Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
net/publication/257564082
CITATIONS READS
4 6,601
4 authors, including:
K. Prakash A. Sridharan
Indian Institute of Science
62 PUBLICATIONS 878 CITATIONS
264 PUBLICATIONS 4,187 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Acid Rain Intrusion Effects on Slope Failure Phenomena and Mechanisms View project
All content following this page was uploaded by A. Sridharan on 16 July 2014.
ISSN 0960-3182
Volume 30
Number 4
1 23
Your article is protected by copyright and
all rights are held exclusively by Springer
Science+Business Media B.V.. This e-offprint
is for personal use only and shall not be self-
archived in electronic repositories. If you
wish to self-archive your work, please use the
accepted author’s version for posting to your
own website or your institution’s repository.
You may further deposit the accepted author’s
version on a funder’s repository at a funder’s
request, provided it is not made publicly
available until 12 months after publication.
1 23
Author's personal copy
Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:1063–1067
DOI 10.1007/s10706-012-9521-6
TECHNICAL NOTE
H. M. Swaroop
Received: 23 January 2012 / Accepted: 5 May 2012 / Published online: 22 May 2012
Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012
123
Author's personal copy
1064 Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:1063–1067
• The entrapped air in the soil mass has to removed measurements made during the determination of the
by any one of the following tedious procedures. shrinkage limit in the laboratory, one can calculate the
value of specific gravity of soil solids easily. Follow-
• By keeping the density bottle without stopper,
ing are the steps involved.
containing soil and water, in a vacuum desiccator
and by applying vacuum in a controlled condition • The soil is mixed with distilled water such that the
for several hours ranging from 4 to 8 h. water content of the soil paste is slightly above the
• By heating the density bottle with the soil and liquid limit of the soil, which ensures the complete
water inside on a water bath or sand bath. filling of the soil voids with water.
• After the moisture equilibration of the soil paste is
• The test is required to be conducted in a constant
achieved, the soil paste is worked into the shrink-
temperature room or cabinet. In the absence of
age dish without entrapping the air bubbles in the
such a facility, it is required to keep the density
soil paste in the dish and the mass of the wet soil
bottle with water and the density bottle with soil
paste in the shrinkage dish (m1) is recorded. The
and water on a constant temperature bath, before
entrapped air bubbles, if any, can be removed by
determining the masses of density bottle with
keeping the shrinkage dish with wet soil paste in a
water and density bottle with soil and water.
vacuum desiccator, with the vacuum pressure
• If the soil is highly expansive, then the addition of
applied.
water to the soil mass leads to cluster formation
• The volume of the wet soil mass (V) in the
and uniform dispersion of soil particles in water
shrinkage dish is taken as the volume of the
cannot be achieved. This situation makes the
shrinkage dish itself. Conventionally, the volume
removal of air entrapped within the cluster all the
of the shrinkage dish is measured by the mercury
more difficult. In addition, the soil swells inside the
displacement method. However, it can also be
density bottle, thus increasing the complexity of
measured by directly measuring the internal
the process. For soils containing soluble salts, use
dimensions of the shrinkage dish with a slide
of water as the test liquid is not preferred. Instead
calipers. Prakash et al. (2009) have shown that the
kerosene or white spirit or carbon tetra chloride
volume of the shrinkage dish measured by the slide
may be preferred (ASTM Designation D 854-06,
calipers is the same as that obtained from mercury
2007; IS: 2720-Part 3/sec 1, 1980). The use of
displacement method.
organic liquids is not admissible as they prove to
• After allowing the wet soil mass in the shrinkage
be health hazardous substances.
dish to air dry to prevent the cracking of the soil
• The time consumed by the conventional pycnom-
pat, the air dried soil pat is oven dried for 24 h at
eter/density bottle method is, with clays, prohib-
105–110 C to constant mass. The oven dried soil
itively more.
pat is cooled in a desiccator and the mass of the dry
In view of overcoming various difficulties encoun- soil pat (md) is recorded.
tered during the determination of specific gravity of soil
The value of specific gravity of soil solids is then
solids, an alternate simple method of determining the
calculated using Eq. 1, the derivation of which is
same in the laboratory is suggested in this technical note.
provided in Appendix 2.
md
GS ¼ ð1Þ
Vqw ðm1 md Þ
2 Specific Gravity from the Shrinkage Limit
Test Data where qw = density of water (which can be taken 1 g/
cm3); m1 = mass of the wet soil paste in the shrinkage
Shrinkage limit (wS) is one of the three Atterberg dish, in g; md = mass of the dry soil pat in g;
limits of fine-grained soils, the other two being liquid V = volume of the wet soil paste in the shrinkage
and plastic limits. Any laboratory testing of fine- dish, in cm3.
grained soils invariably involves the determination of It may be noted that for determining the specific
the Atterberg limits of soils. Using some of the gravity, volume of the dry soil pat is not required.
123
Author's personal copy
Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:1063–1067 1065
Table 1 Details of the soils studied and the comparative statement of the values of specific gravity obtained from conventional
method and from the proposed method
Soil Soil wL, (%) wP, (%) wS, (%) GCon GSL % deviation
No.
123
Author's personal copy
1066 Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:1063–1067
For each of the soils, the value of the specific Table 1 presents the comparative statement of the
gravity of soil solids was determined by two methods. values of specific gravity obtained from the conven-
tional density bottle method and from the shrinkage
1. The conventional density bottle method using
limit test procedure. It can be noted from Table 1 that
carbon tetra chloride as the test liquid: Here, the
the deviation of GSL, from GCon is quite negligible.
specific gravity was determined by conducting
Considering the complexities in conducting the con-
three trials on each soil. Care was taken to see that
ventional density bottle method of testing and the
the results by the three trials calculated do not
utmost care that needs to be exercised during testing,
differ by more than 0.03. The average of the three
this deviation can be considered allowable, as the
or two very close values obtained was recorded as
values obtained from the conventional density bottle
the specific gravity of soil solids by the conven-
method themselves cannot be treated as error free.
tional method, GCon.
2. Shrinkage limit test: Three determinations were
made on each soil as per the procedure explained
in the previous section of this note. The value of 5 Conclusions
specific gravity in each case was determined using
Eq. 1. The average of three or two very close Determination of specific gravity of fine-grained soil
values obtained was recorded as the specific solids in the laboratory by the conventional density
gravity of the soil solids predicted from the test bottle method is quite sensitive and involves a lot of
procedure described above, GSL. complexities. In the present technical note, it is
proposed to determine the value of specific gravity
of fine-grained soils by the shrinkage limit test
4 Results and Discussion procedure. Since, the shrinkage limit test is a routine
test that is done on all fine-grained soils during their
Figure 1 presents the relationship between the values laboratory testing, some of the measurements done in
of specific gravity obtained from the conventional that process can also be utilized to calculate the value
density bottle method and those obtained from the of specific gravity. This does not necessitate any new
shrinkage limit test procedure. Statistical analysis measurements and additional procedures. The values
shows that the relationship between the two quantities of specific gravity obtained from the shrinkage limit
mentioned above is given by test procedure are in good agreement with those
GCon ¼ 1:0027 GSL ð2Þ obtained from the cumbersome conventional density
bottle method. As a consequence, one can dispense
with a correlation of 1.00. with the conventional specific gravity test. Since the
proposed method does not require the use of any non-
polar chemical or the use of health hazardous mercury
2.95
for the determination of specific gravity of soil solids,
2.90
the proposed method is an eco-friendly method.
GCon= 1.0027 GSL
2.85
r = 1.00
2.80
6 Appendix 1
GCon
2.75
2.70
The value of specific gravity in the conventional
2.65
pycnometer/density bottle method is calculated using
2.60 the following equation.
2.55 md
2.55 2.60 2.65 2.70 2.75 2.80 2.85 2.90 2.95 GS ¼ ð3Þ
GSL md ðm3 m4 Þ
where, md = mass of dry soil sample; m3 = mass of
Fig. 1 Comparison of values of specific gravity obtained from
conventional density bottle method with those obtained from the (pycnometer ? soil ? water); m4 = mass of (pyc-
proposed method nometer ? water)
123
Author's personal copy
Geotech Geol Eng (2012) 30:1063–1067 1067
Ex: 1 Soil: Clay; md = 100 g; m3 = 614.03 g; m4 = 550 g; By definition, the specific gravity of soil solids is
Actual value of GS = 2.78 the ratio of the mass of a given volume of soil solids at
Volume of entrapped air Calculated value a given temperature to the mass of an equal volume of
in the soil–water system, cm3 of GS distilled water at that temperature, which is expressed
as,
0.5 2.74
1.0 2.71 qs
GS ¼ ð4Þ
1.5 2.67 qw
2.0 2.63 mS 1 md 1
2.5 2.60 i:e: GS ¼ ¼ ð5Þ
VS qw VS qw
3.0 2.57
From the figure,
m1 md Vqw ðm1 md Þ
Ex: 2 Soil: Clayey silt; md = 52.2 g; m3 = 706.71 g; VS = V ¼ ð6Þ
qw qw
m4 = 674.28 g; Actual value of GS = 2.64
Volume of entrapped air Calculated value Substituting Eq. 6 in Eq. 5, the following equation
in the soil–water system, cm3 of GS results.
md
0.5 2.58 GS ¼ ð7Þ
1.0 2.51
Vqw ðm1 md Þ
1.5 2.45
7 Appendix 2
References
The phase diagrammatic representation of a saturated ASTM Designation D854-06, 2007, Standard test method for
soil mass is shown below: specific gravity of soil solids by water pycnometer: annual
book of ASTM standards, Vol. 04.02, ASTM, West
Conshohocken, PA
Bowles JE (1997) Foundation analysis and design. The
McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., New York, p 29
Vw Water BS: 1377-Part 2, 1990, British standard methods of test for soil
for engineering purposes: classification tests, BSI, London
IS: 2720-Part 3/sec.1, 1980, Indian standard methods of test for
soils: determination of specific gravity of fine-grained
V m1 soils, BIS, New Delhi
Prakash K, Sridharan A, Ananth Baba J, Thejas HK (2009)
VS Soil Solids mS = md Determination of shrinkage limit of fine-grained soils by
wax method. Geotech Test J ASTM 32(1):86–89
123