Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 11

Geotechnical and Geological Engineering (2006) 24: 1469–1479 Ó Springer 2006

DOI 10.1007/s10706-005-1882-7

Technical Note

Methodology for determination of osmotic


suction of soils

S. SREEDEEP and D. N. SINGHw


Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, Powai, Mumbai,
400076, India

(Received 10 March 2005; accepted 2 August 2005)

Abstract. Soil suction constitutes of the matric suction and the osmotic suction. Several
studies have been conducted and reported by researchers that reveal the importance of the
matric suction on unsaturated soil properties. However, not many efforts have been made to
develop methodologies that can be employed for measuring osmotic suction of the soil and to
understand its influence on unsaturated soil properties. With this in view, efforts were made to
utilize the results of the pressure membrane extractor (PME) and the dewpoint potentiameter
(WP4), which measure matric and total suction of the soil, respectively. Details of the
methodology developed to achieve this are presented in this technical note.
Key words. dewpoint potentiameter, matric suction, osmotic suction, pressure membrane
extractor, unsaturated soil.
Notations: cd: dry unit weight; w: total suction; wm: matric suction; wo: osmotic suction; AEV:
air entry value; af nf: fitting parameters primarily dependent on the air entry value AEV; hr:
suction (in kPa) corresponding to the residual water contentwr; mf: fitting parameter that
depends on the residual water contentwr; Sr: degree of saturation; Srf: degree of saturation of
the sample after saturation; w(w): gravimetric water content at any suction w; w: gravimetric
water content; wf: final gravimetric water content; wr: residual water content; wS: gravimetric
water content at saturation.

1. Introduction
Characterization of the unsaturated soil is primarily based on developing a rela-
tionship between its (total) suction, w, and the gravimetric water content, w, which is
termed as the soil–water characteristic curve, SWCC, (Fredlund and Xing, 1994;
Singh et al., 2001; Singh and Kuriyan, 2002; Sreedeep and Singh, 2003). It must be
noted that w is the sum of matric suction, wm, and the osmotic suction, wo, (Krahn
and Fredlund, 1972). wm is attributed to the interactive adsorbed and capillary forces
between water and the soil matrix, where as wo results from the solutes present in the
pore-solution (Hillel, 1998).
However, in most of the studies, w is wrongly approximated equal to wm
based on the assumption that solutes present in the soil, particularly in the
w
Corresponding author: D.N. Singh, Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Tech-
nology, Bombay, Powai, Mumbai, 400076, India. E-mail: dns@civil.iitb.ac.in
1470 S. SREEDEEP AND D.N. SINGH

pore-solution, are dilute enough and hence wo is negligible. In fact, the high salt
content (viz. of marine soils), which contributes to high wo, influences the physical
and volumetric properties of the soil to a great extent (Noorany, 1984; Barbour
and Fredlund, 1989; Fredlund and Rahardjo, 1993; Feng et al., 2003). Studies
indicate that clays and shales, which are used as liners and covers for waste
containment facilities act as semi-permeable membranes that can generate very
high wo in the subsurface (Fritz and Marine, 1983; Keijzer and Loch, 2001;
Malusis et al., 2003). It is also reported by the researchers that soils having low
porosities and high cation exchange capacity exhibit high wo (Fritz and Marine,
1983), which can also contribute to the strength of expansive plastic clays
(Graham et al., 1992). However, it has also been reported that the increase in soil
strength is more pronounced with an increase in wm than wo (Tang et al., 2002).
Rao and Shivananda (2002) have studied the influence of osmotic suction on the
swelling of salt-amended clays. These studies indicate that wo is one of the key
parameter for understanding the behavior of soils with high salt content, and
migration of contaminants in them. Due to this fact, the SWCC established by
measuring only wm would not be realistic for determining the properties of
unsaturated soils.
It must be noted that most of the methods that are reported in the literature
(Fredlund and Rahardjo, 1993; Lee and Wray, 1995; ASTM D 3152; ASTM D
5298; ASTM D 6836; Sreedeep and Singh, 2005) for measuring soil suction are
capable of yielding wm. On the other hand, w of the soil has been measured using
a transistor or thermocouple psychrometers (Richards and Ogata, 1961), filter
papers (Leong et al., 2002) and a dew point potentiameter (WP4) (Leong et al.,
2003; Thakur et al., 2005a, b). wo can be measured, indirectly, by squeezing the
pore-solution from the soil and determining its electrical conductivity (Manheim,
1966; Krahn and Fredlund, 1972; Brightman et al., 1985; ASTM D 4542). In an
attempt to determine wo, Oster et al. (1969) have demonstrated the usefulness of
psychrometers. However, for conducting these tests, slurried soils are required
and hence the obtained wo corresponds to the saturated state of the soil, only.
But this strategy would not account for the effect of adsorbed ions and diffuse
double layer contributions to wo (Chen, 1975). Also, the magnitude of wo would
depend upon the concentration of the salt present in the soil, which is a function
of the water content, w (Chen, 1975; Sacchi et al., 2001). Hence, it is essential to
determine wo from the independent measurement of the matric suction, wm, and
the total suction, w, of the soil. Such a study would be of immense help for
characterizing the soil for its suitability to construct liners and covers for the
waste containment facilities.
With this in view, an effort was made to develop a methodology that can be
employed for measuring wo of the soil with the help of a pressure membrane
extractor (PME) and a dewpoint potentiameter (WP4), which measure matric and
total suction, respectively. Details of the methodology are presented in this
METHODOLOGY FOR DETERMINATION OF OSMOTIC SUCTION OF SOILS 1471

technical note. The study highlights that wo is dependent on the water content of
the soil.

2. Experimental Investigations
The soil used in this study was collected from the coastal area of Mumbai, India, and is
of marine origin. The chloride (9840 ppm) and sulphite (15 ppm) contents of this soil
were obtained on an extract of 2:1 water to soil ratio (by weight), with the help of an
Indion Easy test kit (Ion Exchange, India Ltd.). The physical and chemical charac-
teristics of the soil were obtained following the ASTM guidelines (ASTM D 422;
ASTM D 854; ASTM D 4318) and X-ray fluorescence studies, respectively. The results
are listed in Tables 1 and 2 for physical and chemical characteristics, respectively. The
cation exchange capacity, CEC, of the soil was determined following the guidelines
provided by EPA SW-846. X-ray diffraction studies on the soil sample indicate that it
constitutes of Anorthite, Quartz and Montmorillonite minerals.

2.1. PREPARATION OF THE SOIL SAMPLE USED FOR SUCTION MEASUREMENT


The soil was thoroughly mixed with the required amount of the distilled water and
stored for three days, in a humidity chamber for maturation. The matured soil was
compacted in a stainless steel mold (38 mm in internal diameter and 76 mm in
height) with the help of a miniature compactor (Kolay and Singh, 2001). The
compaction was achieved in three layers by providing 39 blows to each layer. Table 3
presents details of the molding compaction state (i.e., dry unit weight, cd, and sat-
uration, Sr) of the samples used for PME and WP4 tests. The stainless steel mold
containing the compacted sample was placed in a vacuum desiccator, for about four
days, to ensure complete saturation. Later, the sample was extruded out of the mold
and a 10 mm thick slice was cut out from it for determining its water content, wf, and
Table 1. Physical characteristics of the soil

Soil property Value

Specific gravity 2.64


Particle size characteristics
Sand: Coarse (4.75–2.0 mm) 4
Medium (2.0–0.420 mm) 9
Fine (0.420–0.074 mm) 11
Fines: Silt size (0.074–0.002 mm) 44
Clay size (<0.002 mm) 32
Consistency limits
Liquid limit (%) 61
Plastic limit (%) 37
Plasticity index (%) 24
Soil classification (USCS)a MH
a
(ASTMD 2487).
1472 S. SREEDEEP AND D.N. SINGH

Table 2. Chemical characteristics of the soil

Oxide wt%

SiO2 33.75
Al2O3 10.87
Fe2O3 11.77
TiO2 1.76
CaO 6.41
K2O 0.65
MgO 1.65
P2O5 0.11
SrO 0.02
Na2O 2.02
MnO 0.15
(SiO2+Al2O3+Fe2O3) 56.39
(SiO2+Al2O3) 44.62
CEC (meq/100 g) 4.04

saturation, Srf (ASTM D 2216). It can be noted from the data presented in Table 3
that the compacted samples have attained almost full saturation. Remaining 66 mm
of the sample was preserved for suction measurement, as discussed in the following.

2.2. MEASUREMENT OF THE MATRIC SUCTION OF THE SOIL


Details of the test setup for measuring wm are depicted in Figure 1 (Shah and Singh,
2005). The test setup mainly consists of a pressure membrane extractor (PME),
manufactured by Eijkelkamp, Netherlands, as depicted in Figure 2. As depicted in
the figure, a cellulose acetate membrane, with its properties listed in Table 4, can be
placed over a nylon filter cloth resting on the base plate of the PME. PVC rings
(37 mm in internal diameter, 10 mm in height and 2 mm thick) were used for holding
the soil sample, which was extruded from the stainless steel mold after saturation.
Later, these rings, which contain samples, were placed on the cellulose acetate
membrane. An air compressor unit was used to pressurize the chamber through the
pressure inlet (A), while the chamber pressure was monitored with the help of a
pressure gauge (PG), as depicted in these figures. The water that expels out of the soil
sample, due to the pressurization of the chamber, flows out through drainage valve
(D), which is provided at the base of the chamber. Before starting PME tests, the
membrane and the filter cloth were soaked in distilled water for 48 h for complete

Table 3. Details of the soil samples used in the study

cd(kN/m3) Molding state After saturation


state

w(%) Sr(%) wf(%) Srf(%)

13.8 32.9 95 34.2 99


METHODOLOGY FOR DETERMINATION OF OSMOTIC SUCTION OF SOILS

Figure 1. Details of the setup used for measuring soil suction using the pressure membrane extractor (PME).
1473
1474 S. SREEDEEP AND D.N. SINGH

Figure 2. Details of the pressure membrane extractor chamber.

saturation (ASTM D 3152). As the PME chamber is designed for a maximum


pressure of 1500 kPa, and the AEV of the membrane is 1500 kPa, this setup would
yield suction (wm), which is 61500 kPa, only.
PME chamber was pressurized in seven to eight steps till a maximum pressure of
1500 kPa is achieved. Each pressure increment was maintained for two days (ASTM D
3152) and later it was released. For each pressurization and release step, three rings
were removed from the PME and the gravimetric water content, w, of the sample was
determined (ASTM D 2216). Later, the average of w values was used for establishing
the SWCC by plotting it against the applied pressure, which is equal to wm.

2.3. MEASUREMENT OF THE TOTAL SUCTION OF THE SOIL


A dewpoint potentiameter, WP4, was employed to measure w of the saturated
compacted soil sample extruded from the stainless steel mold. The WP4 works on the
principle of chilled-mirror technique (Decagon, 2002; ASTM D 6836; Leong et al.,
2003; Thakur et al. 2005a). The WP4 consists of a sealed block chamber in which the
soil sample can be placed in a 15 cc polyurethane sampling cup. The block chamber
consists of a mirror; an optical sensor which is used to detect the dew formation on
the mirror; a temperature sensor which measures the dew point temperature of the
air; a thermopile to measure the temperature of the sample; and a fan, which speeds
up the equilibration of the sample with the chamber environment (Decagon, 2002;
Thakur et al., 2005b). With the help of the built in software, w of the soil sample, in
MPa and pF, gets displayed on the LCD panel along with the temperature of the
sample. For proper functioning of the WP4, its calibration was done by using
standard 0.5 M KCl (wo=2.19±0.1 MPa) solution (Decagon, 2002).

2.4. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE SOIL–WATER CHARACTERISTIC CURVE


The fitting function proposed by Fredlund and Xing (1994), and represented by
Equation (1), was used to obtain the SWCC corresponding to wm and w, measured
using PME and WP4, respectively. This fitting function is widely used in the liter-
ature and has been formulated based on the more realistic pore size distribution of
METHODOLOGY FOR DETERMINATION OF OSMOTIC SUCTION OF SOILS 1475

the soil (Fredlund and Xing, 1994; Miller et al., 2002; Singh and Kuriyan, 2002;
Sreedeep and Singh, 2005).
2 h i3
ln 1 þ hwr h h  nf ii 1
4 5 w mf
wðwÞ ¼ wS 1  h i  In expð1Þ þ ð1Þ
ln 1 þ 10hr
6 af

where w(w) is the gravimetric water content at any suction, w, wS is the gravimetric
water content at saturation; af, and nf are fitting parameters primarily dependent on
the air entry value AEV, which is the suction at which air starts entering into the
largest pores in the soil; mf is the fitting parameter that depends on the residual water
content wr, which is the water content below which there is no appreciable change in
w, hr is the suction (in kPa) corresponding to the wr.

3. Results and Discussion


The PME and WP4 results were used for establishing the SWCC by using the
Fredlund and Xing fit (Equation (1)), as depicted in Figure 3. Details of the SWCC
fitting parameters are listed in Table 5. As expected, it can be observed from Fig-
ure 3 that w is quite high as compared to wm, even at very high water contents (where
wm0). This can be attributed to wo, which generates due to the presence of solutes,
predominantly chlorides in the pore-solution of the soil.

Figure 3. Comparison of SWCCs obtained from WP4 and PME.


1476 S. SREEDEEP AND D.N. SINGH

Table 4. Properties of the cellulose acetate membrane

Thickness (lm) Max. pore sizea (lm) AEVa (kPa) Porosity

57.5 <0.14 1500 0.60


a
Data supplied by the manufacturer.

Table 5. SWCC fitting parameters for WP4 and PME results

Parameter WP4 PME

af (kPa) 2500 238.5


nf 2.640 2.210
mf 0.990 0.183
hr (kPa) 925000 1785
R2 0.99 0.981
wr 0.05 0.027
AEV (kPa) 1489 159

Another important observation that can be derived from the figure is that the
difference in wm and w, which is equal to wo, does not remain constant for the entire
range of w. To elaborate this, wo is plotted as a function of w as depicted in Figure 4.
It can be observed that the value of wo is high for lower w. Such a trend could be
attributed to the increase in wo due to the higher concentration of solutes at lower w.

Figure 4 Variation of the osmotic suction with water content.


METHODOLOGY FOR DETERMINATION OF OSMOTIC SUCTION OF SOILS 1477

This indicates that wo, and hence w, of the soil varies due to the soil–water–salt
interaction. This observation also highlights the need to reassess the normal practice
of determining wo of the soil by measuring w corresponding to the saturated extract
(Krahn and Fredlund, 1972). It can also be observed that for lower w (<0.15) there
is a negligible difference between w and wm. This may be attributed to a very high
value of wm corresponding to lower w. However, it can be noted that wo does not
increase as appreciably with w, as compared to wm. These trends are consistent with
those reported in the literature (Fredlund and Rahardjo, 1993; ASTM D 6836).
Further, it can be noted from the data presented in Table 5 that in general, values
of the SWCC fit parameters corresponding to WP4 results are higher than those for
the PME results. In particular, AEV obtained from the WP4 is quite high than that
obtained from the PME. This clearly indicates the importance of wo on the prop-
erties of the unsaturated soil.

4. Concluding Remarks
The utility of PME and WP4 for determining osmotic suction, which can be
attributed to the presence of salts in the soil, has been demonstrated in this technical
note. The study indicates that the difference between the total and the matric suc-
tions, which is equal to the osmotic suction, depends strongly on the water content of
the soil. Hence, osmotic suction of the soil at lower water content may be quite
different from that obtained using the pore-solution extraction method. It must also
be noted that the present methodology would account for the osmotic suction
contribution due to the presence of salts in the soil. The study also brings out the fact
that osmotic suction influences the unsaturated soil properties.

References
ASTM D 2216. (1994) Laboratory determination of water (moisture) content of soil and rock
by mass, Annual book of ASTM standards, 4.08, ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D 2487. (1994) Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes (Unified Soil
Classification System), Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 04.08, ASTM International,
West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D 3152. (2000) Standard test method for capillary-moisture relationships for fine
textured soils by pressure-membrane apparatus, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 04.08,
ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D 422. (1994) Standard test method for particle size analysis of soils, Annual Book of
ASTM Standards, 4.08, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D 4318-93. (1994) Standard test method for liquid limit, plastic limit and plasticity
index of soils, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 04.08, ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D 4542-95. (2001) Standard test method for pore water extraction and determination
of the soluble salt content of soils by refractometer, Annual Book of ASTM Standards,
04.08, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
1478 S. SREEDEEP AND D.N. SINGH

ASTM D 5298-94. (1994) Standard test method for measurement of soil potential (suction)
using filter paper, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 04.08, ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D 6836-02. (2003) Test methods for determination of the soil water characteristic curve
for desorption using a hanging column, pressure extractor, chilled mirror hygrometer,
and/or centrifuge, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 04.08, ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM D 854. (1994) Standard test method for specific gravity of soils, Annual Book of
ASTM Standards, 4.08, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
Barbour, S.L. and Fredlund, D.G. (1989) Mechanisms of osmotic flow and volume change in
clay soils, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 26, 551–562.
Brightman, M.A., Bath, A.H., Cave, M.R. and Darling, W.G. (1985) Pore fluids from the
argillaceous rocks of the Harwell region, BGS Rep. FLPU 85-6.
Chen, F.H. (1975), Foundations on Expansive Soils, Elsevier Scientific Pub., Amsterdam.
Decagon Services Ltd. (2002) WP4 User’s Manual, Decagon services Inc., USA.
EPA SW-846. Test method for cation exchange capacity of the soils ‘CEC’, www.epa.gov/
epaoswer/hazwaste/test/sw846.htm.
Feng, G.L., Meiri, A. and Letey, J. (2003) Evaluation of a model for irrigation management
under saline conditions: I. Effects on plant growth, Soil Science Society of America Journal,
67, 71–76.
Fredlund, D.G. and Rahardjo, H. (1993), Soil Mechanics for Unsaturated Soils, John Wiley
and Sons, Inc., New York.
Fredlund, D.G. and Xing, A. (1994) Equations for the soil–water characteristic curve,
Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 31(3), 521–532.
Fritz, S.J. and Marine, I.W. (1983) Experimental support for a predictive osmotic model of
clay membranes, Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 47, 1515–1522.
Graham, J., Oswell, J.M. and Gray, M.N. (1992) The effective stress concept in saturated
active clays, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 29, 1033–1043.
Hillel, D. (1998), Environmental Soil Physics, Academic Press, San Diego, USA.
Keijzer, Th.J.S., Loch, J.P.G. (2001) Chemical osmosis in compacted dredging sludge, Soil
Science Society of America Journal, 65, 1045–1055.
Kolay, P.K. and Singh, D.N. (2001) Effect of zeolitization on compaction, consolidation and
permeation characteristics of a lagoon ash, Journal of Testing and Evaluation, ASTM,
28(6), 425–430.
Krahn, J. and Fredlund, D.G. (1972) On total, matric and osmotic suction, Soil Science,
114(5), 339–348.
Lee, H.C. and Wray, W.K. (1995) Techniques to evaluate soil suction – a vital unsaturated soil
variable, Proceedings of the first international conference on unsaturated soils, Paris, E.E.
Alonso and P. Delage, Vol. 2, pp. 615–621.
Leong, E.C., He, L. and Rahardjo, H. (2002) Factors affecting the filter paper method for total
and matric suction measurements, Geotechnical Testing Journal, ASTM, 25(3), 321–332.
Leong, E.C., Tripathy, S. and Rahardjo, H. (2003) Total suction measurement of unsaturated
soils with a device using the chilled-mirror dew-point technique, Geotechnique, 53(2), 173–
182.
Malusis, M.A., Shackelford, C.D. and Olsen, H.W. (2003) Flow and transport through clay
membrane barriers, Engineering Geology, 70, 235–248.
Manheim, F.T. (1966) A hydraulic squeezer for obtaining interstitial waters from consolidated
and unconsolidated sediments, Geological Survey Professional Papers U.S., 550-C, 256–
261.
METHODOLOGY FOR DETERMINATION OF OSMOTIC SUCTION OF SOILS 1479

Miller, C.J., Yesiller, N., Yaldo, K. and Merayyan, S. (2002) Impact of soil type and com-
paction conditions on soil water characteristic, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenviron-
mental Engineering, ASCE, 128(9), 733–742.
Noorany, I. (1984) Phase relations in marine soils, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE,
110(4), 539–543.
Oster, J.D., Rawlins, S.L. and Ingvalson, R.D. (1969) Independent measurement of matric
and osmotic potential of soil water, Soil Science Society of America Proceedings, 33, 188–
191.
Rao, S.M. and Shivananda, P. (2002) Role of osmotic suction in swelling of saltamended
clays, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 42, 1–9.
Richards, L.A. and Ogata, G. (1961) Psychrometric measurements of soil samples equilibrated
on pressure membranes, Soil Science Society of America Proceedings, 25, 456–459.
Sacchi, E., Michelot, J-L., Pitsch, H., Lalieux, P. and Aranyossy, J-F. (2001) Extraction of
water and solutes from argillaceous rocks for geochemical characterisation: Methods,
processes, and current understanding, Hydrogeology Journal, 9, 17–33.
Shah, P.H. and Singh, D.N. (2005) Generalized Archie’s law for estimation of soil electrical
conductivity, Journal of ASTM International, 2(5), 10.1520/JAI13087.
Singh, D.N. and Kuriyan, S.J. (2002) Estimation of hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated
soils using a geotechnical centrifuge, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 39(3), 684–694.
Singh, D.N., Kuriyan, S.J. and Madhuri, V. (2001) Application of a geotechnical centrifuge
for estimation of unsaturated soil hydraulic conductivity, Journal of Testing and Evaluation,
ASTM, 29(6), 556–562.
Sreedeep, S. and Singh, D.N. (2003) Laboratory measurement of soil suction, Indian
Geotechnical Journal, 33(3), 279–290.
Sreedeep, S. and Singh, D.N. (2005) A study to investigate influence of soil properties on its
suction, Journal of Testing and Evaluation, ASTM, 33(1), 579–584.
Tang, G.X., Graham, J., Blatz, J., Gray, M. and Rajapakse, R.K.N.D. (2002) Suctions,
stresses and strengths in unsaturated sand-bentonite, Engineering Geology, 64, 147–156.
Thakur, V.K.S., Sreedeep, S. and Singh, D.N. (2005a) Laboratory Investigations on
Extremely high Suction Measurements for Fine-Grained Soils, Geotechnical and Geological
Engineering, 24(3), 565–578.
Thakur, V.K.S., Sreedeep, S. and Singh, D.N. (2005b) Parameters affecting soil–water
characteristic curves of fine-grained soils, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering, ASCE, 131(4), 521–524.

Вам также может понравиться