2013
DOI: 10.1179/1939787913y.0000000005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Swell–shrink–consolidation behavior of compacted expansive clays

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

7
8
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
7
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Marinho and Oliveira [13] reported that for cohesive soils the optimum water content is within ±5% of the plastic limit. These data are similar to those reported by Azam and Chowdhury [14] for the same material. The corresponding values of dry density and optimum water content were 1.60 g/cm 3 at 22% for CS-I and 1.65 g/cm 3 at 20% for CS-II.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 92%
“…Marinho and Oliveira [13] reported that for cohesive soils the optimum water content is within ±5% of the plastic limit. These data are similar to those reported by Azam and Chowdhury [14] for the same material. The corresponding values of dry density and optimum water content were 1.60 g/cm 3 at 22% for CS-I and 1.65 g/cm 3 at 20% for CS-II.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 92%
“…The kaolinite 100K showed a maximum dry density of 1.7 g/ cm 3 at an optimum water content wSPO equal to 17.2%, which is close to PL = 20%. These data are similar to those reported by Khan et al [16], Azam and Chowdhury [35] and Marinho and Oliveira [36]. Marinho and Oliveira [36] reported that for cohesive soils, the optimum water content is within ±5% of the PL.…”
Section: Materials Characterisationsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…The various types of WRC have their respective utilities: w-based is most accurate because it is directly measured, θ-based is useful for the determination of water storage capacity, and S-based is the most clear in depicting soil behavior. However, none of these curves can capture volumetric changes due to capillary water through soil pores and adsorbed water on clay particles within lumps [73]. The data indicate that about 90% of volume change in the soil occurred in the plastic zone (from liquid limit of 29% to shrinkage limit of 12%) with a change in S from 100% to 60% and negligible thereafter, albeit a change in S from 60% to 0.…”
Section: Volumetric Changesmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…The various types of WRC have their respective utilities: w-based is most accurate because it is directly measured, θ-based is useful for the determination of water storage capacity, and S-based is the most clear in depicting soil behavior. However, none of these curves can capture volumetric changes due to capillary water through soil pores and adsorbed water on clay particles within lumps [73].…”
Section: Water Retentionmentioning
confidence: 99%