Problem Solution Manual for Unsaturated Soil Mechanics by

Ning Lu and William J. Likos, Wiley, 2004

This manual is prepared by the following individuals:

Phillip J. Wolfram, Alexandra Wayllace, William J. Likos1 , and Ning Lu1

2007
1 All correspondences should be addressed to likosw@missouri.edu or ninglu@mines.edu
Contents

1 State of Usaturated Soil 1

2 Material Variables 6

3 Interfacial Equilibrium 11

4 Capillarity 20

5 State of Stress 28

6 Shear Strength 36

7 Suction and Earth Pressure Profiles 52

8 Steady Flows 66

9 Transient Flows 71

10 Suction Measurement 80

11 Hydraulic Conductivity Measurement 87

12 Suction and Hydraulic Conductivity Models 90

i
Acknowledgments
This Solution Manual was not possible without the generous help of Silvia Simoni, Adam Prochaska,
and Tom Bonnie. These individuals were participants in the Unsaturated Soil Mechanics course
at the Colorado School of Mines and their fine homeworks served as an initial starting points for
chapters 5, 6, 7, 10, and 11.

ii
Chapter 1

State of Usaturated Soil

1.1 Where are the regions in the U.S. where unsaturated soils are likely encountered to significant
depth below the ground surface?
Unsaturated soils are likely encountered to significant depth below the ground surface in large
portions of the United States in the arid or semiarid regions (Figure 1.8)
1.2 What kind of climatic conditions tent to lead to the formation of a thick unsaturated zone?
Precipitation, evaporation, and evapotranspiration are factors that contribute to the depth
and extent of the unsaturated zone. A thick unsaturated zone generally occurs in regions
where potential evaporation outweighs annual precipitation by a factor ranging between 2
and 20 within 40 degree north of equator.
1.3 What is the fundamental difference between unsaturated soils and saturated soils in terms of
pore water pressure?
Pore water pressure in a saturated soil is generally compressive and isotropic, in contrast
to unsaturated soils where pore water pressure is generally, but not necessarily, tensile (p.
20-21).

1.4 Describe and illustrate the Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion.

The Mohr Coulomb criterion delineates a failure envelope for a material defining critical states
of stresses. It is described in terms of (c) and internal friction angle (f ). It is described in
terms of states of cohesion (c0 ) and internal friction angle(0 ) to dictate a failure shear stress
at a given normal effective stress (n0 ) in f = c0 + n0 tan 0 . Graphically, the Mohr-Coulomb
failure criterion plots as a straight line on the effective normal and shear stress graph as
shown in S1.1. It is also important to note that the Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion is a linear
approximation and therefore valid only near the range of values from which it was derived.

1
Figure S1.1: Mohr-Coulomb Failure Criterion

2
 1.5 When the state of stress (i.e., Mohr circle) in a soil reaches the Mohr-Coulomb criterion,
what is the state of stress called?
Failure state.
1.6 Give three examples of unsaturated soil mechanics problems in geotechnical engineering.
Transient and steady seepage in unsaturated embankment dams, consolidation and settlement
of unsaturated soils, bearing capacity for shallow foundations under moisture loading, slope
stability, and land sliding.
1.7 For a given unsaturated soil under either a dry or wet condition, which one has a higher
suction?
The dry soil has a higher suction (p. 39, 42-43).
1.8 What are state variables, material variables, and constitutive laws?
State variables are those variables that completely describe the state of the system for the
given phenomenon. Material variables generally vary with state variables and describe the
physical characteristics of the material. These variables are intrinsic material properties. Con-
stitutive laws describe the governing physical principles which demonstrate interrelationships
between or among state variables and material variables. Constitutive laws are used as the
mathematical connection between state and material variables for the purpose of prediction
and explanation of phenomena (p. 26-28).
1.9 What are the principal differences between saturated and unsaturated soil profiles of pore water
pressure, total stress, and effective stress?
Pore water Pressure Profiles- Generally vary linearly with depth, increasing hydrostatically
below the water table (saturated soils), and decreasing hydrostatically above the water table
(unsaturated soils).
Total Stress Profiles- For unsaturated soils, total stress decreases due to change in the self-
weight when the material is dewatered. Therefore, the total stress profile for a saturated soil
extends to a greater magnitude than the profile for the same soil under unsaturated conditions.
Effective Stress Profiles- The effective stress for a saturated soil at ground surface is 0. It is
also important to note that effective stresses for an unsaturated soil are greater than for a
saturated soil due to the tensile pore water pressure in the unsaturated soil (p. 22-23). Figures
1.12 and 1.13 graphically demonstrate these concepts. For both saturated and unsaturated
conditions, horizontal stresses are dependent upon vertical stresses according to formula 1.5a
(p. 23).
1.10 According to Bishops effective stress concept, which state, saturated or unsaturated, has a
higher effective stress? Why?
According to Bishops effective stress concept, unsaturated conditions have higher effective
stress since pore water pressures are negative, leading to a greater effective stress. This is
demonstrated by examining the equation: 0 = ( ua ) + (ua uw ) where matric suction
(ua uw ) is positive.
1.11 What is the shape of the pore water pressure profile under hydrostatic conditions in saturated
and unsaturated states, respectively?

3
 The shape of the pore pressure profile under the hydrostatic condition for saturated and
unsaturated states is linear, as shown in Figure S1.2 where z = 0 is the ground surface:

Figure S1.2: Comparison of saturated and unsaturated hydrostatic soil profiles

1.12 If an unsaturated soil has a water potential of 1000 J/kg, what is the equivalent soil suction
value? If the soil at the air dry condition has a matric suction of 100 M P a, what is the soil
water potential in joules per kilogram?
For 1000 J/kg potential the equivalent soil suction is 1000 kP a, since 100 J/kg = 100 kP a.
Soil with a matric suction of 100 M P a has a soil water potential of 100, 000 J/kg since
0.1 M P a = 100 J/kg (p. 40).
1.13 Three soils- clay, silt, and sand- are all equilibrated at the same matric suction, which soil
has the highest water content and why?
If clay, silt, and sand are all equilibrated at the same matric suction, then clay has the highest
water content as shown on Figure 1.20 (p. 42). Clay has the highest water content at a given
matric suction due its charged surfaces and very high specific surface area as (p. 42) Sand
and silt have lower specific surface areas than clay.
1.14 Describe the major physical and physicochemical mechanisms responsible for soil suction.
Soil suction is caused by the physical and physicochemical mechanisms that decrease the po-
tential of the pore water relative to a reference potential of free water. These mechanisms
include capillary effects, short-range adsorption effects composed of particle-pore water inter-
action, and osmotic effects. Capillary effects are caused by curvature of the air-water interface.
Short-range adsorption effects are composed of electrical double layer and van der Waals force
field interactions at the solid-liquid interface. Osmotic effects are the result of dissolved solute
in the pore water. With the same chemical concentration, osmotic pressure of pure solution

4
could be different with that of pore water as interaction between solute and solid surface of
soil particles could occur. Matric suction is generally used to group the aggregate of capillary
and short-range adsorption effects. Osmotic suction refers to the aggregate of osmotic effects
(p. 34-35).

5
Chapter 2

Material Variables

2.1 What are the state variables that control the density of air? What is the average air density
at your location?
Temperature, pressure, and relative humidity are state variables that control the density of air
as evidenced by the equation below. The average air density for Golden, CO during a typical
winter, assuming a 10% relative humidity, an average temperature of 0 and an average
pressure of 85 kPa is as follows:
Moist air density is estimated using Tables 2.8 and 2.9.

ud d d T 273.2 v RH
a,moist = 0.611 1 exp 17.27
RT v T 36 RT
kg
The first part of the expression is estimated as 1.084 m3 (from Table 2.8), and the second part

of the expression can be estimated as 0.000 (from Table 2.9), resulting in

kg
a,moist = 1.084
m3

2.2 What is the physical meaning of relative humidity?

Relative humidity (RH) is the ratio of absolute humidity in equilibrium with any solution to
the absolute humidity in equilibrium with free water at the same temperature. RH is also
equivalent to the ratio of vapor pressure in equilibrium with a given solution and the saturated
vapor pressure in equilibrium with free water.
2.3 At 25 and 101.3 kPa (1 atm), what is the ratio of the viscosity of water to the viscosity
of air? The viscosity of which phase, air or water, is more sensitive to temperature changes
between 0 and 100 ?
4
8.7710 kg/ms
w /a = 1.84510 5 kg/ms = 47.53 50. Water is more sensitive to viscocity changes than

air, changing by a magnitude of about 10, between 0 and 100 .

2.4 Temperature varies between 15 in the night and 30 in the afternoon at a certain location.
If the ambient vapor pressure remains constant at 1.6 kPa, what is the range of the relative

6
 humidity variation? If the vapor pressure remains unchanged, at what temperature will dew
formation occur?
uv
RH = uv,sat .With uv constant, RH depends on the saturated vapor pressure which is related

to change in temperature according to the following equation: uv,sat = 0.611 exp 17.27 T T273.2
36 .
At 15 , uv,sat = 1.70 kPa. At 30 , uv,sat = 4.24 kPa. With uv = 1.6 kPa, RH ranges from
93.8 % to 37.7 %. If the vapor pressure remains unchanged, dew formation will occur when
uv,sat = uv = 1.6 kPa. This condition is met when T = 287.2 K, or 14.0 . Dew formation
will therefore occur at 14.0 .
2.5 If a saturated swelling soil has a specific gravity of 2.7 and gravimetric water content of 300
%, what is the volumetric water content?

1 1
= 1 = 1 = 0.89 = 89%
1+ Gs w 1+ 2.7(3)

2.6 A closed room is filled with humid air. If the temperature rises significantly, does the relative
humidity increase or decrease?
In a closed room filled with humid air, a significant temperature rise will result in a decrease
of relative humidity (RH) since RH is inversely proportional to temperature (by Equations
2.11 and 2.12).
2.7 Can the vapor pressure of soil gas be greater than the saturation pressure at the same temper-
ature and pressure? Why or why not?
No, the vapor pressure of soil gas cannot be greater than saturation pressure at the same tem-
perature and pressure because the saturation pressure is the maximum pressure corresponding
to a given equilibrium state (state of same temperature and pressure).

2.8 Can volumetric water content be greater than 100% in unsaturated soil?
Volumetric water content cannot be greater than 100 % in unsaturated soil as mathematically
evidenced by the following definition:
Vw Vw
= =
Vt Vw + Vs + Va

where = volumetric water content, Vw = volume of water, Vs = volume of solids, and Va =

volume of air.
2.9 Is degree of saturation a mass-based or volume-based quantity?
Degree of saturation (S) is a volume-based quantity since it is defined as:

Vw
S=
Vv
where Vw = volume of water, and Vv = volume of voids.

7
2.10 When the temperature of unsaturated soil increases, does the surface tension at the air-water
interface increase or decrease?
When the temperature of unsaturated soil increases, the surface tension at the air-water
interface decreases, as shown in Figure 2.12 and Table 2.10 (Lu, 2004).
2.11 What is the density of dry air if the prevailing temperature and pressure are 25 and 95
kPa, respectively? What is the relative change in dry-air density if the tempreature rises to
40 and the air pressure remains unchanged? If the temperature is kept at a constant value
of 25 , how much pressure change is required to cause the dry-air density to decrease by
15% compared to 95 kPa?
The density of dry air at T = 25 and P = 95 kPa is

ud d (95 kPa)(28.966 103 kg/mol)

d = = = 1.110 kg/m3
RT (8.314 N m/mol K)(298.2 K)

If the temperature rises to 40 and the air pressure remains unchanged, the air density is

(95 kPa)(28.966 103 kg/mol)

d = = 1.057 kg/m3
(8.314 N m/mol K)(313.2 K)

Relative change of 0.053 kg/m3 or a 4.8 % decrease.

If temperature is kept constant at 25 , the pressure change required to cause the dry-air
density to decrease by 15 % compared to 95 kPa (d = 0.85 1.110 kg/m3 = 0.944 kg/m3 ) is
computed as follows:

(d )(RT )
ud = =
d
(0.944 kg/m3 )((8.314 N m/mol K)(298.2 K))
= 80.76 kPa
28.966 103 kg/mol

This value corresponds to a decrease in pressure of 14.24 kPa.

2.12 Estimate the viscosity of air and water at a temperature of 50 . Given a mean pore size for
a sandy soil as 103 m, and a specific discharge for both air and water as 102 m/s, identify
the flow regimes for the air and water, respectively.
Estimates for the viscosity of air and water at a temperature of 50 , are as follows:
a = 1.96 105 kg/(m s) w = 5.32 104 kg/(m s)
Assume that density of water is 1000 kg/m3 and the density of air is 1 kg/m3 . Given a mean
pore size for a sandy soil as 103 m, and a specific discharge, q, for both air and water as
102 m/s, the Reyonds number for air and water are:

vd (1 kg/m3 )(102 m/s)(103 m)

Rea = = = 0.51 < 1
1.96 105 kg/(m s)

8
 vd (1000 kg/m3 )(102 m/s)(103 m)
Rew = = = 18.8 < 100
5.32 104 kg/(m s)

These Reynolds numbers indicate that the flow regime for air is linear and laminar since the
value is less than one. The Reynolds number between 1 and 100 for water indicates that
although the flow regime for water is laminar, it is not linear.

2.13 The relative humidity at equilibrium in an unsaturated soil is measured to be 80% at 22 . (a)
What is the vapor pressure in the soil? (b) What is the vapor density of the soil? (c) What is
the dew-point temperature if the vapor density is maintained constant but the temperature drops
during the night? (d) What is the absolute humidity if temperature in the soil is maintained
constant but vaporization is allowed to occur? (e) What is the free energy per unit mass of
the pore water?
Relative humidity at equilibrium in an unsaturated soil is measured to be 80 % at 22 .
Assume ambient pressure is 101.3 kPa so that Table 2.6 can be used.
(a) The vapor pressure in the soil, uv , is 2.114 kPa (80 % of the value from Table 2.6).
(b) The vapor density of the soil, v , is 15.507 g/m3 (80 % of the value from Table 2.6).
(c) If the vapor density is maintained constant but the temperature drops during the night,
the dew-point temperature is approximately 18.3 (as determined by finding the abso-
lute humidity for v = 15.507 g/m3 , or alternatively by equation 2.14).
(d) If temperature in the soil is maintained constant but vaporization is allowed to occur,
the absolute humidity is 19.384 g/m3 (from Table 2.6).
(e) The free energy per unit mass of the pore water is:

RT (8.314 N m/mol K)(295.2 K)

E= ln(RH) = ln(0.80)
w 18 kg/kmol

E = 30.43 kJ/kg
2.14 At a prevailing temperature of 25 and a pressure of 95 kPa, how much does the density of
air change from a completely dry state to a 100% relative humidity state?
From Table 2.8 and Table 2.9:

RH( %) a (kg/m3 )
0 1.110
100 1.096
1.110 kg/m3 0.014 kg/m3 = 1.096 kg/m3 .

2.15 If the ambient air pressure is 101.3 kPa and the temperature is 20 , what is the pressure
inside the water meniscus for a capillary tube with diameter of 0.001 mm? If the temperature
increases to 50 , what is the pressure inside the meniscus?

2Ts
ua uw =
R

9
 where ua = air pressure, uw = pressure inside the water meniscus, Ts = the surface tension
between the water-air interface, and R = radius of curvature of the capillary meniscus.

From Table 2.10, Ts = 72.75 mN/m for 20 .

2Ts 2 72.75 mN/m

uw = ua = 101.3 kPa = 189.7 kPa
R 0.0005 mm
The pressure inside the water meniscus is -189.7 kPa. If temperature increases to 50 , Ts =
67.91 mN/m.

2Ts 2 67.91 mN/m

uw = ua = 101.3 kPa = 170.3 kPa
R 0.0005 mm
At the increased temperature of 50 , the pressure inside the water meniscus is -170.3 kPa.
It is important to note that pressure within the water meniscus decreases in magnitude with
increasing temperature
2.16 If a tensiometer were used to measure matric suction of unsaturated soil at an elevation
of 500 m above sea level, what would be the approximate maximum possible reading of the
tensiometer?
If a tensiometer were used to measure matric suction of unsaturated soil at an elevation of
500 m above sea level, the approximate maximum possible reading of the tensiometer would
be approximately 91 kPa (from Figure 2.17).

10
Chapter 3

Interfacial Equilibrium

3.1 A liter of water at 25 can dissolve 0.0283 L of oxygen when the pressure of oxygen in
equilibrium with the solution is 1 atm. Derive the Henrys law constant for oxygen in water
from this information.

Mi /i
= KHi uai
Vl
Since there are 22.4 L per each mole of an ideal gas like oxygen:
1 mol
(0.0283 L) = 1.2634 103 mol O2 .
22.4 L

Notice that Mi /i = moles of gas. Therefore, Mi /i = 1.2634 103 mol. Solving equa-
tion 3.1 for KHi :

Mi /i 1.2634 103 mol O2

= KHi KHi =
Vl ui (1 L)(1 atm)(1.01325 bar / atm)
KHi = 1.247 103 M/bar

3.2 What is the mass coefficient of solubility of air at a temperature of 20 and a total air
pressure of 1 atm if the volumetric coefficient of solubility of air, hair , is 0.01708?
At a temperature of 20 and a total air pressure of 1 atm (101.3 kPa), the density of air is
air = 1.2 kg/m3 and the density of water is w = 998 kg/m3 .

air 1.2 kg/m3

Hai = hair = 0.01708 = 2.05 105
w 998 kg/m3
3.3 If the air pressure changes to 10 bars in the previous problem, what is the mass coefficient of
solubility?
If the air pressure changes to 10 bars (1 MPa) in the previous problem, the density of air is

ua a (106 N/m2 )(29 103 kg/mol)

air = = = 11.71 kg/m3
RT (8.314 N m/mol K)(298 K)

11
 The density of water is approximately the same as before, water = 998 kg/m3 .

air 11.71 kg/m3

Hai = hair = 0.01708 = 2.00 104
w 998 kg/m3
3.4 Two different sizes of capillary tubes are in the divided container shown in Fig. 3.25 (r1 =
106 m and r2 = 104 m). Each side has reached equilibrium between the air in the container
and the pore water. Assume the total mass of water vapor in each side is much less than the
amount of water in the capillary tubes. Also assume that the initial water levels in the tubes
are very low compared to the overall lengths of the tubes. Describe the equilibrium position(s)
of the water levels in the tubes when the valve is opened.
Since r1 < r2 , and vapor pressure is directly proportional to r, uv1 < uv2 , the left side of the
tank has a lower vapor pressure than the right. After opening the valve, the vapor pressures
on each side of the tank equalize, increasing the relative humidity on the left side of the tank
with reference to the initial state. Similarly, the relative humidity of the right side of the tank
is decreased with respect to the initial equilibrium state.
Since the relative humidity on the right side of tank has decreased, the water content of the
capillary tube decreases due to capillary evaporation resulting in a decreasing water level in
these tubes. Conversely, the tubes in the left side of the tank experience an increased relative
humidity, which results in capillary condensation, increasing the water level in the tubes. The
water level of the tubes in the left side of the container will increase and the water level in the
tubes in the right side of the container will decrease. Assuming that the contact angle does
not change as water content changes, the tubes on the right side of the tank will completely
evaporate and the tubes on the left side of the tank will fill up to reflect the change in water
volume on the right.
3.5 Calculate the hydrostatic pressure of water at 28 in spherical raindrops with (a) 5 mm
diameter and (b) 0.2 mm diameter.
The surface tension between air and water is 71.4 mN/m, as determined from interpolation of
table 2.10 (Lu, 76). Assuming an ambient air pressure of 101.3 kPa, the hydrostatic pressure
of spherical raindrops at 28 is as follows for diameters of 5 mm and 0.2 mm.
2Ts 2Ts
ua uw = = uw = ua
R R
For a diameter of 5 mm:

2(71.4 mN/m)
uw = 101.3 kP a = 101.3 kP a + .057 kP a = 101.36 kP a
2.5 mm
For a diameter of 0.2 mm:

2(71.4 mN/m)
uw = 101.3 kP a = 101.3kP a + 1.428kP a = 102.73 kP a
0.1 mm
3.6 For a bundle of capillary tubes of various sizes ranging between 107 and 104 m in radii,
assume the contact angle is zero, T= 25 , and answer the following: (a) What is the range
of matric suction? (b) What is the range of pore water pressure? (c) What is the range of
vapor pressure? (d)What is the range of relative humidity?
The air-water surface tension, Ts , is 71.79 mN/m.

12
 (a) The matric suction, ua uw for a given radius is given as
2Ts cos
ua uw =
r
For r = 104 m:
2(71.79 mN/m) cos(0)
ua uw = = 1.436 kP a
104 m
For r = 107 m:
2(71.79 mN/m) cos(0)
ua uw = = 1.436 M P a
107 m
Therefore, matric suction ranges from 1.44 kP a to 1.44 M P a
(b) Assume an air pressure of 101.3 kP a.
uw = ua (ua uw ).
Therefore, the range for pore water pressure is 99.86 kP a to 1.33 M P a.

(c) The vapor pressure can be estimated as uv = exp 2Ts rRT w cos
uv0 . At T = 25 ,
uv0 = 3.167 kP a.
For r = 104 m:

2(71.79 mN/m)(0.018 m3 /kmol) cos 0
uv = exp (3.167 kP a)
(104 m)(8.31432 J/mol K)(298.15 K
uv = 3.16697 kP a
7
For r = 10 m:

2(71.79mN/m)(0.018 m3 /kmol) cos 0
uv = exp (3.167 kP a)
(107 m)(8.31432 J/mol K)(298.15 K
uv = 3.13415 kP a
Therefore, the range of vapor pressure is from 3.167 kP a to 3.134 kP a.
uv
(d) Relative humidity is uv0 .
For r = 104 m:
3.167 kP a
RH = 100%
3.167 kP a
For r = 107 m:
3.13415 kP a
RH = = 0.9896 = 98.96%
3.167 kP a
3.7 Table 3.5 (p. 125) shows data comprising the soil-water characteristic curve during a drying
process for an unsaturated soil. Assuming the drying process has a contact angle of zero, and
the wetting process has a contact angle of 30 , calculate and plot the soil-water characteristic
curve for the wetting process.
The matric suction for the drying process can be computed from equation 3.34. The matric
suction for the wetting process is the matric suction for the drying process multiplied by
cos wet
cos dry . A plot of the SWCC for the wetting process is included below.

13
 Figure S3.1: Soil-Water Characteristic Curve for Wetting Process

3.8 (a) Plot the relationship between matric suction (kPa, log scale) and relative humidity (%,
linear scale) for temperatures of 20, 40, and 60 . (b) Plot the relationship between relative
humidity (%) and capillary tube radius (m) for a temperature of 20 and contact angle of
0 , 30 , and 60 . (c) Discus the general characteristics of each plot.
Matric suction is given by
RT
ua uw = ln(RH)
w
where w = 0.0018m3 /kmol, and R = 8.314 J/mol K.
(a) For temperatures of 20, 40, and 60 :
As shown by Figure S3.2, the SWCC for the range of temperatures is almost similar,
demonstrating that the temperature dependence on SWCC is not significant at a large
scale.
(b) A plot of relative humidity and capillary tube radius for a temperature of 20 and
contact angle of 0 , 30 , and 60 is shown in Figure S3.3. At 20 , Ts = 72.75mN/m.
w = 0.0018m3 /kmol, and assume T = 298.15 K.
It is important to note that as the contact angle increases, the relative humidity at a
given capillary tube radius increases.

14
 Figure S3.2: Matric Suction vs. Relative Humidity for T = 20, 40, and 60

(c) In Figure S3.2, the temperature does not significantly change the matric suction at a
given relative humidity.

15
 Figure S3.3: Relative Humidity vs Contact Angle

In Figure S3.3 , relative humidity increases as the radius of the capillary tube increases,
with a relative humidity of 100 % attained at approximately 1 m. Relative humidity is
approximately 35 % at 1 Afor small contact angles. Qualitatively, this indicates that for
small pore sizes on the order of 1 m and smaller, there will be large matric suction.
3.9 For unsaturated sand undergoing a drying process at 20 , where the radius of the air-water
menisci varies between 106 and 105 m, the contact angle is zero, and the air pressure is
zero, answer the following:(a) What is the range of vapor pressure in the soil pores? (b) What
is the range of relative humidity in the soil pores? (c) What is the range of pore water pressure
in the soil pores?
At a temperature of 20 , Ts = 72.75mN/m. Saturated vapor pressure is uv0 = 2.337 kP a.

(a) For r = 106 m:

2(72.75 mN/m)(0.018 m3 /kmol)
uv0 = exp (2.337 kP a)
(106 m)(8.314 J/mol K)(293.15 K)

uv0 = 2.3345 kP a

16
 For r = 105 m:

2(72.75 mN/m)(0.018 m3 /kmol)
uv0 = exp (2.337 kP a)
(105 m)(8.314 J/mol K)(293.15 K)

uv0 = 2.3368 kP a
Therefore, vapor pressure ranges from 2.335 to 2.337 kPa in the soil pores.
(b) For r = 106 m:
2.3345 kP a
RH = = 0.9989 = 99.9%
2.337 kP a
For r = 105 m:
2.3368 kP a
RH = = 0.9999 = 100.0%
2.337 kP a
Therefore, relative humidity ranges from 99.9 % to 100.0 % in the soil.
RT
(c) Since air pressure is zero, uw = w ln(RH).

For r = 106 m:
(8.314 J/mol K)(298.15 K)
uw = ln(0.9989)
0.018 m3 /kmol
uw = 145.5 kP a

For r = 105 m:
(8.314 J/mol K)(298.15 K)
uw = ln(0.9999)
0.018 m3 /kmol
uw = 14.55 kP a
Therefore, the pore water pressure ranges from -14.6 kPa to -145.5 kPa.
3.10 If the negative pore pressure in the sand from the previous example acts to draw the soil pore
water above the water table in the field, what is the corresponding range of the height above
the water table?
If the negative pore water from the previous example were to draw soil pore water above the
water table in the field, the corresponding height is calculated by recognizing that the pore
water pressure corresponds to a head, which is the height of the water above the water table.
Assume w = 9.81 kN/m3 . For r = 106 m:

uw 145.5 kN/m2
h= = = 14.83m
w 9.81 kN/m3

For r = 105 m
uw 14.55 kN/m2
h= = = 1.483m
w 9.81 kN/m3

The corresponding range of the height above the water table is 1.5 m to 14.8 m.

17
3.11 Complete or answer the following for Figure 3.26 (p. 127). (a) Label the wetting and drying
branches of the characteristic curve for the soil on Fig. 3.26a. (b) What is the saturated water
content during drying for the soil on FIg 3.26a? (c) Estimate the air-entry pressure during
drying for the soil on Fig 3.26a. (d) Which soil on Fig 3.26a is the more fine-grained? (e)
Estimate the residual water content for soil B.

(a) Please see Figure S3.4

(b) The saturated water content during drying for the soil on Figure S3.4 is 0.3, or 30 %.
(c) The air-entry pressure during drying for the soil is approximately 10 kPa.
(d) Soil A is more fine-grained since matric suction occurs over a wider range of volumetric
water contents.
(e) The residual water content for soil B, as shown on Figure S3.4, is 0.02, or 2%.

18
Figure S3.4: Soil Water Characteristic Curves

19
Chapter 4

Capillarity

4.1 Compute and compare the equilibrium height of capillary rise in a 5 105 m diameter
capillary tube for free water with surface tension of 0.072 N/m and soapy water with surface
tension of 0.010 N/m. Assume zero contact angle and a fluid density equal to 1 g/cm3 in
both cases.

(a)
4Ts cos
hc =
w gd
4(0.072 N/m) cos(0)
hc = = 0.587 m
(1000 kg/m3 )(9.81 m/s2 )(5 105 m)
hc = 59 cm
(b) Similarly, for soapy water with surface tension of 0.010 N/m, hc is
4(0.010 N/m) cos(0)
hc = = 0.0815 m
(1000 kg/m3 )(9.81 m/s2 )(5 105 m)
hc = 8.2 cm

As demonstrated, the surface tension of the liquid is a strong contributor to capillary rise.
Soap breaks down the surface tension of water and retards capillary rise.
4.2 Water is in a capillary tube at equilibrium. The tube has an inner radius of 2 105 m,
the contact angle is 60 , and the surface tension is 0.072 N/m. What are the pressure in
the water and the relative humidity in the tube? If the tube were placed in a spacecraft with
zero gravity, water from capillary condensation is likely to spread over the inner wall with a
uniform water film thickness. Assume the thickness of the water film at equilibrium is 105 m.
What are the pressure in the water and the relative humidity in the tube?
Assume air pressure is 101.3 kP a and temperature is 273.2 K. For water at equilibrium in
a capillary tube of radius 2 105 m with a contact angle of 60 and a surface tension of
0.072 N/m the pressure in the water and relative humidity in the tube is as follows:
2Ts cos
uw = ua
r

20
 2(0.072 N/m)(cos 60 )
u2 = 101.3 kP a = 97.7 kP a
2 105 m

2Ts w cos
RH = exp
rRT

2(0.072 N/m)(0.018 m3 /kmol)(cos 60 )
RH = exp
(2 105 m)(8.31432 J/mol K)(273.2 K)
RH = 0.9999 = 99.99%

In zero-gravity, with water spread out uniformly 105 m thick due to capillary condensation,
the pressure in the water can be computed as follows since there is only one curvature r0 = rt:
2Ts cos
uw = ua
r0
2(0.072 N/m)(cos 60 )
uw = 101.3 kP a = 94.1 kP a
2 105 m 105 m
The associated relative humidity for these conditions is as follows:

2Ts w cos
RH = exp
rRT

2(0.072 N/m)(0.018 m3 /kmol)(cos 60 )
RH = exp = 0.94454 = 94.45%
(2 105 m 105 m)(8.31432 J/mol K)(273.2 K)

4.3 Uniform fine sand with particle radius of 0.1 mm is packed in two arrays- simple cubic packing
and tetrahedral closest packing- for an open-tube capillary rise test. The contact angle is 50
and surface tension is 0.072 N/m. What is the expected range for height of capillary rise?
For an open-tube capillary rise test a uniform sand with particle radius of 0.1 mm packed in
simple cubic packing and tetrahedral closest packing. The contact angle is 50 and surface
tension is 0.072 N/m. The range of capillary rise can be computed from a modified version
of equation (4.27a). Assume w = 9.81 kN/m3 .
9.76Ts cos 26.67Ts cos
hc
Dw Dw
9.76(0.072 N/m) cos 60 26.67(0.072 N/m) cos 60
h c
(0.1 mm)(9.81 kN/m3 ) (0.1 mm)(9.81 kN/m3 )
0.3582 m hc 0.9787 m

Therefore, the range of capillary rise is between 0.358 m and 0.979 m.

4.4 A fine sand specimen was tested for grain size and pore size distribution parameters and
the soil-water characteristic curve. Particle size analysis shows D10 = 0.06 mm. Pore size
analysis shows a mean pore radius of 0.05 cm and a void ratio of 0.4. Soil-water characteristic
curve testing indicates an air-entry head of 100 cm. Estimate the maximum height of capillary
rise for this soil using three different empirical relationships.

21
 For the Peck et al. (1974) relation (With C [10 mm2 , 50 mm2 ]):
C
hc =
eD1 0
10 mm2 50 mm2
hc
(0.4)(0.06 mm) (0.4)(0.06 mm)
0.417 m hc 2.08 m

For the Lane and Washburn (1946) relation:

hc = 990(ln D10 ) 1540 = 990(ln 0.06) 1540 = 1.25 m

The Kumar and Malik (1990) relation yields:

p
hc = ha + 134.84 5.16 r = 100 cm + 134.84 cm 5.16 500 m = 1.19 m

4.5 Derive Terzaghis solution for the rate of capillary rise (eq. 4.33).
Solution: Assume Darcys law for saturated flow applies for unsaturated flow and upward
hydraulic gradient directly at the wetting front is approximated as i = hczz , where i is the
hydraulic gradient, hc is the height of capillary rise, and z is the elevation measured positive
upward from the water table. Starting from Darcys law:
dz
q = ks i = n (S4.1)
dt
where n is the porosity, ks is the saturated hydraulic conductivity (a constant), and q is the
discharge velocity. Substituting i into equation S4.1:

dz hc z
n = ks
dt z
Separating parts and taking indefinite integrals over each side:
Z Z
z ks
dz = dt
hc z n

1 ks
hc ln z = t+C
z hc n
Applying the boundary condition that at t = 0, the capillary rise has not extended past the
water table (z(0) = 0):

1 ks
hc ln 0= (0) + C (S4.2)
0 hc n
1
C = hc ln
hc
Substituting C back into equation S4.2 yields Terzaghis solution for the wetting front z as
an implicit function of t:

22

1 ks 1
hc ln z = t + hc ln
z hc n hc

hc ks
hc ln z = t
hc z n

nhc hc z
t= ln
ks hc z hc

4.6 Show that eq. (4.36a) can be reduced to eq. (4.33a) if the summation index m is zero.
Reproduce the theoretical curves shown in Figure 4.12a using the system parameters shown in
the Figure. Use a summation index m = 5.
Equation (4.36a) can be reduced to Terzaghis original equation if the summation index m is
zero as shown below.
m=0
j=0 s j+1s
!
n X 0 0+1 hc X hc z
t= hc ln
ks j=0 0! hc z s=0 j + 1 s

n hc h0 z 0+10
t= hc ln c
ks hc z 0+10

n hc
t= hc ln z
ks hc z

nhc hc z
t= ln
ks hc z hc
The theoretical curves shown in Figure 4.12a were reproduced using a summation index of
m = 5 and are shown below in Figure S4.1.

23
 Figure S4.1: Theoretical Curves for Capillary Rise

4.7 Data describing the soil-water characteristic curve for a sand specimen is shown in Table 4.3
(Lu, pg 168) If the surface tension is 0.072 N/m, the molar volume of water is 0.018 m3 /kmol,
and R is 8.314 J/mol K, conduct a pore size distribution analysis and provide the following
information: specific surface area (m2 /g), total pore volume (cm3 /g), average pore radius vs.
pore volume in an x y plot, and average pore radius vs. cumulative pore volume in an x y
plot.
The specific surface area (m2 /g) and total pore volume (cm3 /g) were computed and are as
follows:
S = 1.093 m2 /g
(Vp ) = 0.311 cm3 /g

The average pore radius vs. pore volume is shown in Figure S4.2, and the average pore radius
vs. cumulative pore volume is shown in Figure S4.3.
The water-filled pore volume per unit mass of solid is computed by dividing the water content
by water density (Vpi = wi /w ) The Kelvin radius rki (air-filled pore radius) was computed as
follows:
2Ts
rki =
ua uw

24
The actual pore radius rpi is the Kelvin radius plus the water film thickness ti . ti is copmuted
as follows: 1/3
5
ti =
ln(RH i )
where = 2.77
A. From this result the change in specific surface area, S, is computed as

3Vpi
rpi

for the assumed spherical pore geometry. It is important to note that figure S4.2 corresponds
to the changes in pore volume.

Figure S4.2: Average Pore Radius vs. Pore Volume

25
Figure S4.3: Average Pore Radius vs. Cumulative Pore Volume

26
 4.8 Caculate and plot the interparticle force between two spherical particles (R = 0.1 mm) as a
function of filling angle from = 0 to = 30 .
The interparticle force between two spherical particles (R = 0.1 mm) as a function of filling
angle from = 0 to = 30 is given by equation 4.48:
Fe = ua R2 (ua uw )r22 Ts 2r2
1cos

It can be shown from geometry that r1 = R cos(+) and r2 = R tan r1 1 sin
cos

(p. 161,

177). Given Kelvins equation, ua uw = Ts r11 r12 , and the relations for r1 and r2 , Fe
reduces to a function of since r2 and r1 are defined according to .

Assume Ts = 0.072 N/m, = 0,and ua = 0 kP a, a reference value. The interparticle force

between two equally sized spherical particles with R = 0.1 mm as a function of filling angle
from = 0 to = 30 is shown in Figure S4.4. The interparticle force is negative, indicating
a tensile force. It is interesting to note that the interparticle force asymptotically decreases
in magnitude with increasing filling angle .

Figure S4.4: Interparticle Force Between Two Equally Sized Spherical Particles as a Function of
Filling Angle

27
Chapter 5

State of Stress

5.1 What is the soil-water characteristic curve? Draw, semiquantitatively, the characteristic curve
for sand, silt, and clay. For the same water content, which of these three soils has the highest
value of matric suction? For the same value of matric suction, which soil has the highest
water content?
The soil-water characteristic curve SWCC is a fundamental constitutive relation between the
soil water content, which can be expressed both as volumetric and gravimetric water content,
and matric suction. More specifically, it describes the thermodynamic potential of the soil
pore water relative to that of free water as a function of the amount of water adsorbed by
the soil system. It is specific for each soil because it depends on the soil texture, chemical
compositions, pore geometry and particle size distribution. Figure S5.1 shows qualitative
characteristic curves for typical sand, silt, and clay.
As shown in Figure S5.1, clay has the highest value of matric suction at a given water content
as compared to the sand and silt soils. For the same value of matric suction, the clay also has
the highest water content.

28
Figure S5.1: Semiquantitative SWCC for Sand, Silt, and Clay

29
5.2 Assume that a soils specific gravity Gs is 2.65, the void ratio is 0.91, and the effective stress
parameter varies linearly with saturation from = 0 to = 1.0 at S = 100%. What is the
relationship between and gravimetric water content w? What is the relationship between
and voluetric water content w ? Hint: Se = Gs w, and w = Se/(1 + e).
Given (S) = S ; S [0, 1], introduce Se = Gs w to solve for the relationship between and
gravimetric water content w. Substituting S = Ges w in (S) yields

Gs w
(w) =
e
Plotting this function from w = 0 to w = e/Gs = 0.34 yields Figure S5.2.

Figure S5.2: Effective Stress Parameter as a Function of Gravimetric Water Content

Similarly, introducing w = Se/(1 + e) into (S) yields an expression for (w ):

(1 + e)
(w ) = w
e
Plotting this function from w = 0 to w = 0.48 yields Figure S5.3.

30
Figure S5.3: Effective Stress Parameter as a Function of Volumetric Water Content

31
5.3 a.) Calculate a theoretical soil-water characteristic curve for spheres in simple cubic packing
order with a uniform particle radius R = 1mm using the following parameters: surface tension
Ts = 74 N/mm, contact angle = 0 , and Gs = 2.8. Filling angle ranges from 0 to 45 .
b.) Repeat the previous procedures for particles with a radius of 0.1mm.
c.) Plot your results in a figure showing matric suction vs. gravimetric water content.
Water lens radii r1 and r2 were calculated from equations 5.3 and 5.4. These radii were used
to compute matric suction from Kelvins Law. Gravimetric water content was calculated from
equation 5.10. The results of these calculations are plotted in Figure S5.4.

Figure S5.4: Theoretical SWCC: Matric Suction vs. Gravimetric Water Content

32
5.4 a.) Calculate the theoretical relationship between the effective stress parameter and water
content for spheres in simple cubic packing order using the following parameters:surface ten-
sion Ts = 74 mN/m, contact angle = 0 , and Gs = 2.8. Filling angle ranges from 0 to
45 .
b.) Repeat the above procedures for contact angle = 20 .
c.) Does the material variable depend on particle size? Is the material variable sensitive
to contact angle ?
Water contents calculated from Problem 5.3 were used in conjunction with equation 5.16 to
calculate the effective stress parameter . This calculation was performed for = 0 , = 20 ,
= 60 as shown in Figure S5.5. does not depend on particle size, however as the graph
show it is very sensitive to the contact angle .

Figure S5.5: Effective Stress Parameter as a Function of Gravimetric Water Content

5.5 What are the major mechanisms to explain soil-water hysteresis? Give these mechanisms,
explain why the same soil has a higher soil suction when drying than when wetting? Will
suction stress be higher during a drying process or a wetting process?
Soil water hysteresis is likely caused by geometrical effects associated with nonhomogeneous
pore size distribution (ink-bottle effect), capillary condensation occurring at low water content,
entrapped air which limits water filling voids during wetting, swelling and shrinkage which

33
 changes the volume of the soil and subsequently the amount of water contained in the soil,
and contact angle hysteresis (variances on contact angle whether drying or wetting). Soil has
a higher suction during drying than wetting due to the smaller drying contact angle, and the
increasingly severe curvature of the water-soil interface as the soil dries and goes from larger
to smaller pores. As a result, suction stress is higher during a drying process (p. 185-186).
5.6 Explain why matric suction cannot be controlled using axis translation for values higher than
the air-entry pressure of the HAE material.
Air permeates the HAE material above its air-entry pressure and allows the HAE to desat-
urate, prohibiting true measurement of the soil water content since the hydraulic connection
between the soil sample and the water pressure is lost.
5.7 The following stress components are measured at a point in an unsaturated soil: x = 200 kP a,
y = 250 kP a, z = 400 kP a, ua = 100 kP a, and uw = 100 kP a where x and y are the
horizontal directions, z is the vertical direction, positive stress or pressure is compressive, and
negative stress or pressure is tensile.
a. What is the matric suction?
b. What are the stress tensors?
c. Draw Mohr circles in shear stress, matric suction, and net normal stress space.
d. On which plane (i.e., x-y, y-z, or z-x) does the shear stress reach its maximum?
e. If the effective stress parameter = 0.5, what are the effective stress components in the
x,y, and z directions, respectively?

(a) Matric suction: (ua uw ) = 100 (100) = 200 kP a

(b)

200 100 0 0 100 0 0
(ij ua ) = 0 250 100 0 kP a = 0 150 0 kP a
0 0 400 100 0 0 300

200 0 0
(ua uw ) = 0 200 0 kP a
0 0 200

(c) See Figure S5.6.

(d) The shear stress reaches its maximum of 100 kPa on a 45 plane from the major principal
plane in the x y plane.
(e) = .5

x ua 0 0 (ua uw ) 0 0
0 = 0 y ua 0 + 0 (ua uw ) 0 =
0 0 z ua 0 0 (ua uw )

200 0 0
0 250 0 kP a
0 0 400

34
 Figure S5.6: Mohr Circles in Shear Stress, Matric Suction, and Net Normal Stress Space

5.8 If the stress components at the same point as Problem 5.7 change to the following values:
x = 400 kP a, y = 450 kP a, z = 600 kP a, ua = 300 kP a, and uw = 100 kP a
a. What are the new stress tensors?
b. Does the state of stress change?
c. Would you expect the volume to change?

(a)

400 300 0 0 100 0 0
( ua ) = 0 450 300 0 kP a = 0 150 0 kP a
0 0 600 300 0 0 300

200 0 0
(ua uw ) = 0 200 0 kP a
0 0 200

(b) The state of stress does not change.

(c) The volume does not change because the state of stress on the soil does not change.

35
Chapter 6

Shear Strength

6.1 Under the same external loading condition, which state, saturated or unsaturated, has a higher
strength? What are the possible state variables that control changes in soil strength? Among
the controlling variables matric suction, the effective stress parameter, and suction stress,
which one do you think will be more representative to describe the strength of unsaturated
soil?
The unsaturated state has a higher strength under the same external loading conditions as
evidenced by equation 6.2. Under the same external loading condition, the net normal stress
is constant. Matric suction, however, is given by the water content of the soil and therefore is
higher for an unsaturated soil. State variables controlling changes in soil strength traditionally
include net normal stress and matric suction. Net normal stress and suction stress state
variable control changes in soil stress under the unified representation of the failure envelope
and are more representative to describe the strength of unsaturated soil. It is important to
note that suction stress is technically a material variable defined a state variable.
6.2 Show that the material variables b ,, and can be related mathematically under the frame-
work of Terzaghis effective stress and the M-C failure criterion.
Starting from the classic M-C criterion in Equation 6.1:

f = c0 + ( uw ) tan 0 = c0 + 0 tan 0 (S6.1)

and considering Terzaghis effective stress:

0 = ( ua ) + (ua uw ) (S6.2)

yields

f = c0 + [( ua )f + f (ua uw )f ] tan 0 = c0 + ( ua )f tan 0 + (ua uw )f f tan 0 (S6.3)

Comparing equation S6.3 to the extended M-C criterion (Fredlund et al. 1978) in equation
S6.4 shows that tan b = f tan 0 .

f = c0 + ( ua )f tan 0 + (ua uw )f tan b (S6.4)

36
 Considering Escario and Jucas (1989) empirical relation (eq. 6.30)


f = (S6.5)
s

yields equation S6.6 which mathematically relates b , , and .

tan b = tan 0 = f tan 0 (S6.6)
s

6.3 A series of direct shear tests was conducted to determine the unsaturated shear strength prop-
erties of a glacial till. Results are shown in Table 6.8. Determine the internal friction angle
0 and cohesion c0 at saturation, the effective stress parameter as a function of saturation
and matric suction, and the suction stress characteristic curve, (ua uw ) versus S. Plot
matric suction, the effective stress parameter, and suction stress as functions of the degree of
saturation.
The internal friction angle can be determined by computing the slope between the line passing
through the test 1 and test 2 points in net normal-shear strength space and then determining
the cohesion by finding the y-intercept at x=0 for this line.

0 1 33.31 21.66
= tan = tan1 (0.466) = 24.9
50 25
c0 = 33.31 0.466(50 kP a) = 10.01 kP a

is calculated via equation 6.17 resulting in the following plots of these calculations. Figure
S6.1 shows the effective stress parameter as a function of degree of saturation and Figure
S6.2 shows the effective stress parameter as a function of matric suction. Figure S6.3 shows
matric suction as a function of degree of saturation and Figure S6.4 shows suction stress as a
function of degree of saturation.

37
Figure S6.1: Effective Stress Parameter vs Degree of Saturation

38
Figure S6.2: Effective Stress Parameter vs Matric Suction

39
Figure S6.3: Matric Suction vs Degree of Saturation

40
Figure S6.4: Suction Stress vs Degree of Saturation

41
6.4 A series of saturated and unsaturated triaxial tests were conducted on a sand-clay mixture.
Results are shown in Table 6.9. Assume that the cohesion c0 is zero and determine the internal
friction angle 0 , effective stress parameter function, versus ua uw , and capillary cohe-
sion function, c00 versus ua uw . Plot the effective stress parameter and capillary cohesion
functions.
Test 1 is conducted under saturated conditions and can be used to evaluate the internal
friction angle. Considering the equation of a circle whose center is known:

(x a)2 + (y b)2 = r2 =
1 ua = 486kP a
3 ua = 150kP a
r = d/2 = 168kP a
a = 150 + r = 318kP a b=0
(x 318) + (y 0)2
2
= 1682 (S6.7)

Consider the right triangle with vertices at the origin, the circles origin, and the intersection
of the circle and the failure envelope. Using the law of cosines it can be shown that

a2 r2 3182 1682
cos = = = 0.8491
a a2 r2 318 3182 1682
= 31.89

Equation 6.19 was used to calculate f , and equation 6.34b was used to calculate capillary
cohesion c00 . The results of these calculations are shown in Figures S6.5 and S6.6.

42
Figure S6.5: Effective Stress Parameter Function vs Matric Suction

43
Figure S6.6: Capillary Cohesion Function vs Matric Suction

44
6.5 Using Fig. 6.20 (p. 266), show mathematically that the relationship between suction stress
and capillary cohesion can be established.
For book Figure 6.20 (p. 255) considers the following vertices of the right triangle: A) capillary
cohesion on the shear stress axis, B) suction stress on the net normal stress axis, and O) the
origin of the axes. Another inner triangle EFO can be identified with E) tensile strength, and
F) cohesion.
Since these triangles have the same angles they are similar, therefore ABO = F EO;
in addition,AO = AF + F O and BO = BE + EO. Mathematically BO = AO/ tan 0
i.e. (suction + tensile ) = (c0 + c00 )/ tan 0 and F O = EO/ tan 0 i.e. tensile = c0 / tan 0 ,
where suction is the suction stress and tensile is the tensile strength. As a consequence
suction = c00 / tan 0 .
Alternatively, it is known that for any set of parallel lines, i.e. BA and EF , the distance
between the lines is constant by definition. As such, AF = BE tan 0 , since a line parallel
to AF can be drawn through E (with identical length). This relationship also shows that
suction = c00 / tan 0 .
6.6 Triaxial test results for a silty soil are shown in Table 6.10 (p. 266). The friction angle and
cohesion intercept were determined by tests conducted under saturated conditions as 0 = 25
and c0 = 20.8 kP a. Plot Mohr circles for tests 1 through 6 and construct failure envelopes for
the test pairs conducted at the same suction. Graphically determine capillary cohesions for
each suction level. Calculate the effective stress parameter, capillary cohesion, and apparent
cohesion as functions of matric suction.
Mohr circles for each suction level are plotted in Table 6.1 and Figures S6.7 through S6.8.
The effective stress parameter was calculated with equation 6.19 (p. 243). Capillary cohesion
was calculated with equation 6.36 (p. 256). Apparent cohesion was calculated by adding c0
and c00 (p. 253). These results are tabulated in Table 6.1. Figures S6.7, S6.8, and S6.9 show
the Mohr circles for the testing. Figures S6.10, S6.11, and S6.12 and show the effective stress
parameter, capillary cohesion, and apparent cohesion as functions of matric suction.

Table 6.1: Triaxial Testing Results

45
Figure S6.7: Mohr Circles for Test 1 and 2

46
Figure S6.8: Mohr Circles for Test 3 and 4

47
Figure S6.9: Mohr Circles for Test 5 and 6

48
Figure S6.10: Effective Stress Parameter vs. Matric Suction

49
Figure S6.11: Capillary Cohesion vs. Matric Suction

50
Figure S6.12: Apparent Cohesion vs. Matric Suction

51
Chapter 7

Suction and Earth Pressure

Profiles

7.1 Consider a 10-m-thick unsaturated silty soil layer with the following properties: ks = 107 m/s,
= 0.01 kP a1 , and n = 4.0. Use the analytical procedures developed in this chapter to esti-
mate and plot matric suction and effective degree of saturation profiles with depth under the
following steady conditions: (a) hydrostatic, (b) infiltration rate of 1 m/yr, and (c) evapora-
tion rate of 0.365 m/yr.
The equations used to create Figure S7.1 and S7.2 are eq. 7.5b and 7.15:

1
ua uw = ln[(1 + q/ks )ew z q/ks ]

where z =the height above the ground water table
11/n
1
Se =
1 + [(ua uw )]n

The following plots were obtained from this equation.

52
Figure S7.1: Matric Suction Profiles

53
Figure S7.2: Effective Saturation Profiles

54
7.2 Plot the suction stress profiles for the unsaturated soil layer from Problem 7.1
Suction stress is given as (ua uw ) and was computed using the data from Problem 1
resulting in the suction profiles shown in Figure S7.3.

Figure S7.3: Suction Stress Profiles

55
7.3 Assume that the unsaturated soil layer from Problem 7.1 is bounded by the retaining wall
shown in Fig. 7.27a. Given the following properties: = 18 kN/m3 , T = 5 m, 0 = 30 , and
c0 = 15 kP a, calculate the passive earth pressure profiles in front of the retaining wall under:
(a) steady infiltration rate of 1 m/yr (3.14 108 m/s), (b) hydrostatic condition, and (c)
steady evaporation rate of 0.36 m/yr (1.15 108 m/s).
p
From Equation 7.50 Kp = tan2 (45 + 0 /2) = 3 and h ua = (h)Kp + 2c0 Kp + (ua
uw )(Kp 1), which are used to create Figures S7.4, S7.5, and S7.6.

Figure S7.4: Passive Lateral Earth Pressure Profile for q = 0

56
Figure S7.5: Passive Lateral Earth Pressure Profile for q = -1 m/yr

57
Figure S7.6: Passive Lateral Earth Pressure Profile for q = 0.365 m/yr

58
7.4 When suction stress is present under the unsaturated soil condition, will the lateral earth
pressure at rest be less than or greater than that under a saturated condition? What are the
possible practical implications for unsaturated soil under nonconstant value of Ko ? Which
climatic condition, evaporation or infiltration, will cause lateral earth pressure at rest to be
smaller?
Ko is lower for unsaturated conditions than for saturated conditions as evidenced by equation
7.31 (p. 296) since a saturated condition has ua uw = 0. If Ko becomes negative, the
horizontal stress is tensile and tension cracks may develop. Ko is smaller for evaporation than
for infiltration. Therefore, lateral earth pressure at rest is smaller for evaporation. Similarly,
tension cracks in unsaturated soil are larger for evaporative conditions (p. 297).
7.5 A silty unsaturated soil deposit with an 8-m vertical cut is at the active limit state. The soil
has the following properties: internal friction angle 0 = 33 , cohesion c0 = 15 kP a, unit
weight = 18 kN/m, and suction stress (ua uw ) = 30 kP a throughout the entire depth of
unsaturated zone. Calculate and plot the lateral active earth pressure profile.
2 0
From Equation 7.40 Ka = tan (45 /2) = 0.295 and equation 7.42c h ua = (h)Ka
0
2c Ka + (ua uw )(1 Ka ). These equations are used to create Figure S7.7.

Figure S7.7: Active Earth Pressure Profile for Constant Suction Stress

59
7.6 Consider the soil from Problem 7.5 with the following additional material properties: ks =
2 107 m/s, = 0.01 kP a1 . Calculate active earth pressure profiles under the following
conditions: (a) steady infiltration rate of 1 m/yr (q = 3.14 108 m/s), (b) hydrostatic
condition, and (c) steady evaporation rate of 0.36 m/yr (q = 1.15 108 m/s).
Using equation 7.45:

ln[(1 + q/ks )ew z q/ks ]

(ua uw ) =
(1 + ( ln[(1 + q/ks )ew z q/ks ])n )(n1)/n

Assume: n = 4 for silt (Table 7.1) and ground water table is at base of cut. Also assume the
self weight and cohesion profiles remain unchanged from problem 7.5. Figures S7.8, S7.9, and
S7.10 show the results of these calculations.

Figure S7.8: Active Earth Pressure Profiles for q = 1m/yr

60
Figure S7.9: Active Earth Pressure Profiles for q = 0

61
Figure S7.10: Active Earth Pressure Profiles for q = 0.365m/yr

62
7.7 Consider the soil from Problem 7.6. Calculate passive earth pressure profiles for this soil
situated in front of the retaining wall with a depth of 3 m shown in Fig. 7.27a under: (a) a
steady infiltration rate of 1 m/yr (3.14 108 m/s), (b) hydrostatic condition, and (c) a
steady evaporation rate of 0.36 m/yr (1.15 108 m/s).
Assume n = 4 and ground water table is at base of wall. Soil characteristics are the same as
in Problem 5. Figures S7.11, S7.12, and S7.13 were produced using the following equations:

ln[(1 + q/ks )ew z q/ks ]

(ua uw ) =
(1 + ( ln[(1 + q/ks )ew z q/ks ])n )(n1)/n
p
h ua = (h)Kp + 2c0 (Kp ) + (ua uw )(Kp 1)
Kp = tan2 (45 + 33/2) = 3.39

Figure S7.11: Passive Earth Pressure Profiles for q = 1m/yr

63
Figure S7.12: Passive Earth Pressure Profiles for q = 0

64
Figure S7.13: Passive Earth Pressure Profiles for q = 0.365m/yr

65
Chapter 8

Steady Flows

8.1 Does intrinsic permeability depend on fluid properties such as fluid density and viscosity?
What are the approximate ranges of intrinsic permeability, water conductivity, and air con-
ductivity for sandy silt? For the same soil, which one, water conductivity or air conductivity,
is higher?
Intrinsic permeability does not depend on fluid properties such as fluid density and viscosity.
A sandy silt has an intrinsic permeability ranging from approximately 8 1015 m2 to
7 1011 m2 , water conductivity ranging from 8 108 m/s to 7 104 m/s, and air
conductivity ranging from 7 109 m/s to 7 105 m/s. For a sandy silt, water conductivity
is higher than air conductivity.
8.2 Explain how the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity of a silt could be greater than the hydraulic
conductivity of a sand.
The unsaturated hydraulic conductivity of a silt could be greater than the unsaturated hy-
draulic conductivity of a sand due to drainage of sand pores at an earlier air-entry head than
for a silt. The lower hydraulic conductivity for the sand is a direct result of the uniform and
fairly complete desaturation of the soil pores which limits the hydraulic pathways available
for fluid particle flow. Silt has a higher air-entry head and as a result retains its pore water
under a higher matric suction, maintaining water-filled pores to facilitate fluid flow.
8.3 Why can a given unsaturated soil have different values of hydraulic conductivity for the same
suction?
A given unsaturated soil can have different values of hydraulic conductivity for the same
suction due to soil hysteresis. This hysteresis is strongly dictated by the difference between
the geometry of fluid-filled pores and the contact angle for wetting and drying in solid-liquid
interactions. As such, differing values for hydraulic conductivity can be obtained at the same
matric suction under differing wetting, drying processes.
8.4 Consider a horizontal capillary barrier consisting of a silt layer overlying a coarse sand layer.
If the silt has a pore size distribution index = 1 kP a1 and the sand has = 10 kP a1 ,
what is the maximum height of water that can be suspended in the overlying silt?

66
 For a horizontal capillary barrier consisting of a silt layer overlying a coarse sand layer with a
pore size distribution index of = 1 kP a1 for the silt and = 10 kP a1 for the sand, the
maximum height of water that can be suspended in the overlying silt is given by

1 2
h=
w gf ine w gcoarse
1 2
h=
(9.81 kN/m3 )(1 kP a1 ) (9.81 kN/m3 )(10 P a1 )
h = 0.102 m 0.0102 m = 0.0917 m
h = 9.17 cm

8.5 What is the efficiency of the capillary barrier described in Problem 8.4?
The efficiency of the capillary barrier described in problem 4 is bounded by equations (8.35)
and (8.36):

2ha,f ine 1 4ha,f ine

ha,coarse 1 ha,coarse
From problem 8.4:

ha,f ine = 0.102 m

ha,coarse = 0.0102 m

Therefore,

2(0.102 m) 1 4(0.102 m)

0.0102 m 1 (0.0102 m)
1
20 40
1
0.950 0.975

The efficiency of the capillary barrier should range between 95% and 98%.
8.6 Assume that the diffusivity of water vapor Dv in a soil layer is 108 m/s, the relative humidity
of the atmosphere air is 40%, the relative humidity of the soil pore water at the water table
is 100%, the thickness of the unsaturated layer is 1 m, and the average temperature is 25.
Calculate the vapor flux (in mm/day) between soil and air. What is the mass of vapor moving
across 1.0 m2 of the ground surface every year?
Consider a soil layer 1 m thick with a diffusivity of water vapor, Dv = 108 m/s2 , a soil pore
water relative humidity of 100.0 % at the water table, in ambient temperature conditions of
25 with a relative humidity of atmospheric air equal to 40.0%. The vapor flux qv between
the soil and the air is given by

ORH OT w OT
qv = Dv v,sat +
RH T RT 2

67
 From Figure 8.20 at a temperature of 25 and a relative humidity of 100 %, w,sat 23 g/m3 .
Since OT = 0:

ORH
qv = Dv v,sat
RH

(0.60)
qv = (108 m/s2 )(23 g/m3 )
(1 m)(0.70)

g (1 kg)(60 s)(60 min)(24 hrs)(m3 )(1000 mm)
qv = 1.971 107 2
m s (1000 g)(1 min)(1 hr)(1 day)(1000 kg)(1 m)
qv = 1.703 105 mm/day
The vapor flux between the soil and the air is 1.70 105 mm/day. The mass of vapor
moving across 1.0 m2 of ground surface every year is

g 5.156 107 s
Qyearly = (1.0 m2 )(1.971 107 ) = 6.22 g/yr
m2 s yr
8.7 The steady net infiltration rate at a two-soil capillary barrier overlying a waste package is
0.1 m/yr, the saturated hydraulic conductivity of the overlying fine soil is 107 m/s, the air-
entry head of the fine soil is 0.1 m, and the width of the waste package is 6 m. What is the
required dip of the capillary barrier if a symmetric capillary cap is used in the design?
Given a steady net infiltration rate of 0.1 m/yr at a two-soil capillary barrier overlying a waste
package with the saturated hydraulic conductivity of the overlying fine soil ks,f ine = 107 m/s,
an air-entry head of the fine soil ha,f ine = 0.1 m, with the width of the waste package W = 6 m,
the required dip of a capillary barrier with symmetric capillary cap is given as

qW
tan1
4ks,f ine ha,f ine

1 (0.1 mm/yr)(6 m) (yr)
tan
4(10 m/s)(0.1 m) (3.156 107 s)
7

25.42

The required dip angle should be greater than or equal to 25.5 .

8.8 An unsaturated soil layer (2 m from the surface to the water table) is described by the soil-water
characteristic curve and hydraulic conductivity function tabulated in Table 8.2. Estimate and
plot the soil moisture and matric suction profiles for a steady downward infiltration rate of
1 108 m/s. What are the matric suction and water content at 0.5 m below the ground
surface? For soil less than 0.5 m from the surface, what is the dominating driving force for
the downward flow? For soil greater than 0.5 m depth, what is the dominating driving force?
The soil moisture and matric suction profiles are shown below in Figures S8.1 and S8.2 for an
unsaturated soil layer 2 m from the surface of the water table with a downward infiltration
rate of q = 1 108 m/s.

68
 Figure S8.1: Soil Moisture Profile

At 0.5 m below the ground surface (1.5 m from the groundwater table), the matric suction
head is approximately 0.80 m and the water content is approximately 0.34. For soil less
than 0.5 m from the surface, the dominating driving force for the downward flow is gravity
since the gradient of matric suction is small. For soil greater than 0.5 m from the surface, the
dominating driving force for the downward flow is suction.

69
Figure S8.2: Matric Suction Head Profile

70
Chapter 9

Transient Flows

9.1 Describe the major differences between steady and transient liquid flow in unsaturated soil in
terms of boundary conditions, head distribution, and discharge velocity.
The major differences between steady and transient liquid flow in unsaturated soil are sum-
marized as follows:
(a) Boundary conditions: Steady state flow boundary conditions for liquid flow in unsatu-
rated soil are given by defining the head conditions and/or fluid flux at points along the
problem domain. In contrast, transient flow boundary conditions for head and/or fluid
flux conditions are required for a given instant in time or as a function of time. For
example, under steady state conditions, precipitation infiltration into the soil must be
constant, whereas for transient flow precipitation infiltration can vary with time.
(b) Head Distribution: Under steady state conditions, head does not change at a given
point, whereas for transient flow, the head at a given point in time can vary. Generally,
transient conditions are more relevant for soil close to the surface because temperature
and moisture fluctuate due to changes in environmental conditions. The head profile for
steady state flow is linear, whereas for transient flow it is non-linear.
(c) Discharge Velocity: Discharge velocity under steady state conditions is a constant,
whereas for transient flow conditions discharge velocity may vary with time. This indi-
cates that the amount of water contained in an elemental soil volume for transient flow
can change with time.
9.2 What are the characteristic functions (material variables)required to quantify transient water
flow in unsaturated soil? Describe the interdependency among these functions.
The hydraulic conductivity function, the soil-water characteristic curve, and the specific mois-
ture capacity function are the material variables required to quantify transient water flow in
unsaturated soil. The specific moisture capacity function is a derivative of the soil-water char-

acteristic curve (C = h m
). The hydraulic conductivity function quantifies the dependency
of hydraulic conductivity on the matric suction head. In general, hydraulic conductivity is
a maximum at zero suction (saturated hydraulic conductivity) and decreases with increasing
suction as the soil matrix desaturates. Matric suction head is a function of water content as
described by the soil-water characteristic curve.

71
9.3 If a soils hydraulic conductivity and soil-water characteristic curve were known, could the
moisture field be quantified using eq. (9.17)?
If a soils hydraulic conductivity and soil-water characteristic curve are known, the mois-
ture field can be quantified using equation (9.17) since the specific moisture capacity can be

obtained from the soil-water characteristic curve as given by C = h m
.

9.4 What is the driving force for fluid flow for a horizontal infiltration problem in initially dry
sand when the infiltration just starts? What is the infiltration rate when the infiltration time
is sufficiently long? What is the driving force for fluid flow for a vertical infiltration problem
into initially dry sand when the infiltration time just starts? What is the infiltration rate when
the infiltration time is sufficiently long?
The driving force for fluid flow for a horizontal infiltration problem in initially dry sand
when infiltration just starts is the gradient of matric suction. The infiltration rate when the
infiltration time is sufficiently long is 0, as the infiltration rate is inversely proportional to
time.
The driving force for fluid flow for a vertical infiltration problem into initially dry sand when
the infiltration just starts is the combined effect of suction and gravity gradients. The infil-
tration rate is equal to the hydraulic conductivity ko corresponding to water content o when
the infiltration time is sufficiently large.

9.5 The soil-water characteristic curve for a silty loam can be represented by van Genuchtens
(1980) model with the following parameters: = 0.0028 kP a1 , n = 1.3, m = 0.231, r =
0.030, and s = 0.322. Calculate and plot volumetric water content as a function of matric
suction head. Calculate and plot specific moisture capacity as a function of water content .
Representing the soil-water characteristic curve for a silty loam by van Genuchtens model
with = 0.0028 kP a1 , n = 1.3, m = 0.231, r = 0.030, and s = 0.322 yields a plot of
volumetric water content as a function of matric suction head (Figure S9.1). The function
governing the curve is
m
1
= (s r ) + r
1 + ()n

The specific moisture capacity can be derived from C = hm as follows:
m
1
mn 1+(hm )n (hm )n
C= = (s r )
hm hm ((hm )n + 1)

Using this equation with = 0.0002745 cm yields Figure S9.2, a plot of specific moisture
capacity as a function of water content .
9.6 A silty soil later with a 20-m-thick unsaturated zone (from the surface to the ground water
table) has the following properties: saturated hydraulic conductivity ks = 107 m/s, initial
water content r = 0.05, and saturated water content s = 0.4. Estimate the arrival time of
a downward infiltration front to the water table after a heavy-rainfall event. Assume that the
suction head behind the wetting front is ho = 1.5 m.

72
 Figure S9.1: Soil Water Characteristic Curve

A silty layer has a 20-m thick unsaturated zone with the following properties ks = 107 m/s,
r = 0.05, and s = 0.4. The arrival time of a downward infiltration front to the water table
after a heavy-rainfall event is estimated assuming the suction head behind the wetting front
is ho = 1.5 m and hi = 1000 m (estimated from Figure 9.2a).

o i z
t= z (ho hi ) ln 1 +
ko ho hi

0.4 0.05 20 m
t = 7 20 m (1.5 m + 1000 m) ln 1 + = 192.175 hrs
10 m/s 1.5 m + 1000 m

The estimated arrival time of a downward infiltration front to the water table is 192 hours.

73
Figure S9.2: Specific Moisture Capacity, C()

74
9.7 An unsaturated soil layer has hydrologic properties as follows: ho hi = 0.9 m, o i = 0.45,
and ko = 5 106 m/s. If the thickness of the unsaturated zone is 2.0 m, predict the position
of the wetting front, the infiltration rate, and the total infiltration as functions of time under
a condition of surface ponding due to heavy rainfall. Plot your calculations on three different
x y plots.
Given an unsaturated soil layer with hydrologic properties of ho hi = 0.9 m, o i = 0.45,
and ko = 5 106 m/s, with an unsaturated zone of thickness 2.0 m, the position of the
wetting front, the infiltration rate, and the total infiltration displacement with respect to time
are plotted in Figures S9.3, S9.4, and S9.5.
Figure S9.3 was generated through equation (9.26). Figure S9.4 was generated using equation
(9.25b). Figure S9.5 was generated using equation (9.27).

Figure S9.3: Position of Wetting Front

75
Figure S9.4: Infiltration Rate

76
Figure S9.5: Total Infiltration Displacement

77
9.8 A daily barometric pressure cycle follows a sinusoidal variation with an amplitude of 350 Pa.
If the magnitude of pore air pressure at a point 10 m below the ground is measured to be 150
Pa and the thickness of the unsaturated zone is 30 m, what is the pneumatic diffusivity of the
soil? If the air-filled porosity na = 0.3 and the mean air pressure uo = 95, 000 P a, what is
the air permeability? How long will it take for the air pressure wave to propagate to 20 m and
30 m below the ground surface, respectively?
Given the magnitude of a daily barometric pressure cycle to be An = 350 P a and the pore
air pressure at a point 10 m below the ground surface is 150 P a in an unsaturated zone with
thickness of 30 m, the pneumatic diffusivity of the soil can be calculated as follows:

150 P a
Cn /An = = 0.42857
350 P a
and
10
z/L = = 0.3333
30
Using Equation 9.62a and 9.63 to solve for :
3.3
From equation 9.63:

1/2
2n
=
Da
2n
Da =
2
2 2
where = T = 24 hrs = 0.2618 1/hr.
Therefore for n = 1,

2(0.2618 1/hr)
Da = = 0.04808 m2 /hr
(3.3)2

Alternatively, using equations (9.51) - (9.54) to model diurnal sinusoidal barometric function,
a numerical solution can be obtained for A = 350 P a and C = 150 P a at z = 20 m yielding
a more accurate result for Da of

Da = 0.0496 m2 /hr

If the air-filled porosity is na = 0.3 and the mean air pressure isuo = 95, 000 P a, the air
permeability can be calculated as follows (assuming = 1.8 105 kg/m s):

Da na
K= =
ua
(4.96 102 m2 /hr)(hr/3600 s)(1.8 105 kg/m s)(0.3)
=
95000 P a

78
 7.832 1016 m2

The air permeability is K = 7.83 1016 m2 .

Using the same model created with equations (9.51) - (9.54), the time needed for the air
pressure wave to propagate to 20 m below the ground surface is approximately 18.9 hrs and
for 30 m below the ground surface is approximately 21.3 hrs. Figure S9.6 details the wave
propagation underground for various vales of z as measured from the water table.

Figure S9.6: Dynamic air pressure propagation into 30-m thick unsaturated zone showing amplitude
attenuation and phase lag with increasing depth from the water table

79
Chapter 10

Suction Measurement

10.1 Summarize the major techniques to measure matric suction and total suction. Summarize the
advantages and disadvantages for each technique including its practical measurement range.
Matric suction is commonly measured with tensometers which directly measure negative pore
water pressure, axis translation techniques which measure or control matric suction and cor-
responding soil water content by separation of the pore air and water pressure, electrical and
thermal conductivity sensors which indirectly measure matric suction through its relationship
to electrical or thermal conductivity, and contact paper techniques which measures the equi-
librium water content of filter papers in direct contact with unsaturated soil specimens under
laboratory induced relative humidity and determines suction through correlation to the filter
papers moisture content- suction characteristic curve (p. 417-419).
Total suction can be measured with humidity measurement techniques such as thermocouple
psychrometers, chilled-mirror hygrometers. Humidity control techniques to measure total
suction include isopiestic techniques using salt solutions, and two pressure techniques such
as divided-flow humidity control. Total suction can also be measured with the non-contact
filter paper method. Total suction techniques utilize Kelvins equation to convert humidity
to suction (p. 419-420).
Tensiometers are usable over a practical range of approximately 0100 kP a and are useful for
directly measuring suction in the field under varying osmotic potentials since the tensiome-
ters sensor tip is permeable to dissolved solutes. However, the sensor tip must be in direct
contact with the pore water. Axis translation can measure soil suctions from approximately
0 1, 500 kP a. This technique is useful for controlling the matric suction on a soil sample,
however, it must be performed with equipment not commonly practical for the field. Further-
more the technique is primariliy applicable for coarse-grained soils since the HAE stone used
in the techniques has an air-entry point of about 1, 500 kP a, which limits the usefulness of this
technique for fine soils. Further difficulties arise near residual or saturated conditions since
the continuity of the pore air and water spaces is uncertain (p. 427). Electrical and thermal
conductivity sensors are useful from 0 400 kP a and are useful for automated electronic
applications in the laboratory and the field. However, the sensors may be highly responsive
to changes in temperature or moisture content of the soil being measured and require fine
calibration and care with respect to hysteresis of the sensor (p. 429-431). Thermocouple
psychrometers are useful over a range of 100 8, 000 kP a. This technique is performed in the

80
 laboratory and is limited to relative humidity readings of about 94%. Chilled-mirror hygrom-
eters work quickly and are fairly simple to operate. They are accurate within 3% relative
humidity. Humidity control techniques are useful over a range of 4, 000 600, 000 kP a. These
techniques are indirect and not generally applicable for the field. Filter paper techniques are
useful for a total suction range of 1, 000 500, 000 kP a. This technique is very useful when
the filter paper is calibrated due to its wide range of total suction measurement. However,
this technique is temperature dependent and requires a fair amount of time to perform ( 10
days).
10.2 If a sandy soil were encountered, what would be the appropriate technique(s) for laboratory
suction measurement? If a clayey soil were encountered, what would be the appropriate tech-
nique(s) for laboratory suction measurement?
A sandy soil would be best measured with a tensiometer, axis translation, or the contact
filter paper method. For a clayey soil, non-contact filter paper and either humidity control
or humidity measurement techniques would be the best suction measurements techniques to
use.
10.3 Investigate the sensitivity of total suction to temperature by plotting Kelvins equation in terms
of suction versus relative humidity for three different temperatures. Summarize your findings
from this investigation.
Total suction is given in terms of relative humidity by equation 10.3 (p. 431). A specific
volume of water of vwo = 0.001 m3 /kg and a molecular water mass of water vapor,vo =
18.016 kg/kmolare assumed. Temperatures of 250 K, 300 K, and 350 K were plotted and
are shown in Figure S10.1. As shown on the graph, these values are fairly close together.
Examination of equation 10.3 shows that total suction is directly proportional to temper-
ature. However, total suction is directly proportional to the natural logarithm of relative
humidity, indicating that total suction is much more dependent upon relative humidity than
temperature.
10.4 A thermocouple psychrometer is used to measure the relative humidity of an unsaturated clayey
soil specimen. At equilibrium, the RH of the pore water vapor is 97.3% and the temperature
is 15. What is the total suction of the soil in kPa? What is the likely water content for the
clay (give an approximate range)?
The molecular mass of water vapor v = 8.016 kg/kmol. Using equation 10.3,

RT (285.15 K)(8.314J/mol K)
t = ln(RH) = ln(0.973) = 3639.687 kP a
vw v (0.001m3 /kg)(18.016 kg/kmol)

The total suction is about 3640 kPa with a likely water content for the clay between 30-50%
gravimetric water content.
10.5 A Tempe cell test was conducted for a sample of unsaturated sandy silt. The data shown in
Table 10.7 was obtained (p. 260). Column 1 shows values of air pressure that were incremen-
tally applied to the system. Column 2 shows the change in mass of the soil specimen as pore
water was expelled at each air pressure increment (e.g., when the pressure was increased from
15 kPa to 20 kPa, 1.15 g of water were expelled). After the system reached equilibrium for the

81
 Figure S10.1: Plot of Total Suction Related to Temperature vs. Relative Humidity

final air pressure increment, the specimen was removed, weighed wet (23.71 g), oven-dried,
and then weighed dry (23.00 g). Plot the matric suction characteristic curve for the soil.
Problem data is shown in Figure S10.2, with data for the SWCC shown in Figure S10.3.
10.6 Concentrations of NaCl and KCl solutions shown in Table 10.8 (p. 461) were used to calibrate
a batch of filter papers for total suction testing using the noncontact method. The filter paper
water content wf p (%) corresponding to each salt solution is shown. The average temperature
during calibration was 25. Plot the calibration curve for the filter paper in terms of total
suction versus filter paper water content.
Nacl (58.46 g/mol) and KCl(74.57 g/mol) concentrations were converted to molality and
tables 10.3 and 10.4 (p. 437) were used to obtain values for the total suction of the filter
paper.
10.7 An unsaturated soil specimen was tested for total suction using the calibrated filter paper from
Problem 10.6. The equilibrium water content of the filter paper after testing was measured as
12.0What is the approximate total suction of the soil?
From the calibration curve = 353757e0.3014wf p . With wf p = 12.0%, 12.0 = 9505. The
total suction of the soil is approximately 9500 kPa.

82
 Figure S10.2: Problem Data for 5

10.8 Evaluate the validity of the vant Hoff approximation [eq. (1.16)] using Tables 10.3 and 10.4
(p. 461).
From Tables 10.3 and 10.4 using equation 1.16 with R = 8.314J/molK and uw0 = 0.000018 m3 /mol
the following data in Table S10.6 is obtained, where bold values are computed with the vant
Hoff approximation.
The vant Hoff approximation is valid as it produces an estimate for the osmotic suctions that
approximates the overall trend of the data. However, the approximation only estimates the
order of the osmotic suction.
For example, the osmotic suction for NaCl and KCl is approximately twice the vant Hoff
approximated value. This is most likely caused by the constant value of uw0 used in the
equation, which in actuality is non-constant and different depending upon the concentration
of solution. A more accurate value for uw0 (probably non-linear) will yield better results for
the osmotic suction estimate. Additionally, the vant Hoff approximation does not account
for the influence of short-range electrical fields or van der Waals fields on total suction.

83
 Figure S10.3: SWCC

Figure S10.4: Problem Data for 6

84
Figure S10.5: Total Suction vs. Filter Paper Water Content

85
Figure S10.6: vant Hoff Approximation Comparison for Total (Osmotic) Suction in NaCl and KCl
Solutions as a function of Temperature

86
Chapter 11

Hydraulic Conductivity
Measurement

11.1 Summarize the advantages and disadvantages of the various laboratory methods described in
this chapter for determining the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soil.
Steady state methods of determining hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soil include the
constant-head method, the constant-flow method, and the centrifuge method.
The advantage of the constant-head method is its simplicity in procedure and analysis and
common use, applicable for stress-controlled and simulated in situ conditions. Its disadvan-
tages include the length amount of time require to run the test for steady state to be reached,
the difficulty associated with accurately measuring low flow rates, nonuniform suction and
corresponding hydraulic conductivities within the testing apparatus,and uncertainties in the
contact between the HAE end caps, the head loss measurement probes, and the rigid walls of
the permeameter cell (p. 465).
The advantage of the constant-flow method is its ability to measure extremely low flow rates
for low-permeability soils and further capability to simultaneously determine the soil-water
characteristic curve and hydraulic conductivity function. Its disadvantages include the in-
creased cost of low flow rate pumps, and similar disadvantages as the constant-head method
such as difficultly in achieving good contacts within the apparatus (p. 467).
The centrifuge methods primary advantage is its relatively short testing time with measure-
ment uncertainty 8%. Disadvantages include is its relatively high cost, limited application
with respect to incompressible materials such as dense sands or highly overconsolidated sed-
iments, possibility to disrupt the soil fabric, and the limited head/ tail reservoirs exceeding
capacity when testing wet soils or soils with large hydraulic conductivities (p. 474).
Transient methods of determining hydraulic conductivity include the horizontal infiltration
method,the multistep outflow method and the laboratory and field instantaneous profile meth-
ods.
The horizontal infiltration method is easily conducted with relatively simple laboratory equip-
ment and is very useful for testing coarse-grained specimens. Its disadvantages include the
necessity to disturb the soil specimen as it is packed into the soil column, and the often sig-

87
 nificant scatter in the diffusivity function that propagates from scatter in measurements of
the post-test water content distribution (p. 478-479).
The multistep outflow methods advantages include its wide use, its rapid simultaneous de-
termination of the soil-water characteristic curve and hydraulic conductivity function, and
its operation using conventional axis-translation equipment. The techniques disadvantages
include its limitation to relatively coarse-grained soils, its reliance on air flushing systems
during long periods of testing, and differences in impedance between the HAE and the soil
(p. 483-484).
The advantage of the instantaneous profile method is its ability to be used for in situ, remolded,
or undisturbed samples. Its disadvantages include its many assumptions (particularly the 1-D
assumption for field testing), its interpolation between often spread out data probes, and its
setup time and long period required for testing.
11.2 A laboratory constant-flow permeability test was conducted on an unsaturated sandy soil. The
following measurements were obtained at steady state: A = 75 cm2 , hwt = 5 cm, hwb = 3 cm,
L = 10 cm, ha = 76 cm H2 0, and Q = 4.05 104 cm3 /s, where A is the specimen
cross-sectional area, hwt is the pore water head measured at the top of the specimen, hwb is
the pore water head measured at the bottom of the specimen, L is the distance between the
two head measurements, ha is the applied air pressure head, and Q is the applied constant flow
rate. Calculate the hydraulic conductivity of the sand at the corresponding matric suction.

QL
K=
A(hwt hwb )
4.05 104 cm3 /s(10cm)
K= = 2.7 105 cm/s
75cm2 (5cm 3cm)
11.3 Estimate the air-entry pressure (kPa) for the soil from Example Problem 11.1.
From Figure 11.2, it can be seen that air enters the soil at a suction head of about 8.16 cm H2 O,
which corresponds to an air-entry pressure of approximately 0.8 kP a.
11.4 If the hydraulic conductivity test following extraction 2 for the soil from Example Problem
11.2 was conducted using a constant flow rate of q3 = 0.005cm/ s, estimate the expected head
loss.
From Darcys law knowing that k is constant and q2 = 0.005 cm/s and h2 = 270 cm:

q2 q3
=
h2 h3
q3 h2 (0.005 cm/s)(207 cm)
h3 = = = 450 cm
h2 0.003 cm/s
Therefore, the expected head loss is 450 cm.
11.5 Repeat Example Problem 11.3 for an analysis time of t = 2000 min using the same data shown
in Table 11.2. How do these results compare with the previous analysis where t = 1500 min?
These results are lower than the results of Example Problem 11.3 with T = 1500 min, which
makes sense because the time has been increased, indicating that horizontal infiltration has
decreased, or diffusivity is decreased.

88
 Figure S11.1: Problem 11.5 Data

11.6 Define hydraulic diffusivity and explain why it is a function of water content.
Hydraulic diffusivity is defined as the ratio of the hydraulic conductivity to specific moisture
capacity

k() k()
D() = =
C()

k is a function of , and D() , indicating that hydraulic diffusivity is a function of water
content through the hydraulic conductivity function, which is a function of water content,
and the specific moisture capacity which is dependent upon the change in water content.

89
Chapter 12

Suction and Hydraulic

Conductivity Models

12.1 Plot the SWCC for a fine sand specimen using the following Brooks and Corey (1964) param-
eters: b = 3 kP a, = 2.2, and Sr = 0.14.
12.2 Model the hydraulic conductivity function obtained from Example Problem 11.1 by fitting the
data using the Gardner (1958) two-parameter power law equation and the Brooks and Corey
(1964) equation.
The Gardner two-parameter power law equation is given by

ks
k() =
1 + n
A graphical methodology can be utilized to fit this relation to the data given a = 0.05 and
n = 4.7 and is shown in Figure S12.2.
The Brooks and Corey (1964) function is given as (p. 512)

k() = ks f or b

b
k() = ks

From the data in Table 11.1 (p. 466), the air-entry pressure is graphically estimated as
b = 3kP a. Saturated hydraulic conductivity is estimated as ks = 2.4 103 cm/s
from examination of the graph. Graphical fitting of these equations to the data yields an
approximate value of = 6.5. The curve fit to the data is shown in Figure S12.3.

90
Figure S12.1: Brooks and Corey SWCC Model

91
Figure S12.2: Gardner Two-parameter Hydraulic Conductivity Model

92
Figure S12.3: Brooks and Corey Hydraulic Conductivity Model

93
12.3 Estimate the Brooks-Corey (1964) and van Genuchten (1980) fitting parameters for the sandy
silt from Problem 10.5. Assume the specimen has void ratio e = 0.64 and specific gravity
Gs = 2.65.
The SWCC is given from the solution to Problem 10.5 as shown in Figure S10.5 and Table
S10.6.
Figure S12.4 details the Brooks-Corey (1964) curve fit with = 1.3, Sr = 0.075, and b =
12 kP a. This model was produced by graphical inspection with the Problem 10.5 data.

Figure S12.4: Brooks and Corey Hydraulic Conductivity Model

The van Genuchten (1980) model was similarly used to model the SWCC with the a =
0.083 kP a1 , m = 0.005, and n = 270 parameters as shown in Figure S12.5.
12.4 Hydrualic properties of four different soils are given in Table 12.8 (p. 527) along with fitting
parameters for the van Genuchten (VG) and Brooks-Corey (BC) models. Construct and
compare the SWCC for each soil using each model.
The SWCC was constructed for each soil using equations 12.4 for the BC model, and 12.7 for
the VG model. For the VG model, was used instead of , for the SWCC in terms of head.
Finally, suction head was converted to pressure head for plotting.
The BC and VG models for the silty clay loam are shown in Figure S12.6. The models are in

94
 Figure S12.5: van Genuchten Hydraulic Conductivity Model

very good agreement within the 0.3 to 0.4 volumetric water content. Beyond these ranges, the
BC and VG model deviate due to their varying mathematical simplification for the SWCC.
Most notably, the VG model simulates a smoother transition of the soil for air entry head,
whereas the BC model displays a more abrupt representation of air entry into the soil.
The BC and VG models for the Touchet silt loam are shown in Figure S12.7. Similar to Figure
S12.6, the Figure S12.7 shows that the BC and VG models are closest align in the 0.2 to 0.4
volumetric water content range. Outside of this range, the models show greater variance.
The BC and VG models for the GE No 2 Sand are shown in Figure S12.8. The models show
similar differences in behavior as described above.
The BC and VG models for the Sarpy loam are shown in Figure S12.9. The models show
similar differences in behavior as described above.
12.5 Hydraulic properties of three different clayey soils are given in Table 12.9 (p. 527) along with
fitting parameters for the van Genuchten (VG) and Brooks-Corey (BC) models. Construct
and compare the SWCC for each soil using each model.
The SWCC was constructed for each soil using equations 12.4 for the BC model, and 12.7 for
the VG model.

95
 Figure S12.6: BC and VG Models for Silty Clay Loam

The BC and VG models for the low plasticity clay B are shown in Figure S12.10. The models
are in good agreement for the range of 0.24 and 0.34 volumetric water content. Outside of
this range the models show variance from each other.
The BC and VG models for the low plasticity clay C are shown in Figure S12.11. The BC and
VG models vary significantly between a volumetric water content range of about 0 to 0.25.
The BC and VG models for the high plasticity clay F are shown in Figure S12.12. These
models show more moderate variance than the low plasticity clay C from a volumetric water
content range of about 0 to 0.27.
12.6 Data comprising the hydraulic conductivity function for a silty loam is shown as Table 12.10
(p. 528). Model the hydraulic conductivity function using as many models described in the
chapter as possible.
The hydraulic conductivity function is modeled with the Brooks and Corey (1964), the Gard-
ner (1958) one-parameter, Gardner (1958) two-parameter, and Richards (1931) models. Fig-
ure S12.13 shows the results of modeling the Table 12.10 data. The Brooks and Corey (1964)
parameters used are = 0.44, = 3.32, and hb = 0.66 m. The Gardner (1958) one-parameter
is = 1.18 and the two-parameter values are n = 2.7 and a = 2.8. The Richards (1931) model
values are a = 0.7 and b = 1.0.

96
 Figure S12.7: BC and VG Models for Touchet Silt Loam

12.7 The SWCC for a silty soil is shown in Fig. 12.18 (p. 529). Use the Jackson (1972) statis-
tical modeling formalism to predict and plot the hydraulic conductivity function. Assume the
saturated conductivity ks = 5.8 106 cm/s and c = 1.
Using equation 12.33,
c 2
i m
j=1 [(2j + 1 2i)hj ]
k(i ) = ks 2
s m
j=1 [(2j 1)hj ]

the characteristic curve is divided into a series of equal water content increments as shown
in Figure S12.14 and the suction head at the midpoint of each increment is estimated. The
problem continues in a similar fashion as Example Problem 12.5 (p. 522-523), resulting in
Figure S12.15 which shows the hydraulic conductivity function for the silty soil.

97
Figure S12.8: BC and VG Models for GE No 2 Sand

98
Figure S12.9: BC and VG Models for Sarpy Loam

99
Figure S12.10: BC and VG Models for Low Plasticity Clay B

100
Figure S12.11: BC and VG Models for Low Plasticity Clay C

101
Figure S12.12: BC and VG Models for High Plasticity Clay F

102
Figure S12.13: Hydraulic Conductivity Functions for Silty Loam

103
Figure S12.14: SWCC Discretized Data

104
Figure S12.15: Hydraulic Conductivity Function for Silty Soil

105