composition or fibrous materials such as textiles
stress-displacement behavior of MSW from this study is consistent and plastics on the shear behavior of MSW is examined by

Please cite this article in press as: Ramaiah, B.J., et al. Mechanical characterization of municipal solid waste from two waste dumps at Delhi, India. Waste
Management (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.055
 B.J. Ramaiah et al. / Waste Management xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 9

300 Jones et al. (1997)

This study (GP1- IC) - 300 x 300 mm
300 x 300 mm (UK)
50 kPa
v = 300 kPa
250 100 kPa
200 kPa
Harris et al. (2006)
400 kPa

Shear stress (kPa)

300 x 300 mm (USA)
200
v = 345 kPa

150 Stoltz et al. (2009)

300 x 300 mm (France)
v = 300 kPa
100
Zekkos et al. (2010a)
300 x 300 mm (USA)
50
v = 150 kPa

Bareither et al. (2012b)

0
280 mm diameter (USA)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
v = 90 kPa
Horizontal displacement (mm)

Fig. 7. Qualitative comparison of typical stress-displacement response of MSW from this study with those reported from some large DS tests in literature.

250 250
GP1-IC GP1-20mm GP2-IC GP2-20mm

Mobilized shear stress (kPa)

(a)
Mobilized shear stress (kPa)

10 mm 10 mm
10 mm 10 mm (b)
200 25 mm 25 mm 200
25 mm 25 mm
55 mm 55 mm 55 mm
55 mm
150 150

100 100

50 50

0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 250
250 250
Mobilized shear stress (kPa)

OP2-20mm

Mobilized shear stress (kPa)

OP2-IC (c) OP3-IC OP3-20mm
10 mm 10 mm 10 mm 10 mm
(d)
200 200
25 mm 25 mm 25 mm 25 mm
55 mm 55 mm 55 mm 55 mm
150 150

100 100

50 50

0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 250
Normal stress (kPa) Normal stress (kPa)

Fig. 8. Mobilized shear stress in MSW specimens with and without fibrous materials in DS at different horizontal displacements.

conducting DS tests on specimens reconstituted with and without normal stress. The effect of applied normal stress on the shear-
fibrous constituents using the solid waste from GP1, GP2, OP2 and induced volume change behavior exhibited by MSW specimens
OP3 (see Table 3 for details). Specimens with 100% <20 mm frac- with and without fibrous materials is consistent with those
tion were prepared at the same compaction effort required to pre- observed for conventional soils, wherein the soil particles roll over
pare their counterpart having the fibrous fraction. Typical results one another to induce the dilative response under low normal
from these tests are presented in Fig. 6a–h for the solid waste at stress and at high density or high compaction effort (Lambe and
GP1 and OP3. It can be observed that the specimens prepared with Whitman, 1969). However, the applicability of the same volume
fibrous fraction have not exhibited failure, whereas, the specimens change mechanisms for MSW materials (which are composite
with only the <20 mm fraction exhibited a trend tending towards materials comprising particles of varying types, size, shape and
failure. aspect ratios) is not yet well understood and need further investi-
It can also be noted that during shearing, the specimens com- gation in this regard.
prising fibrous materials exhibited dilation (increase of volume) Fig. 8a–d compares the mobilized shear stress for the specimens
under low normal stresses and the dilative response is suppressed with and without fibrous fractions at horizontal displacements of
consistently with increasing normal stress (see Figs. S3–S8). On the 10, 25 and 55 mm for MSW at GP1, GP2, OP2 and OP3. It can be
other hand, the MSW specimens without fibrous materials exhib- noted that the mobilized shear stress in specimens with and with-
ited compression behavior under all the tested normal stresses out fibrous fraction is almost identical in all the cases. During spec-
and compressive strain increased consistently with increasing imen preparation in DS box, the textiles and plastics constituents

Please cite this article in press as: Ramaiah, B.J., et al. Mechanical characterization of municipal solid waste from two waste dumps at Delhi, India. Waste
Management (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.055
10 B.J. Ramaiah et al. / Waste Management xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

oriented predominantly parallel to the shearing direction (horizon-
tal). Hence, the contribution of tensile strength through reinforce-
ment mechanism from these fibrous elements will not be as
significant as when these fibrous elements are oriented perpendic-
ular to the shearing direction which happens in TXC tests (Ramaiah
and Ramana, 2017). This is in good agreement with observations
reported by Zekkos et al. (2010b), in which the MSW reconstituted
with 0%, 38% and 88% fibrous fractions exhibited almost identical
shear strength at 55 mm horizontal displacement in large DS box
(300
300 mm). Zekkos et al. (2010b) reported a 100% increase
in mobilized shear strength when the fibrous components are per-
pendicular to the shearing direction in large DS compared to when
the fibrous elements are parallel to the shearing direction.
7.2.2. Effect of age or degradation
Contradictory observations are reported in the literature on the
effect of age or degradation of MSW on its shear strength parame-
ters as summarized previously. The DS tests data from this study is
analyzed to examine the effect of age or degradation on the shear
strength parameters of MSW. Fig. 9 shows the mobilized c0 and /0
at 55 mm horizontal displacement with the average age of MSW. It
can be observed that with increasing age of MSW, the c0 decreased
and /0 increased for the waste at both the sites. This observation is
consistent with the findings reported by Zhan et al. (2008) and
Gomes et al. (2013). With the increase in age of solid waste, the
decrease in c0 may be attributed to the decrease in the fibrous frac-
tion, whereas, the increase in /0 may be attributed to the increase
in inert content due to physico-chemico-biodegradation processes
in the landfill.

25
7.2.3. Effect of initial density
The disposal practice (tipping over method) is resulting in a rel-
Apparent cohesion, c (kPa)

20 atively low density of the landfilled MSW. Low values of shear

wave velocity measured in-situ using surface wave based geophys-
ical techniques at the Ghazipur and Okhla dumps also corroborate
15
the loose state of MSW (Ramaiah et al., 2016). Hence, the effect of
initial density on the shear strength of MSW is examined. For this
10 purpose, the DS tests were conducted on waste reconstituted at
; Ghazipur site
(GP1-IC, GP2-IC & GP3-IC)
5
; Okhla site 500
(a) 3
(OP2-IC & OP3-IC) d0
= 7.5 kN/m (GP3-IC)
0 3
400 = 10 kN/m (GP3-IC-HD)
40 d0
Shear stress (kPa)

35
()

300
Friction angle,

30 c = 28.8 kPa
200 = 40.4
25 2
R = 0.98

20 100
c = 11.1 kPa
2
15 = 35.4 R = 0.99
0
(b) 0 100 200 300 400 500
10
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Normal stress (kPa)

Average age (years) Fig. 11. Mobilized shear strength parameters of solid waste at two different
densities.
Fig. 9. Effect of age on the mobilized shear strength parameters of MSW at the two
dump sites.

350
Ghazipur dump site
Mobilized shear stress, (kPa)

300 Okhla dump site

250 Symbols in gray color:

3 250 Literature data (see Table 4)
Solid symbols: do
= 10 kN/m
3
200 Hollow symbols: = 7.5 kN/m
do 200
Shear stress (kPa)

MSW from GP3 At 200 kPa

150 150

100
100
50
At 25 kPa
50
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Effective normal stress, n (kPa)
Horizontal displacement (mm)
Fig. 12. Comparison of the mobilized shear strength of MSW at 55 mm displace-
Fig. 10. Effect of density on shear stress-displacement response of solid waste from ment in DS tests from this study with the experimental data from large-scale
GP1-IC and GP1-IC-HD. laboratory and field DS tests reported for MSW from different countries.

Please cite this article in press as: Ramaiah, B.J., et al. Mechanical characterization of municipal solid waste from two waste dumps at Delhi, India. Waste
Management (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.055
 B.J. Ramaiah et al. / Waste Management xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 11

initial dry densities of 7.5 and 10 kN/m3, but with identical compo-
sition. Waste collected from GP3 was used for these DS tests (GP3-
IC and GP3-IC-HD) at rn of 10–400 kPa (Table 3). Results from
these DS tests (GP3-IC and GP3-IC-HD) are given in Fig. S5.
Fig. 10 presents the effect of initial density on the stress-
displacement response of waste at rn of 25 and 200 kPa. It can
be observed that, for a 33% increase in initial dry density, the mobi-
lized shear strength of solid waste at 55 mm displacement
increased by about 37% at rn = 25 kPa and by about 43% at
rn = 200 kPa. Shear strength parameters computed at 55 mm dis-
placement from these DS tests are shown in Fig. 11, which indi-
cates that the apparent cohesion has increased from 11 kPa to
28 kPa and friction angle increased from 35.4° to 40.4° for an
increase in initial density from 7.5 to 10 kN/m3. This suggests that

Table 4
Database of the shear strength of MSW from large-scale direct shear tests (in-situ and laboratory) considered for the statistical analysis.

Landfill Country Test Shear box size Normal stress range Failure definition No. of Reference
method (cm) (kPa) tests
Four landfills Canada L 43
29 (R) 30.3–565 PS 23 Landva and Clark (1990)
Central Maine landfill USA I 122 (S) 15–40 NR 17 Richardson and Reynolds
(1991)a
A landfill in Durham UK L 30 (S) 50–400 PD (30 mm) 32 Jones et al. (1997)
North West Regional landfill, USA I 122 (S) 15.3–44.5 PS 6 Houston et al. (1995)
Arizona
A landfill in Wisconsin USA L 30 (D) 13.8–138 PD (60 mm) 18 Edincliler et al. (1996)
A landfill in Verona Italy I&L 80 (D) 50–220 PS 6 Mazzucato et al. (1999)
OII landfill, California USA L 46 (D) 137.5–1730 NR 9 Kavazanjian et al. (1999)
Normandy landfill, Beirut Lebanon L 60 (S) 49.1–245.3 8% strain (48 mm) 5 Sadek et al. (1999)b
Torcy landfill France I 100 (S) 50–125 10% strain 10 Gotteland et al. (2000)
(100 mm)
Montech landfill France I 100 (S) 50–125 10% strain 10 Gotteland et al. (2000)
(100 mm)
Dona Juana landfill, Bogotá Columbia I 90 (D) 2.2–117 PS or PD 6 Caicedo et al. (2002)
Outer Loop landfill, Kentucky USA L 30 (S) 172–690 PD (30 mm) 3 Harris et al. (2006)
Brock West landfill, Ontario Canada L 100 (S) 60–150 PD (250–300 mm) 3 Singh et al. (2009)
A landfill Pakistan I 122 (S) 6–20 4% strain (48.8 mm) 3 Ali et al. (2009)
Huko landfill, Hsinchu Taiwan I 80 (S) 64–226 PS 4 Shan and Fan (2009)
Chunan landfill Taiwan I 80 (S) 52–229 PS 4 Shan and Fan (2009)
Landfill Site B France L 300 (S) 50–100 PD (11% 3 Arif (2010)
strain = 33 mm)
Landfill Site LM France L 300 (S) 50–200 PD (11% 21 Arif (2010)
strain = 33 mm)
Landfill Site N France L 300 (S) 50–200 PD (11% 6 Arif (2010)
strain = 33 mm)
Tri-Cities landfill, California USA L 300 (S) 1.8–700 PS or PD (55 mm) 11 Zekkos et al. (2010b)c
Deer Track Park Landfill USA L 280 (D) 12–90 PD (56 mm) 22 Bareither et al. (2012b)
Sao Carlos sanitary landfill, Sao Brazil L 50 (S) 25–250 PD (100 mm) 19 Abreu (2015)
Carlos
Two dump sites (A and B) Japan I 300 (S) 8.2–19.1 PD (35 mm) 6 Miyamoto et al. (2015)
Laogang landfill China I 300 (S) 7.5–22.3 PD (35 mm) 6 Miyamoto et al. (2015)
Ghazipur dump site, Delhi India L 300 (S) 7–400 PD (55 mm) 15 This studyc
Okhla dump site, Delhi India L 300 (S) 25–300 PD (55 mm) 9 This studyc

Note: L = Laboratory tests; I = In-situ tests; R = Rectangular box; S = Square box; D = Circular box; PS = Peak stress; PD = Peak displacement; NR = Not reported.
a
Data adopted from Zekkos et al. (2010b).
b
DS tests data conducted at in-situ water content only is considered.
c
Data of specimens reconstituted with only the <20 mm fraction is not considered.

350

c = 17 kPa At 25 mm displacement
300
Mobilized shear stress, (kPa)

= 34 GP1-IC
2 GP2-IC
R = 0.99 GP3-IC
250
OP2-IC
OP3-IC
200 Composite envelope

150 At 55 mm displacement
GP1-IC
GP2-IC
100 GP3-IC
c = 13 kPa OP2-IC
50 = 22.8 OP3-IC
2
R = 0.99 Composite envelope
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Normal stress, n
(kPa)

Fig. 13. Composite shear strength envelopes for MSW at the two dump sites for the shear stress at a horizontal displacement of: (a) 25 mm and (b) 55 mm.

Please cite this article in press as: Ramaiah, B.J., et al. Mechanical characterization of municipal solid waste from two waste dumps at Delhi, India. Waste
Management (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.055
12 B.J. Ramaiah et al. / Waste Management xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

This study: (at 25 mm); (at 55 mm)

70 Literature data:
Miyamato et al. (2015) Siegel et al. (1990)
Laogang landfill Withiam et al. (1995)
60 Houston et al. (1995)
Kavazanjian et al. (1999)
(direct simple shear) Gabr and Valero (1995)
Edicliler et al. (1996)
50
() Jones et al. (1997)
Kavazanjian et al. (1999)-DS
Friction angle,
40 Sadek et al. (1999)
Gotteland et al. (2000)
Caicedo et al. (2002)
Montec landfill
Harris et al. (2006)
30 Reddy et al. (2009)
Ali et al. (2009)
Shan and Fan (2009):
20
Huko landfill
Landva and Clark Shan and Fan (2009):
Mazzucato et al. Gotteland et al. (2000)
10 (1986, 1990) Chunan landfill
(1999) Torcy landfill
Zekkos et al. (2010b)
Bareither et al. (2012b)
0 Miyamato et al. (2015): Site A
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Miyamato et al. (2015): Site B
Apparent cohesion, c (kPa)

Fig. 14. Comparison of shear strength parameters obtained from this study with the published data reported for several MSW landfills. (See above-mentioned references for
further information.)

Table 5 differences in the mobilized shear strength at a given displacement

Mobilized shear strength of MSW from back analysis of failed landfill slopes among the MSW specimens prepared at their in-situ compositions
considered for the statistical analysis (adopted from Stark et al., 2009).
and at the same initial dry density. Hence, a composite failure
Landfill Country Average effective Back-calculated envelope was fitted to the dataset separately for the mobilized
normal stress (kPa) mobilized shear shear stress at 25 mm and 55 mm displacements. The shear
stress (kPa)
strength parameters thus obtained are: c0 = 13 kPa and /0 = 22.8°
New Jersey site USA 62 46 at 25 mm displacement; and c0 = 17 kPa and /0 = 34° at 55 mm dis-
Maine site USA 34 35
placement. The shear strength parameters at 55 mm displacement
Cincinnati site USA 90 103
Eastern Ohio site USA 35 29 can be useful and relevant for the stability computations of the two
Warsaw site Poland 106 40 dumps during operation where the failure surface is expected to
Dona Juana landfill Columbia 55 34 pass through the waste mass only. However, during the closure
Payatas landfill Philippines 95 69.5
of these dumps, the shear strength parameters at 25 mm displace-
Hiriya landfill Israel 32 46
Istanbul landfill Turkey 65 72.5 ments are relevant when the failure surface is expected to pass
Cruz da Almas landfill Brazil 28.9 20.3 through both the cover system and the waste mass. The obtained
Leuwigajah dumpsite Indonesia 31.2 86 shear strength parameters at 25 mm and 55 mm displacements
from this study are well within the range of the published data
from different countries as shown in Fig. 14.
increasing the compaction effort results in an increased shear
strength of the solid waste and hence safer slopes can be made
steeper, thereby increasing the dump site/landfill capacity to 8. Empirical shear strength envelope for MSW
accept more waste.
Several shear strength envelopes were recommended by previ-
7.2.4. Mobilized shear strength parameters ous researchers for MSW (Table 1) based on the statistical analysis
It was observed that MSW specimens prepared with in-situ of the limited data available from the laboratory and in-situ DS
composition exhibited a continued increase of shear stress without tests, back analysis of stable or failed landfills slopes and load bear-
a well-defined peak value or failure stress even up to 55 mm hor- ing tests. Additional large amount of data on the shear strength of
izontal displacement. In such cases, the shear strength parameters MSW is reported in the literature in the last seven to eight years.
are commonly derived at some specified level of displacement or Table 4 summarizes the source and details of the experimental
strain. In this study, the shear strength parameters were computed data from 277 large-scale DS tests (in-situ and laboratory) reported
at 25 mm and 55 mm horizontal displacements. The 25 mm dis- till date (2017) from 13 countries. The width of the shear box
placement is considered based on the recommendation of Stark employed in these DS tests varies between 280 mm and
et al. (2009) from the view of the strain compatibility between 1220 mm. Shear strength data from back analysis of 11 failed land-
MSW and other materials in the waste containment system (min- fill slopes reported by Stark et al. (2009) is shown in Table 5. The
eral soils and geosynthetics). Mobilized shear strength parameters database presented in Tables 4 and 5 represents the mobilized
at these two displacements obtained from the best fit linear envel- shear strength data from a total of 39 dump sites/landfills and 18
ope for individual MSW specimens are given in Table 3. countries. In this study, the experimental data from only the DS
The mobilized shear stress at 55 mm displacement from this testing is considered (along with the back analyzed data of failed
study is in the range of the published data reported from the slopes) because as it is reported that the shear strength of MSW
large-scale DS tests (in-situ and laboratory) for several MSW land- evaluated using DS testing is conservative and is reported to be
fills around the world as shown in Fig. 12 (see Table 4 and Fig. 15 consistent with that estimated from the back analysis of stable
for details of the literature data). Mobilized shear stresses from and failed landfill slopes (Kavazanjian et al., 1995; Eid et al., 2000).
individual specimens at 25 mm and 55 mm horizontal displace- Initially, attempts were made to develop an empirical shear
ments are shown in Fig. 13. Fig. 13 indicates no significant strength envelop as a function of MSW of different age, composition,

Please cite this article in press as: Ramaiah, B.J., et al. Mechanical characterization of municipal solid waste from two waste dumps at Delhi, India. Waste
Management (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.055
 B.J. Ramaiah et al. / Waste Management xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 13

measurement technique (field versus laboratory) or a strength
envelope specific to a geographical region. Unfortunately, the neces-
sary details related to the age of MSW or composition and other rel-
evant information provided in the published articles/reports are
insufficient for developing the contextual categorization of strength
envelopes. Perhaps this could be the reason why previous research-
ers also used the whole dataset rather than recommending the
strength envelop as a function of the above different factors. There-
fore, in the current study also, the dataset as a whole is considered
for the statistical analysis to arrive at an empirical strength envelope
for MSW that can be useful for preliminary stability assessment of
landfills in absence of site-specific data. However, the dataset used
in this study is significantly larger than that considered by previous
researchers and encompasses data from additional geographical
regions/countries.
Howland and Landva (1992) suggests using reported shear
strength data in terms of mobilized shear stress (s) and effective
normal stress (r0 n) from each test, rather than the statistical anal-
ysis of the reported c0 and /0 values. Kavazanjian et al. (1995) and
Bray et al. (2009) also followed a similar procedure in analyzing the
available shear strength data and proposed the shear strength
envelopes for MSW (Table 1). In this study, mobilized shear
strength data from each DS test as well as the back analyzed data
is first plotted on the (s, r0 n) space and then the entire database is

Experimental data from large-scale direct shear tests (in-situ & laboratory) - see Table 4
Landva and Clark (1990) Ali et al. (2009)
Richardson and Reynolds (1991) Shan and Fan (2009) - Huko landfill
Houston et al. (1995) Shan and Fan (2009) - Chunan landfill
Edincliler et al. (1996) Arif (2010)-Site B
Jones et al. (1997) Arif (2010)-Site LM
Mazzucato et al. (1999) Arif (2010)-Site N
Kavazanjian et al. (1999) Zekkos et al. (2010b)
Sadek et al. (1999) Bareither et al. (2012b)
Gotteland et al. (2000) - Torcy landfill Miyamoto et al. (2015) - A & B sites
Gotteland et al. (2000) - Montec landfill Miyamoto et al. (2015) - Laogang landfill
Caicedo et al. (2002) Abreu (2015)
Harris et al. (2006) This study (Ghazipur dump site)
Singh et al. (2009) This study (Okhla dump site)
700
Back analysis of failed landfill slopes (Stark et al. 2009) - see Table 5
New Jersey site
600 Maine site (a)
Mobilized shear stress, (kPa)

Cincinnati site
Eastern Ohi site
500
Warsaw site
Dona Juana site
400 Payatas site
Hiriya site
Istanbul site
300 Cruz da Almas site
Leuwigajah site
Best fit linear envelope
200 =c + n
tan
c = 17 kPa; = 32
2
100 R = 0.93 No.of data points: 288
No.of dumps/landfills: 39
see Fig. 14(b) below No.of countries: 18
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Effective normal stress, n (kPa)
160

140
(b)
Mobilized shear stress, (kPa)

120 Data ignored in

statistical analysis
100

80

60

40

20

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Effective normal stress, n (kPa)

Fig. 15. Shear strength data of MSW from back analysis of failed slopes and large-scale in-situ and laboratory direct shear tests.

Please cite this article in press as: Ramaiah, B.J., et al. Mechanical characterization of municipal solid waste from two waste dumps at Delhi, India. Waste
Management (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.055
14 B.J. Ramaiah et al. / Waste Management xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

statistically analyzed. It was observed that the data beyond r0 n of 90

(degress)
1000 kPa is almost nil (only one data point for MSW at OII landfill = 39.7 - 16.9 log ( n/pa)
80 sec
reported by Kavazanjian et al., 1999). Hence, statistical analysis in
this study is limited for the data up to r0 n = 1000 kPa. The dataset 70 2
R = 0.50
considered for statistical analysis is shown in Fig. 15, which com-

sec
60
bines the data from different methods of strength determination
50

Secant friction angle,

(back analysis of failed slopes, large-scale field and laboratory DS
testing), MSW of different ages, depths, composition and geograph- 40
ical regions. It was observed that the data reported by Caicedo et al.
30
(2002) at very low normal stress (four data points in Fig. 15b) is
abnormally high compared to the rest of the data and hence these 20
data points were not considered in the statistical analysis. This 10
data was also ignored by Bray et al. (2009). (a) c = 0 kPa
Initially, an attempt was made to develop a non-linear model 0
for shear strength of MSW similar to that proposed by Bray et al. 0.01 0.1 1 10
(2009) to account for the decrease of /0 with increasing r0 n. The Normalized stress, n
/pa
variation of secant friction angle (/sec) with r0 n was examined for
90
fixed values of c0 of 0, 5 and 10 kPa. It was noted that with increas-

(degress)
ing c0 , the goodness of fit for the variation of /sec with r0 n decreased
= 37.3 - 12.2 log ( n/pa)
80 sec

significantly, with R2 value decreasing from 0.5 to 0.28 to 0.05 for

70 2
fixed c0 values of 0, 5 and 10 kPa respectively (see Fig. 16a–c). In R = 0.28

sec
view of this, the non-linear model was disregarded and an attempt 60
was made to adopt a simple linear envelope. The linear model pro- 50

Secant friction angle,

vided an excellent fit to the dataset with relatively a high R2 value
of 0.93 (Fig. 15a). Effective shear strength parameters obtained for 40
the best fit linear envelope are: c0 = 17 kPa and /0 = 32°. Cohesion 30
intercept of 17 kPa at r0 n = 0 kPa (unconfined) is supported by
20
the fact that unsupported near vertical cuts on the order of 4–
5 m at MSW dumps at Delhi as well as at other landfills worldwide 10
(Eid et al., 2000; Kavazanjian, 2008) remained stable for months to (b) c = 5 kPa
0
years, indicating an apparent cohesion as per the classical soil 0.01 0.1 1 10
mechanics. The proposed linear strength envelope obtained from Normalized stress, /p
n a
this study is in good agreement with those recommended by pre-
vious researchers as shown in Fig. 17 (Kavazanjian et al., 1995; 90
(degress)

Manassero et al., 1996; Stark et al., 2009; Bray et al., 2009). 80 = 34.6 - 5.4 log ( n/pa)
sec
The model proposed herein is not a substitute for the site-
70 2
specific evaluation of MSW shear strength. The proposed strength R = 0.05
sec

envelope assumes fully drained conditions in the emplaced waste 60

mass. Possible detrimental effects due to excess pore pressure in 50
Secant friction angle,

the waste mass as a result of uncontrolled leachate recirculation

and or gas pressures are not accounted for in this model. Further
research is warranted to account for these situations. The proposed
model is meant for use in the stability assessment of the waste
mass only i.e., the failure surface passing entirely through waste
mass only.
9. Summary and conclusions
Physical and mechanical properties of emplaced MSW with age
between 2 and 12 years, collected from different locations of the
Ghazipur and Okhla dumps located at Delhi are presented in this
article. In-situ unit weight measured through large tests pits at
these two dumps is in the range of the near surface data reported
for several MSW landfills worldwide. Physical properties, mechan-
ical compressibility and shear strength of MSW were studied using
the representative samples collected from the test pits at these two
dumps. Major findings observed from this study are:
 Composition analysis revealed that MSW near the surface of the
two dumps sites consists of about 60–80% soil-like or soil-sized
fraction i.e., <20 mm fraction.
 Negligible to nil quantity of paper and relatively low quantity of
plastics in the emplaced waste mass at these two dump sites is
attributed to the recycling policies/practices being followed by
local municipalities, households and rag pickers.
40
30
20
10
(c) c = 10 kPa
0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Normalized stress, n
/pa
Fig. 16. Variation of secant friction angle with normal stress for different fixed
values of c0 in a non-linear shear strength model.
 Modified compression index of MSW at the two dump sites is
between 0.11 and 0.17 and is falling on the lower side of the
data reported for MSW in the literature. This is attributed to rel-
atively low percentages of compressible elements such as plas-
tics and paper, coupled with the high percentages of inert
materials such as gravel-sized and soil-like materials.
 Solid waste specimens prepared with fibrous materials exhib-
ited a continued increase of shear stress without any peak stress
or failure even up to 55 mm displacement. This strain-
hardening type behavior of MSW in DS is in agreement with
the observations reported in the literature.
 With the aging of the solid waste, a decrease in c0 and an
increase in /0 are observed.

Please cite this article in press as: Ramaiah, B.J., et al. Mechanical characterization of municipal solid waste from two waste dumps at Delhi, India. Waste
Management (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.055
 B.J. Ramaiah et al. / Waste Management xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 15

700
Kavazanjian et al. (1995) - Bi-linear (1)
Manassero et al. (1996) - Tri-linear (2)
600
(a) Jones et al. (1997) - Linear (3)
Eid et al. (2000) - Linear (4)
Stark et al. (2009) - Bi-linear (5)
(kPa)
500 Bray et al. (2009) - Non-linear (6)
This study - Linear (7)
400
Shear stress,

100
(b)

Shear stress, (kPa)

300 80 (6)
(7)
60 (4)
200
40
100 (1)
20
See (b) (3)
0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 0 20 40 60 80 100

Normal stress, Normal stress, n (kPa)

n (kPa)

Fig. 17. Comparison of proposed shear strength envelope for MSW from this study with shear strength envelops recommended by other researchers.

 Shear strength of MSW increased with increase in density.
Apparent cohesion increased from 11 to 28 kPa and friction
angle increased from 35.4° to 40.4° for an increase in initial den-
sity from 7.5 to 10 kN/m3.
 Shear strength of MSW at these two dump sites is displacement
dependent and is best characterized by the Mohr-Coulomb
model with c0 = 13 kPa and /0 = 23° at 25 mm displacement
and c0 = 17 kPa and /0 = 34° at 55 mm displacement.
A large database on the shear strength of MSW including the
data from this study and published data reported from large-
scale in-situ and laboratory DS tests as well as the data from the
back analysis of failed landfill slopes is statistically analyzed. Based
on the analysis, a simple linear shear strength envelope, character-
ized by c0 = 17 kPa and /0 = 32°, is proposed for MSW that can be
useful in preliminary stability evaluation of solid waste landfill
under drained conditions when site-specific data is not available.
There is a need to update the proposed model as and when new
data, preferably from large-scale in-situ tests and back analysis
of failed landfill slopes, become available.
Acknowledgements
Financial support for this research work by Geosciences/Seis-
mology Division, Ministry of Earth Sciences through research
scheme (MoES/P.O.(Seismo)/1(88)/2010) is gratefully acknowl-
edged. Permission and logistic support from Municipal Corporation
of Delhi during this study are deeply appreciated. The authors
thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable suggestions
which have significantly enhanced the technical quality and pre-
sentation of the article.
Appendix A. Supplementary material
Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in
the online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.
055.
References
Abreu, A.E.S., 2015. Geophysical investigation and shear strength of municipal solid
wastes with different landfilling ages (Ph.D. Dissertation). School of Engineering
Sao Carlos, University of Sao Paulo, Brazil. 250 p. (in Portuguese).
Ali, L., Ali, S., Maqbool, A., 2009. Large direct shear test apparatus for insitu testing of
municipal solid waste landfill sites. In: Proc. GeoHunan International
Conference 2009, ASCE GSP No. 189, pp. 86–91.
Arif, K.N., 2010. Determination of hydro-mechanical characteristics of
biodegradable waste – laboratory and landfill site PhD Thesis. University of
Grenoble, Grenoble, France.
ASTM D2974, 2007. Standard Test Methods for Moisture, Ash, and Organic Matter of
Peat and Other Organic Soils. Book of Standards Volume: 04.08, ASTM
International, Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, USA.
ASTM D 5231, 2008. Standard test method for determination of the composition of
unprocessed municipal solid waste. Book of Standards, Vol. 11.04, ASTM
International, Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, USA.
Babu, G.L.S., Lakshmikanthan, P., Santhosh, L.G., 2015. Shear strength characteristics
of mechanically biologically treated municipal solid waste (MBT-MSW) from
Bangalore. Waste Manage. 39, 63–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
wasman.2015.02.013.
Bareither, C.A., Benson, C.H., Edil, T.B., 2012a. Compression behavior of municipal
solid waste: immediate compression. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 138 (9),
1047–1062. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000672.
Bareither, C.A., Benson, C.H., Edil, T.B., 2012b. Effects of waste composition and
decomposition on the shear strength of municipal solid waste. J. Geotech.
Geoenviron. Eng. 138 (10), 1161–1174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
GT.1943-5606.0000702.
Basha, B.M., Parakalla, N., Reddy, K.R., 2015. Experimental and statistical evaluation of
compressibility of fresh and landfilled municipal solid waste under elevated moisture
contents. Int. J. Geotech. Eng. http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/1939787915Y.0000000018.
Beaven, R.P., Powrie, S.W., 1995. Hydrogeological and geotechnical properties of
refuse using a large scale compression cell. In: Proc. 5th Int. Waste Management
and Landfill Symposium, Sardinia ‘95, CISA, Cagliari, Italy, pp. 746–760.
Bray, J.D., Zekkos, D., Kavazanjian Jr., E., Athanasopoulos, G.A., Riemer, M.F., 2009.
Shear strength of municipal solid waste. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 135 (6),
709–722. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000063.
Caicedo, B., Yamin, L., Giraldo, E., Coronado, O., 2002. Geomechanical properties of
municipal solid waste in Dona Juana sanitary landfill. In: Proc. 4th Int. Congress
on Environmental Geotechnics (ICEG), Brazil, vol. 1, pp. 177–182.
Carvalho, M.F., 1999. Comportamento mecânico de resıduos solidos urbanos.
(Mechanical behavior of municipal solid waste). PhD Thesis, University of Sao
Paulo, Brazil (in Portuguese).
Castelli, F., Maugeri, M., 2014. Mechanical properties of municipal solid waste by
SDMT. Waste Manage. 34 (2), 256–265. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
wasman.2013.10.026.
Chen, Y.M., Zhan, T.L., Wei, H.Y., Ke, H., 2009. Aging and compressibility of
municipal solid wastes. Waste Manage. 29 (1), 86–95. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.wasman.2008.02.024.
Cossu, R., 2009. From triangles to cycles. Waste Manage. 29 (12), 2915–2917. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2009.09.002.
Dixon, N., Jones, D.R.V., 2005. Engineering properties of municipal solid waste.
Geotext. Geomembr. 23 (3), 205–233. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.geotexmem.2004.11.002.
Dixon, N., Ng’ambi, S., Jones, D.R.V., 2004. Structural performance of a steep slope
landfill lining system. Proc. ICE 157, 115–125. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1680/geng.2004.157.3.115.
Edincliler, A., Benson, C.H., Edil, T.B., 1996. Shear strength of municipal solid waste.
Interim Report – Year 1, Environmental Geotechnics Report 96–2, Department
of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Eid, H.T., Stark, T.D., Douglas, W.D., Sherry, P.E., 2000. Municipal solid waste slope
failure. I: waste and foundation properties. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 126 (5),
397–407. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2000) 126:5(397).
Fassett, J.B., Leonardo, G.A., Repetto, P.C., 1994. Geotechnical properties of municipal
solid waste and their use in landfill design. In: Waste Tech ’94, Landfill
Technology Technical Proceedings, Charleston, SC (USA), January 13–14.

Please cite this article in press as: Ramaiah, B.J., et al. Mechanical characterization of municipal solid waste from two waste dumps at Delhi, India. Waste
Management (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.055
16 B.J. Ramaiah et al. / Waste Management xxx (2017) xxx–xxx
Gabr, M.A., Hossain, M.S., Barlaz, M.A., 2007. Shear strength parameters of
municipal solid waste with leachate recirculation. J. Geotech. Geoenviron.
Eng. 133 (4), 478–484. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2007)
133:4(478).
Gabr, M.A., Valero, S.N., 1995. Geotechnical properties of municipal solid waste.
Geotech. Test. J. 18 (2), 241–254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1520/GTJ10324J.
Gachet, C., Gotteland, P., Lemarechal, D., Prudhomme, E., 1998. An in-situ household
refuse density measurement protocol. In: Proc. 3rd Int. Congress on
Environmental Geotechnics, Lisbon, pp. 849–854.
Gomes, C.C., Lopes, M.L.C., 2012. Characterisation of municipal solid waste physical
properties and their evolution with age. Geotech. Eng. 165 (GE1), 23–34. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1680/geng.10.00016.
Gomes, C., Lopes, M.L., Oliveira, P., 2013. Municipal solid waste shear strength
parameters defined through laboratorial and in situ tests. J. Air Waste Manag.
Assoc. 63 (11), 1352–1368. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10962247.2013.813876.
Gomes, C.C., Lopes, M.L., Oliveira, P.J.V., 2014. Stiffness parameters of municipal
solid waste. Bull. Eng. Geol. Env. 73 (4), 1073–1087. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/
s10064-014-0621-9.
Gotteland, P., Gourc, J.P., Aboura, A.A., Thomas, S., 2000. On site determination of
geomechnical characteristics of waste. In: Proc. International Conference on
Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, GeoEng 2000, Vol. 2, Melbourne,
Australia, 19–24 November 2000 (CD-ROM).
Grisolia, M., Napoleoni, X., 1996. Geotechnical characterization of municipal solid
waste: choice of design parameters. In: Proc. 2nd Int. Cong. Environ. Geotech.,
Osaka, Japan 2, pp. 641–646.
Grisolia, M., Napoleoni, Q., Sirini, P., Tangredi, G., 1991. Geotechnical behavior of
sanitary landfills based on laboratory and in-situ test. In: Proc. 7th International
Conference on Solid Waste Management and Technology, Philadelphia, PA.
Harris, J.M., Shafer, A.L., DeGroff, W., Hater, G.R., Gabr, M., Barlaz, M.A., 2006. Shear
strength of degraded reconstituted municipal solid waste. Geotech. Testing J.,
ASTM 29 (2), 1–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1520/GTJ14089.
Houston, W.N., Houston, S.L., Liu, J.W., Elsayed, A., Sanders, C.O., 1995. Insitu testing
methods for dynamic properties of MSW landfills. Earthquake design and
performance of solid waste landfills, ASCE Geotechnical Special Publication No.
54, pp. 73–82.
Howland, J., Landva, A.O., 1992. Stability analysis of a municipal solid waste landfill.
In: Proc. Stability and Performance of Slopes and Embankments–II, ASCE
Geotechnical Special Publication No. 31, pp. 1216–1231.
Jessberger, H.L., Kockel, R., 1991. Mechanical properties of waste materials. In: Proc.
XV Ciclo di Conferenze de Geotecnica di Torino, Torino, 19–22 November 1991,
pp. 1–41.
Jones, D.R.V., Taylor, D.P., Dixon, N., 1997. Shear strength of waste and its use in
landfill stability analysis. In: Proc. Geoenvironmental Engineering-
Contaminated Ground: Fate of Pollutants and Remediation. Thomas Telford,
pp. 343–350.
Karimpour-Fard, M., Machado, S.L., 2012. Deformation characteristics of MSW
materials. Electr. J. Geotech. Eng., 17, Bund A.
Karimpour-Fard, M., Machado, S.L., Shariatmadari, N., Noorzad, A., 2011. A
laboratory study on the MSW mechanical behavior in triaxial apparatus.
Waste Manage. 31 (8), 1807–1819. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
wasman.2011.03.011.
Kavazanjian, E., Jr., 2008. The indispensable role of case histories in landfill
engineering. In: Proc. 6th International conference on case histories in
Geotechnical Engineering, Arlington, VA, Paper No. SOAP 7, pp. 1–10.
Kavazanjian, E., Jr., Matasovic, N., Bachus, R.C., 1999. Large-diameter static and
cyclic laboratory testing of municipal solid waste. In: Proc. Sardinia’99: 7th
International waste management and landfill symposium, CISA, pp. 437–444.
Kavazanjian, E. Jr., Matasovic, N., Bonaparte, R., Schmertmann, G.R., 1995.
Evaluation of MSW properties for seismic analysis. Geoenvironment 2000.
Geotechnical Special Publication No. 46, pp. 1126–1141.
Konig, D., Jessberger, H.L., 1997. Waste mechanics. Report of the ISSMFE Technical
Committee TC5 on Environmental Geotechnics, Bochum, pp. 35–76.
Lambe, T.W., Whitman, R.V., 1969. Soil Mechanics. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Landva, A.O., Clark, J.I., 1986. Geotechnical testing of wastefill. In: Proc. 39th
Canadian Geotechnical Conference Ottawa, Ontario, pp. 371–385.
Landva, A.O., Clark, J.I., 1990. Geotechnics of waste fill. Theory and practice. In:
Landva, A., Knowles, G.O. (Eds.), Special Technical Publication No. 1070. ASTM,
Philadelphia, PA, pp. 86–103.
Landva, A.O., Clark, J.I., Weisner, W.R., Burwash, W.J., 1984. Geotechnical
engineering and refuse landfills. In: Proc. 6th National Conference on Waste
Management, Vancouver, Canada, pp. 1–37.
Landva, A.O., Valsangkar, A.O., Pelkey, S.G., 2000. Lateral earth pressure at rest and
compressibility of municipal solid waste. Can. Geotech. J. 37, 1157–1165. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1139/t00-057.
Manassero, M., Van Impe, W.F., Bouazza, A., 1996. Waste disposal and containment.
Environmental geotechnics. In: Proc. of 2nd Int. Congress on Environmental
Geotechnics, Osaka, Japan, 5–8 November 1996, vol. 3, pp 1425–1474.
Mazzucato, A., Simonini, P., Colombo, S., 1999. Analysis of Block Slide in a MSW
Landfill. In: Proc. 7th International Landfill Symposium, Sardinia, Italy, CISA, pp.
537–544.
Miyamoto, S., Yasufuku, N., Ishikura, R., Omine, K., Kawai, S., Yamawaki, A., 2015. In-
situ shearing response and shear strength of various solid waste ground focused
on fibrous materials composition. In: Proceedings of the TC105 ISSMGE
International Symposium on Geomechanics from Micro to Macro, vol. 2, pp.
1357–1362.
Please cite this article in press as: Ramaiah, B.J., et al. Mechanical characterization of municipal solid waste from two waste dumps at Delhi, India. Waste
Management (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.055
Morris, J.W.F., Lazarte, C.A., Pendleton, C.H., Bachus, R.C., Espinoza, R.D., Stokoe, K.H.,
Germain, A.M., 2006. Comparison of approaches to characterize the unit weight
of MSW in landfills. J. Solid Waste Technol. Manage. 32 (3), 149–158.
O’Kelly, B.C., 2015. Atterberg limits are not appropriate for peat soils. Geotech. Res.
2 (3), 123–134. http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/jgere.15.00007.
Olivier, F., Gourc, J.P., 2007. Hydro-mechanical behavior of municipal solid waste
subject to leachate recirculation in a large-scale compression reactor cell. Waste
Manage. 27, 44–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2006.01.025.
Pelkey, S.A., Valsangkar, A.J., Landva, A., 2001. Shear displacement dependent
strength of municipal solid waste and its major constituent. Geotech. Test. J. 24
(4), 381–390. http://dx.doi.org/10.1520/GTJ11135J.
Pereira, A.G.H., Sopena, L., Mateos, T.G., 2002. Compressibility of a municipal solid
waste landfill. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress on
Environmental Geotechnics, Brazil, pp. 201–206.
Ramaiah, B.J., Ramana, G.V., 2014. Cone penetration testing at a municipal solid
waste site in Delhi, India. In: Proc. 3rd International Symposium on Cone
Penetration Testing: May 12–14, 2014 – Las Vegas, pp. 1083–1091.
Ramaiah, B.J., Ramana, G.V., 2017. Study of stress-strain and volume change
behavior of emplaced municipal solid waste using large-scale triaxial
testing. Waste Manage. 63, 366–379. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
wasman.2017.01.027.
Ramaiah, B.J., Ramana, G.V., Bansal, B.K., 2016. Field and large scale laboratory
studies on dynamic properties of emplaced municipal solid waste from two
dump sites at Delhi, India. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 90, 340–357. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.09.001.
Ramaiah, B.J., Ramana, G.V., Kavazanjian, E., 2014. Undrained response of municipal
solid waste collected from a waste site in Delhi. In: Proc. of GeoShanghai 2014,
Shanghai, China, ASCE GSP No. 241, pp. 130–139.
Ramaiah, B.J., Ramana, G.V., Kavazanjian, E. Jr., Bansal, B.K., 2015. Shear strength and
stiffness of municipal solid waste from large-scale triaxial testing. In: Proc.
Sardinia 2015: 15th International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium,
Cagliari, Italy; 5–9 October 2015 (CD ROM).
Reddy, K.R., Gangathulasi, J., Hettiarachchi, H., Bogner, J., 2008. Geotechnical
properties of municipal solid waste subjected to leachate recirculation.
GeoCongress 2008: Geotechnics of Waste Management and Remediation, GSP
177, pp. 144–151.
Reddy, K.R., Hettiarachchi, H., Parakalla, N.S., Gangathulasi, J., Bogner, J.E., 2009.
Geotechnical properties of fresh municipal solid waste at Orchard Hills landfill,
USA. Waste Manage. 29 (2), 952–959. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
wasman.2008.05.011.
Reddy, K.R., Hettiarachchi, H., Giri, R.K., Gangathulasi, J., 2015. Effects of
Degradation on Geotechnical Properties of Municipal Solid Waste from
Orchard Hills Landfill, USA. Int. J. Geosynthet. Ground Eng.neering. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1007/s40891-015-0026-2.
Richardson, G., Reynolds, D., 1991. Geosynthetic considerations in a landfill on
compressible clays. In: Proc. Geosynthetics ’91, Vol. 2, Industrial Fabrics
Association International.
Sadek, S., El-Fadel, M., Manasseh, C., Abou-Ibrahim, A., 1999. Geotechnical
properties of decomposed solid waste materials. In: Proc., Int. Conf. on Solid
Waste Technology and Management, Widener Univ., School of Engineering,
Chester, PA, 350–357.
Sahadewa, A., 2014. In-situ assessment of linear and nonlinear dynamic properties
of municipal solid waste. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA.
Santos, S.M., Jucá, J.F.T., Aragão, J.M.S., 1998. Geotechnical properties of a solid
waste landfill: Muribeca’s case. In: Proc. 3rd International Congress on
Environmental Geotechnics (3ICEG), Lisboa, vol. 1, pp. 181–184.
Shan, H.Y., Fan, T.H., 2009. In-situ tests and slope stability analysis of municipal
solid waste landfill. In: Proc. of Int. Symp. on Geoenvironmental Eng., ISGE2009
September 8–10, 2009, Hangzhou, China, pp. 590–595.
Shariatmadari, N., Sadeghpour, A.H., Mokhtari, M., 2015. Aging effect on physical
properties of municipal solid waste at the Kahrizak Landfill, Iran. Int. J. Civ. Eng.
neering 13 (1), 126–136.
Siegel, R.A., Robertson, R.J., Anderson, D.G., 1990. ‘‘Slope stability investigation at a
landfill in Southern California”. Geotechnics of waste fills—theory and practice.
ASTM STP 1070, 259–284.
Singh, M.K., 2008. Characterization of stress-deformation behaviour of municipal
solid waste. PhD dissertation, Department of Civil and Geological Engineering
University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.
Singh, M.K., Fleming, I.R., Sharma, J.S., 2010. Development of a practical method for
the estimation of maximum lateral displacement in large landfills. Practice
Periodical Hazard., Toxic, Radioactive Waste Manage. 14 (1), 37–46. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-025X(2010) 14:1(37).
Singh, M.K., Sharma, J.S., Fleming, I.R., 2009. Shear strength testing of intact and
recompacted samples of municipal solid waste. Can. Geotech. J. 46(10), pp.
1133–1145. <http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/T09-052>.
Stark, T.D., Huvaj-Sarihan, N., Li, G., 2009. Shear strength of municipal solid waste
for stability analyses. Environ. Geol. 57 (8), 1911–1923. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1007/s00254-008-1480-0.
Thomas, S., Aboura, A.A., Gourc, J.P., Gotteland, P., Billard, H., Delineau, T., Gisbert, T.,
Ouvry, J.F., Vuillemin, M., 1999. An in-situ waste mechnical experimentation on
a French landfill. In: Proc. Sardinia’99, 7th International Waste Management
and Landfill Symposium, Italy, pp. 445–452.
Vilar, O.M., Carvalho, M.F., 2004. Mechanical properties of municipal solid waste. J.
Test. Eval. 32 (6), 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00254-008-1480-0.
 B.J. Ramaiah et al. / Waste Management xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 17

Withiam, J.L., Tarvin, P.A., Bushell, T.D., Snow, R.E., German, H.W., 1995. Prediction
and performance of municipal landfill slope. In: Proc. International Conference
the Geoenvironment 2000, ASCE GSP No. 46, NY, pp. 1005–1019.
Yuan, P., Kavazanjian Jr., E., Chen, W., Seo, B., 2011. Compositional effects on the
dynamic properties of municipal solid waste. Waste Manage. 31 (12), 2380–
2390. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2011.07.009.
Zekkos, D., Athanasopoulos, G.A., Bray, J.D., Grizi, A., Theodoratos, A., 2010b. Large-
scale direct shear testing of municipal solid waste. Waste Manage. 30(8–9),
1544–1555. (http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2010.01.024).
Zekkos, D., Bray, J.D., Kavazanjian Jr., E., Matasovic, N., Rathje, E.M., Riemer, M.F.,
Stokoe, K.H.-I.I., 2006. Unit weight of municipal solid waste. J. Geotech.
Geoenviron. Eng. 132 (10), 1250–1261. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-
0241(2006) 132:10(1250).
Zekkos, D., Fei, X., Grizi, A., Athanasopoulos, G., 2016. Response of Municipal Solid
Waste to Mechanical Compression. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001608.
Zekkos, D., Gkrizi, A., Athanasopoulos, G.A., 2013. Investigation of fibrous
reinforcement effect on shear resistance of soil-waste mixtures. ASTM
Geotech. Test. J. 36 (6), 867–880. http://dx.doi.org/10.1520/GTJ20120190.
Zekkos, D., Kavazanjian Jr., E., Bray, J.D., Matasovic, N., Riemer, M.F., 2010a. Physical
characterization of municipal solid waste for geotechnical purposes. J.
Geotechn. Geoenviron. Eng. 136 (9), 1231–1241. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/
(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000326.
Zhan, T.L.T., Chen, Y.M., Ling, W.A., 2008. Shear strength characterization of
municipal solid waste at the Suzhou landfill, China. Eng. Geol. 97 (3–4), 97–111.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2007.11.006.
Zornberg, J.G., Jernigan, B.L., Sanglerat, T.R., Cooley, B.H., 1999. Retention of free
liquids in landfills undergoing vertical expansion. J. Geotechn. Geoenviron. Eng.
125 (7), 583–594. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(1999) 125:7
(583).

Please cite this article in press as: Ramaiah, B.J., et al. Mechanical characterization of municipal solid waste from two waste dumps at Delhi, India. Waste
Management (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.05.055