Advertisement

A Comparative Study of Soil Suction Measurement Using Two Different High-Range Psychrometers

  • Rafaela Cardoso
  • Enrique Romero
  • Analice Lima
  • Alessio Ferrari
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Physics book series (SPPHY, volume 112)

Summary

An extensive experimental study was performed to compare the measurement capabilities within different ranges of two total suction measurement equipment: SMI transistor psychrometers and a chilled-mirror dew-point psychrometer (WP4 Dewpoint PotentiaMeter). The equipment were used in a systematic way to determine the relative humidity of the environment surrounding different compacted clayey soils along drying paths and covering a wide total suction range (0.1 to 70 MPa). The equipment description and the calibration protocols followed are presented, as well as suggestions regarding the improvement of their performance. The water retention curves of two different compacted clayey soils are presented and commented by taking into account the corrections proposed for the readings. A possible explanation for differences in the measurements observed between both instruments in the high suction range is presented in terms of the hydraulic paths undergone by the soils during the measurement period.

Key Words

total suction transistor psychrometer chilled-mirror dew-point psychrometer calibration water retention curve 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Boso M, Romero E, Tarantino A (2004) The use of different measurement techniques to determine water retention curves. In: T. Schanz (ed) 93 Springer Proceedings in Physics. Unsaturated Soils: Experimental Studies. Springer, Berlin 1:169–181Google Scholar
  2. Fredlund DG, Rahardjo H (1993) Soil Mechanics for Unsaturated Soils. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Decagon Devices, Inc. (2003) WP4 Water Dewpoint Potentiometer. Operator’s Manual, Version 2.2. Decagon Devices, Inc., Pullman (www.decagon.com)Google Scholar
  4. Dimos A (1991) Measurement of soil suction using transistor psycrometer. Internal Report IR/91–3, Special Research Section, Materials Technology Department, Vic RoadsGoogle Scholar
  5. Horvath AL (1985) Handbook of aqueous electrolyte solutions: physical properties, estimation and correlation methods. Ellis Horword Limited, John Wiley & Sons New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Leong E-C, Tripathy S, Rahardjo H (2003) Total suction measurement of unsaturated soils with a device using the chilled-mirror dew-point technique, Géotechnique 53(2):173–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Loiseau C (2001) Transferts d’eau et couplages hydromécaniques dans les barriers ouvragées. PhD thesis, École Nationale des Ponts et Chaussées, ParisGoogle Scholar
  8. Mata C, Romero E, Ledesma A (2002) Hydro-chemical effects on water retention in bentonite-sand mixtures. In: Jucá JFT, de Campos TMP, Marinho FAM (eds) Proc 3rd Int Conf on Unsaturated Soils, Recife, Brazil. A.A. Balkema Lisse, The Netherlands 1:283–288Google Scholar
  9. OIML R 121 (1996) Organisation Internationale de Métrologie Légale. International Recommendation. The scale of relative humidity of air certified against saturated salt solutions. Grande Imprimerie de Troyes, Troyes, FranceGoogle Scholar
  10. Romero E (2001) Controlled-suction techniques. In: Gehling WY, Schnaid F (eds) 4th National Brazilian Symposium on Unsaturated Soils. ABMS, Brazil 535–542Google Scholar
  11. Romero E, Vaunat J (2000) Retention curves of deformable clays. Experimental Evidence and Theoretical Approaches in Unsaturated Soils. In: Tarantino A, Mancuso C (eds) Proc Int Workshop on Unsaturated Soils, Trento, Italy. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam 91–108Google Scholar
  12. Tang A-M, Cui Y-J (2005) Controlling suction by the vapour equilibrium technique at different temperatures and its application in determining the water retention properties of MX80 clay, Can Geot J 42:287–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Thakur VKS, Singh DN (2005) Swelling and suction in clay minerals. Advanced Experimental Unsaturated Soil Mechanics. In: Tarantino A, Romero E, Cui YJ (eds) Proc Int Symp (Experus 2005), Trento, Italy. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam 27–31Google Scholar
  14. Truong HVP, Holden JC (1995) Soil Suction Measurement with Transistor Psychrometer. In: Alonso EE, Delage P (eds) Proc 1st Int Conf on Unsaturated Soils (UNSAT 95), Paris. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam 2:659–665Google Scholar
  15. van Genuchten MTh (1980) A closed-form equation for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils, Soil Sci Soc Am J, 49(2):143–159Google Scholar
  16. Woodburn JA, Holden JC, Peter P (1993) In: Houston SL, Wray WK (eds) Unsaturated Soils. Geotechnical Special Publication No. 39. ASCE, New York 91–102Google Scholar
  17. Woodburn JA, Lucas B (1995) New Approaches to the Laboratory and Field Measurement of Soil Suction. In: Alonso EE, Delage P (eds) Proc 1st Int Conf on Unsaturated Soils (UNSAT 95), Paris. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam 2:667–671Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rafaela Cardoso
    • 1
  • Enrique Romero
    • 2
  • Analice Lima
    • 3
  • Alessio Ferrari
    • 4
  1. 1.Instituto Superior TécnicoPortugal
  2. 2.Universitat Politècnica de CatalunyaSpain
  3. 3.Universitat Politècnica de CatalunyaSpain
  4. 4.Universitá degli Studi di PalermoItaly

Personalised recommendations