GEOENVIRONMENTAL Introduction PDF
GEOENVIRONMENTAL Introduction PDF
GEOENVIRONMENTAL Introduction PDF
Module 1
FUNDAMENTALS OF GEOENVIRONMENTAL
ENGINEERING
Precipitation
Artificial recharge
Aquifer
Groundwater
Bed rock
The main source and type of hazardous liquid waste include industrial
waste water contained in surface impoundments, lagoons or pits. It is also
produced from municipal solid refuse and sludge that are disposed on land. If not
handled properly sewage becomes an important source of liquid waste that has
undesirable effect on environment. Petroleum exploration leaves waste brine
solution which needs to be managed to prevent groundwater pollution. Liquid
waste emerges due to mining operation which is hazardous. A typical example is
acid mine drainage from dumped mine wastes.
Some of the gaseous waste includes NOx, CO, SO2, volatile
hydrocarbons etc. Chemical reaction may take place in air producing secondary
pollutants. SO2 combines with oxygen to produce SO3, which in turn combines
with suspended water droplets to produce H2SO4 and fall on ground as acid rain.
Natural breakdown of uranium in the geoenvironment emits cancer causing
radon gas into atmosphere.
discussed would fall under the purview of geotechnical engineering. But the
evaluation of soil suitability is not complete without understanding its chemical
reactivity. In this study, cation exchange capacity (CEC) of soil is used as an
indicator of chemical reactivity. It is desirable that the pollutants released from
the waste disposal site should be effectively attenuated by the liners. This means
that the soil should have high chemical reactivity. A soil with high CEC indicates
high reactivity and hence high attenuation capacity of pollutants.
Bioremediation of oil spills:
The case history is discussed in U. S. Congress, Office of Technology
Assessment, Bioremediation for Marine Oil Spills report. It essentially deals with
a marine oil spill that has occurred on the beaches of Alaska, USA, in late 80s.
The reason was due to the grounding of a ship on the shores. Office of
Technology Assessment (OTA), USA, felt the need of technologies to fight such
calamities. A comprehensive review of the methods for oil spill clean up was
conducted to develop an environmental friendly solution. One of the effective
solutions that came up was bioremediation in which specific species of
microorganisms were used to degrade oil. This is a slow natural process and
hence the major focus was on accelerating and improving the efficiency of this
natural process. Even though, some research has been initiated, it was found
that there is a dearth of data and hence the advantage of bioremediation over
other methods of oil spill clean up is yet to be ascertained. It has been opined
that in case of emergency situation, mechanical process such as using
dispersants and in-situ burning may still be appropriate.
Protecting environment from harmful effects of mine waste
using cover system
O’Kane and Wels (2003) have discussed the performance based design
of covers for mine wastes dumped on ground. The objective of the cover system
is to control harmful contaminant release from the waste dumps, chemical
stabilization of acid forming mine waste, dust and erosion control and provide
growth medium for sustainable vegetation cover. The proposed methodology of
cover design links predicted performance of cover system to the groundwater
and surface water impacts. This method is impact oriented performance criteria.
In this method, a conceptual cover is selected first based on the type of waste,
size and geometry of the waste disposal, climate etc. A detailed cover design
analysis is performed that correlates cover design parameters (for example cover
thickness) to cover performance (net percolation). Third step links cover design
parameters to environmental impact assessment (groundwater quality). Fourth
step is to assess the risk based on the result from third step and the regulatory
law. If unacceptable, then cover design is modified. If acceptable then field trial
with performance monitoring is suggested. The feedback loop between impact
assessment and cover design is crucial for developing efficient cover system
without being overly conservative.
Value addition of waste products: Geopolymers from fly ash
Andini et al. (2008) have discussed about the value addition of fly ash by
converting it to a product called geopolymers. Davidovits first introduced the term
geopolymers for a new class of three dimensional alumino-silicate materials
(Davidovits 1989). Geopolymers are alkali-activated alumino-silicate binders and
its synthesis takes place by polycondensation from a variety of raw materials
such as metakaolin, coal fly ash etc. Polycondenstation reaction was carried out
by mixing fly ash with alkali metal silicate solution and then curing at different
temperature and time. Amorphous geopolymers are obtained at condensation
temperature ranging from 20 to 90 °C. The geopolymers has excellent
mechanical properties, thermal stability, acid resistance and are durable. It has
got a wide application in ceramics, cements, hazardous waste stabilization, fire
resistant materials etc. Environmentally sound recycling of fly ash into
geopolymers by hydro-thermal treatment is an excellent example of value
addition to the waste material.
References
1. Andini, S., Cioffi, R., Colangelo, F., Grieco, T., Montangnaro, F. and Santoro,
L. (2008) “Coal fly ash as raw material for the manufacture of geopolymer-
based products”, Waste management, Vol. 28, pp. 416-423.
2. Davidovits, J. (1989) “Geopolymers and geopolymeric materials”, Journal of
Thermal Analysis, Vol. 35, pp. 429-441.
3. Fang, H-Y. and Daniels, J. L. (2006) “Introductory geotechnical engineering-
An environmental perspective”, Taylor and Francis, London.
4. O’Kane, M. and Wels, C. (2003) “Mine waste cover system design - linking
predicted performance to groundwater and surface water impacts”, Sixth
International Conference, Acid, Rock, Drainage, Cairns, Queensland, Carlton
South: AUSIMM.
5. Scott, H. D. (2000) "Soil physics: agricultural and environmental applications”,
Iowa State /university Press, USA.
6. Taha M. R. and M. H. Kabir (2005) “Tropical residual soil as compacted soil
liners”, Environmental Geology, Vol. 47, pp. 375-381.
7. Thomas, G. W. (1977) “Historical developments in soil chemistry: Ion
exchange”, Soil Science Society of America Journal, Vol. 41, pp. 230-238.
8. U. S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Bioremediation for Marine
Oil Spills-Background Paper, OTA-BP-O-70 (Washington, DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office, May 1991).
Model Questions
1) Explain the importance and scope of geoenvironmental engineering.
2) With examples, discuss the multiphase behavior of soil.
3) Why soil becomes important in geoenvironmental engineering?
4) Discuss the multidisciplinary nature of geoenvironmental engineering.
Module 2
SOIL-WATER-CONTAMINANT INTERACTION
Oxygen
Silica Aluminium
tetrahedron octahedron
Fig. 2.1 Basic units of clay minerals (modified from Mitchell and Soga 2005)
Oxygen
Oxygen
It can be noted from the figure that metallic positive ion is surrounded by non-
metallic outer ions. Fig. 2.2 shows the formation of basic Oxygen
layer from basic units
indicated in Fig. 2.1. There are 3 layers formed such as (a) silicate layer, (b)
gibbsite layer and (c) brucite layer.
S
Symbol
-4
(Si4O10)
Symbol
Al4(OH)12
B
Symbol
Mg6(OH)12
Fig. 2.2 Basic layer of mineral formation (modified from Mitchell and Soga 2005)
S S
G B G B
S S S S
Two layer Three layer
Fig. 2.3 Fundamental layers of clay minerals (modified from Mitchell and Soga 2005)
Presence of
cations
Table 2.2 Typical values of SSA for soils (modified from Mitchell and Soga 2005)
For smectite type minerals such as montmorillonite, the primary external surface
area amounts to 50 to 120 m2/g. SSA inclusive of both primary and secondary
surface area, (interlayer surface area exposed due to expanding lattice), and
termed as total surface area would be close to 800 m 2/g. For kaolinite type
minerals there is possibility of external surface area where in the interlayer
surface area does not contribute much. There are different methods available for
determination of external or total specific surface area of soils (Cerato and
Lutenegger 2002, Arnepalli et al. 2008).
O-2 and OH- functional groups at edges and basal surface also induce negative
charge.
Dissociation of hydroxyl ions or broken bonds at the edges is also responsible for
unsatisfied negative or positive charge. Positive charge can occur on the edges
of kaolinite plates due to acceptance of H+ in the acid pH range (Berkowitz et al.
2008). It can be negatively charged under high pH environment.
Absence of cations from the crystal lattice also contributes to charge formation.
In general, clay particle surface are negatively charged and its edges are
positively charged.
+ +
Typical charged clay
Due to the surface charge, it would adsorb or attract cations (+ve charged) and
surface
dipolar molecules like water towards it. As a result, a layer of adsorbed water
exists adjacent to clay surface, the details of which are presented in section
2.2.1.
charge. When particles are sufficiently close, attraction becomes dominant active
force and hence there is an edge to face configuration for clay particles as shown
in Fig. 2.4(a). Such a configuration is termed as flocculant structure. When the
separation between clay particles increase, repulsion becomes predominant and
hence the clay particles follows face to face configuration called dispersed
structure (Fig. 2.4b).
+
++ + ++ + ++ +
+ ++ + ++ +
+
(a) Flocculant (b) Dispersed
A lot of micro and macro level behaviour of clays are associated with these
arrangement of clay particles (Mitchell and Soga 2005).
sulphate, which has relatively high surface area. In most soils, quartz is the most
abundant mineral, with small amount of feldspar and mica present. Carbonate
minerals such as calcite and dolomite are found in some soils in the form of bulky
particles, precipitates etc. Sulphate minerals mainly gypsum are found in
semiarid and arid regions.
peak with the data provided by International Centre Diffraction Data (ICDD)
formerly known as Joint Committee on Powder Diffraction Standards (JCPDS).
200
Mo
Relative Intensity
100
1000 K
WC
K K
750
I
500
I K
K K K
250
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Cu-K (2 Deg.)
Fig. 2.5 A typical XRD pattern with mineral identification for two different soils (modified from Sreedeep 2006)
It is understood that the area under the peak of diffraction pattern gives the
quantity of each phase present in the specimen. However, quantitative
determination of mineral composition in soils based on simple comparison of
diffraction peak height under peak is complex and uncertain because of different
factors such as mineral crystallinity, hydration, surface texture of the specimen,
sample preparation, non-homogeneity of soil samples, particle orientation etc.
The method of quantification will be more precise for those soils with less number
of minerals. Al-Rawas et al. (2001) have discussed about constant mineral
standard method and constant clay method for quantification of clay minerals. In
the first method, increasing quantity of clay are added to the fixed mass of known
standard and the difference in X-ray diffraction intensity when the specimen
changes from 100 percent standard to 100 percent clay is noted. The peak area
ratio for each component is then plotted against percentage of clay, based on
mainly due to the fact that micas get transformed to vermiculite by weathering
process under acidic condition. Velde and Peck (2002) have shown that crops
can affect the clay mineralogy of the soils on which they are grown over periods
of time. The influence of fertilizer addition on cropping can be studied by
analyzing transformation of soil mineral in the field where the cropping has been
done. By analyzing mineralogy, the land use practices can be assessed.
placed in an electric field due to slight displacement of electrons and nuclei. This
is induced effect and the extent to which this effect occurs in molecule
determines its polarisability.
van der Waals force is the force of attraction between all atoms and
molecules of matter. This force comes into effect when the particles are
sufficiently close to each other. Hydrogen bond is formed when a hydrogen atom
is strongly attracted by two other atoms, for example: water molecules. This bond
is stronger than Van der Waals force of attraction and cannot be broken under
stresses that are normally experienced in soil mechanics. These secondary
valence bonds play a vital role in understanding soil-water interactions.
Essentially, the forces in soil mechanics may be grouped as gravitational forces
and surface forces. From classical soil mechanics perspective, gravitational
forces which are proportional to mass are more important. However, in
geoenvironmental engineering surface forces are important. Surface forces are
classified as attractive and repulsive forces. Attractive forces include (a) Van der
Waals London forces (b) hydrogen bond (c) cation linkage (d) dipole cation
linkage (e) water dipole linkage and (f) ionic bond. Van der Waals London force
is the most important in soils and becomes active when soil particles are
sufficiently close to each other. For example, fine soil particles adhere to each
other when dry. Cation linkage acts between two negatively charged particles as
in the case of illite mineral structure. Other types of forces are less important and
will not be explained in this section. Repulsive forces include like charge particle
repulsion and cation-cation repulsion.
be removed easily from the soil. Environmental water is held under the influence
of surface forces such as electrochemical forces or other physical forces. Both
type of water are important in geoenvironmental engineering. There are many
cases like seepage and infiltration problems whose solution necessitates the
knowledge of free water. However, these concepts are discussed in detail in
classical soil mechanics text books. At the same time, there are several
phenomena, which will be discussed in detail in this course, where the
understanding of held water becomes essential. The mechanism of soil-held
water interaction is complex and influenced by soil type, mineralogy, current and
past environmental conditions, stress history etc.
Held water can be further subdivided into structural water, adsorbed water and
capillary water. Structural water is present within the crystal structure of mineral.
This water is not very important as far as engineering property of soil is
concerned. For finding solution to several problems in geoenvironmental
engineering, it is essential to understand in detail adsorbed water and capillary
water.
Adsorbed water
Adsorbed water is strongly attracted to soil mineral surfaces especially
clays. Dry soil mass can adsorb water from atmosphere even at low relative
humidity and it is known by the name hygroscopic water content. For the same
soil, hygroscopic water content will vary depending on relative humidity and
temperature. Adsorptive forces between soil and water is polar bond and
depends on specific surface area of soil. Adsorbed water or bound water
behaves differently from the normal pore water. It is immobile to normal
hydrodynamic forces and its density, freezing point etc. are different from free
water.
Possible mechanisms for water adsorption (Low 1961)
a) Hydrogen bond and dipole attraction: Soil minerals are essentially made up of
oxygen or hydroxyls, facilitating easy formation of hydrogen bonds. Surface
oxygen can attract positive corner of water molecules (H+) and H+ present in OH-
can attract negative corner (O-2) of water molecules as depicted in Fig. 2.6.
H+ of water
H+ Oxygen
Surface
oxygen of present in of water
soil outer OH-
mineral of soil
mineral
b) Hydration of cations: Every charged soil surface has affinity towards ions,
specifically cations. These cations get hydrated by water dipole due to the
formation of hydrogen bond as shown in Fig. 2.7. Therefore, cations present in
the soil would contribute to the adsorbed water. In dry clays, these cations
occupy in the porous space of clay mineral. During hydration, these cations
engulfs with water molecules and move towards centre space between two clay
particles. The discussion on hydration of cations is very vast and its significance
will be dealt in detail, after this section.
+
- + Water
+ -
+ dipole
Cations
+ - +
Clay + -
-
surfac + + +
- -
e + + +
- -
+ +
-
+
+ + + +
_
Concentratio
+ _ _ _
_ + _ _ Cations
+ + _ _
surface
+ _ + _
Clay
+ _ + _
+ _ _ _ _ Anions
n
+ + + +
Distance from clay
surface
Fig. 2.8 Distribution of ions adjacent to clay surface (modified from Mitchell and Soga 2005)
Several theories have been proposed for defining ion distribution in DDL. Gouy
and Chapman is one of the initial explanations on DDL ion distribution (Mitchell
and Soga 2005). The theory has been further modified by Derjaguin and Landau;
Verwey and Overbeek which is known by the name DLVO theory (Mitchell and
Soga 2005). In addition to ion quantification, DLVO describe the repulsive
energies and forces of interaction between clay particles and prediction of clay
suspension stability. Sposito (1989) observed that the theory predicts ion
distribution reasonably for only smectite particles suspended in monovalent ion
solution at low concentration. However, the theory can still be used for defining
forces of interaction, flocculation, dispersion, clay swelling etc. A much more
refined description of interparticle forces has been proposed by Langmuir (1938)
and extended by Sogami and Ise (1984).
Following are the assumptions which pertain to the formulation of DDL
theory:
a) Ions in the double layer are point charges and there are no interactions
among them.
b) Charge on particle surface is uniformly distributed.
c) Platy particle surface is large relative to the thickness of double layer (to
maintain one dimensional condition).
ni
Anion distribution
ni0
Cation distribution
ψ -vieψ negative 0 -vieψ positive ψ
Fig. 2.9 Ion concentration in a potential field (modified from Mitchell and Soga 2005)
In Fig. 2.9 anion distribution is marked negative due to the reason that vi and ψ
are negative and hence -vieψ will be negative. For cations, vi is positive and ψ is
negative and hence -vieψ will be positive. For negatively charged clay surface,
ni,cations > ni0 and ni,anions < ni0.
One dimensional Poisson equation (Eq. 2.4) relates electrical potential ψ, charge
density ρ in C/m3 and distance (x). ε is the static permittivity of the medium (C2J-
1
m-1 or Fm-1).
d 2
(2.4)
dx 2
ρ = e Σvi ni = e(v+ n+- v- n-)
(2.5)
ni is expressed as ions per unit volume, + and – subscript indicates cation and
anion.
Substituting Eq. 2.3 in 2.5
v i e
ρ = e Σvi n i 0 exp (2.6)
kT
d 2 e v i e
Hence, Σvi n i 0 exp (2.7)
dx 2
kT
Eq. 2.7 represents differential equation for the electrical double layer adjacent to
a planar surface. This equation is valid for constant surface charge. Solution of
this differential equation is useful for computation of electrical potential and ion
concentration as a function of distance from the surface.
Surface
charge
potential
the case of a single cation and anion species of equal valency (i=2) and n0 = n0+
= n0- and v+ = v- = v, then Eq. 2.7 simplifies to Poisson-Boltzmann equation (Eq.
2.8).
d 2 2n 0 ve ve
sinh (2.8)
dx 2
kT
Solutions of the above are usually given in terms of the dimensionless quantities
as stated below.
ve
y= Potential functions (2.9)
kT
ve 0
z=
kT
ξ = Kx Distance function (2.10)
2n 0 e 2 v 2 8e 2 v 2 n 0
where K2 = or K = (2.11)
kT DkT
D is the dielectric constant of the medium. According to Eq. 2.11, K depends on
the characteristics of dissolved salt and fluid phase. However, actual values of
concentration and potential at any distance from the surface would also depend
on surface charge, surface potential, specific surface area and dissolved ion
interaction. This means that the type of clays and pore solution are very
important.
Solution can be obtained for a set of boundary conditions, one at the surface and
other at infinite distance:
dy ve 0
y = 0 and = 0 at ξ = ∞ and y = z = at ξ = 0
d kT
ψ0 is the potential at the clay surface.
For z << 1, ψ = ψ0e-Kx
(2.12)
2kT Kx
For z = ∞, ψ = ln coth (2.13)
e 2
4kT e z / 2 1
For some arbitrary z and ξ >>1, ψ = e
e e z / 2 1
(2.14)
Eq. 2.12 is commonly referred to as Debye-Huckel equation and 1/K represents
characteristic length or thickness of double layer (Mitchell and Soga 2005).
Knowing electric potential from above equations, it is possible to determine ion
distribution from Eq. 2.3.
v i e
For cations: n+ = n i 0 exp
kT
(2.15)
v e
For anions: n- = n i 0 exp i (2.16)
kT
This model is accurate only if the soil behaves like a true parallel particle system.
It does not satisfactorily provide description of ψ immediately adjacent to the
charged particle. This is mainly due to the mechanisms associated with chemical
bonding and complexation. Gouy-Chapman model is ideally suited for qualitative
comparisons. The basic assumption in Botlzmann equation where in the potential
energy is equated to the work done in bringing the ion from bulk solution to some
point, does not consider other interaction energy components.
C) Stern model
According to Stern model total cations required to balance the net negative
charge on clay surface consists of two layers. The first layer is of cations are
adsorbed on to the clay surface and are located within a distance of δ. The clay
surface charges and the adsorbed group of cations are termed as electric double
layer (EDL) or Stern layer. The other group of cations are diffused in a cloud
surrounding the particle and can be described by Boltzmann distribution as
discussed in the previous section. The total surface charge (ζs) is counter
balanced by Stern layer charge ζδ and diffuse layer charge ζdl. The surface
potential (ψs) depends on electrolyte concentration and surface charge (whether
it is constant or pH dependent). It decreases from ψs to ψδ when the distance
increases from surface to the outer boundary of Stern layer. Beyond this
distance, ψ is quantified by using Eq. 2.13.
There are other DDL models like DLVO which deals with complex interactions.
However, these are not discussed in this course. The interested readers can
refer to Yong (2001) for further reading.
minerals and hence would take more time. In smectite minerals, much longer
time is required because the major part of exchange capacity is located in the
interlayer region.
For a pore solution containing both monovalent and divalent cations, the
ratio of divalent to monovalent cations is much higher in adsorbed layer than in
the equilibrium solution. If M and N represent monovalent cation concentrations,
P the concentration of divalent ions, subscript s and e represent adsorbed ions
on soil and that in equilibrium solution, respectively, then
M M
k 1 (2.17)
N s N e
M M
2 k 2 (2.18)
P 2 2
1
P s
e
where k1 and k2 are selectivity constants, which can be obtained experimentally.
Following, Eq. 2.18 it can be further written as
Na Na
2 k (2.19)
Ca M g
2
s 1
Ca M g
2 2
2
2 e
The concentration of cation is in milliequivalents per litre. The quantity
Na is termed as sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) in (meq./litre)1/2. If
1
Ca 2
M g
2 2
2 e
the composition of pore fluid and k is known, the relative amounts of single and
divalent cations in the adsorbed cation complex can be determined. The details
of selectivity constants for a wide variety of clays are reported by Bruggenwert
and Kamphorst (1979). Sodium present in the adsorbed layer is normalized with
respect to total exchange capacity as represented by Eq. 2.20 and is termed as
exchangeable sodium percentage (ESP).
= n Sr (2.25)
Where W w is the weight of water, γw is the unit weight of water, W d is the weight
of dry soil, γd is the dry unit weight of soil, G is the specific gravity of soil, e is the
void ratio, n is the porosity and Sr is the degree of saturation. Eqs. 2.24 and 2.25
relates θ with w and Sr, respectively. For a fully saturated soil, Sr = 1 and hence θ
becomes equal to n.
There are some dimensionless expressions for water content, which are
important for different modelling application. Some of the important expressions
are given by Eqs. 2.26 and 2.27.
Relative water content, θrel = θ /θsat (2.26)
Reduced or effective water content, Se = (θ-θr) /θsat-θr) (2.27)
Where θsat and θr are saturated volumetric water content and residual water
content. The same expressions are valid in terms of gravimetric water content
also.
= -21989 J/kg
When relative vapour pressure is 0.989, then ψm = -1496 J/kg.
A higher relative vapour pressure is associated with high water content of the soil
sample. From this example, it can be noted that as water content increases,
matric suction reduces.
Solutes present in soil water results in ψo due to the semi-permeable membrane
effect produced by plant roots, air-water inter phase and clays. As concentration
of solute increases, ψo also increases.
According to Vant-Hoff‟s equation, ψo = RTCs (2.30)
Where ψo is in J/kg, Cs is the concentration in mol/m3, R and T as defined earlier.
According to US Salinity laboratory, ψo = -0.056 TDS (2.31)
Where TDS is the total dissolved solids of soil pore water in mg/L and ψo is in
kPa.
Also, ψo = -36 EC (2.32)
Where EC is the electrical conductivity of soil pore water in dS/m and ψo is in
kPa.
RTρ w e
ψo can also be expressed as ln
M e0
(2.33)
where ρw is the density of water in kg/m3, M is the mass of one mole of water
(kg/mol), R and T as defined earlier, e is the equilibrium vapour pressure of soil
pore water containing solutes, e0 is the vapour pressure of pure water in the
absence of solute, and ψo is in kPa.
Problem: Calculate total potential of a saturated soil at 20 0C at a point through
which reference datum passes. Saturated volumetric water content is 0.5. 1cm 3
of soil at reference datum has 3x10-4 moles of solute. Water table is 1.2 m above
reference datum.
Total potential ψt = ψg + ψp + ψm + ψo
ψg = 0 (at reference datum)
ψm = 0 (soil is saturated)
ψ0 = -RTCs
Cs is moles/m3 in pore water
Movement of water: Soil water moves from higher ψt to lower ψt. If we are
concerned only about liquid flow, then the contribution of ψ0 is considered
negligible because the solutes also move along with the flowing water. While
considering flow of water, ψt can be rewritten as ψg + ψp + ψm. This total potential
is termed as hydraulic potential causing flow. Under hydraulic equilibrium, ψt is
same everywhere, spatially.
Problem: A soil has a perched water table above a clay horizon situated at a
depth of 40 cm from ground surface. Height of water ponded above clay layer is
8 cm. Determine the vertical distribution of ψt at 10 cm interval upto 50 cm depth.
Assume conditions of hydraulic equilibrium. Take reference datum at (a) ground
surface (b) at water table. Distance downwards is taken -ve.
The solution to this problem is given in table below. Depth is Z. All potential of
water is expressed in cm. ψo is not considered.
(a) Reference datum at ground surface
Z (cm) ψg ψo ψp ψm ψt
0 0 0 0 -32 -32
10 -10 0 0 -22 -32
20 -20 0 0 -12 -32
30 -30 0 0 -2 -32
40 -40 0 8 0 -32
50 -50 0 18 0 -32
ψg is the distance of the point from the reference datum. Since it is downwards it
is –ve. Since, there is no mention of contamination ψo is taken as zero at all
points. ψp occurs only below water table. Water level is at 8 cm above 40 cm
depth. Therefore, at 40 cm the ψp will be 8 cm. At 30 cm its value will be zero
since it is above water table. At 50 cm, the total height of water is 18 cm. Now the
value of ψm is not known. But we know that below water table its value will be
zero. Therefore, at 40 cm and 50 cm its value is 0. Therefore, the total potential
(ψt) is known at 40 and 50 cm. It is the algebraic sum of all the water potentials.
Therefore, it must be noted here that sign of the potential is very important. ψt at
40 cm and 50 cm is obtained as -32 cm. Since it is under hydraulic equilibrium
(given), ψt at all the points have to be -32 cm. Once ψt at all the points are know,
then ψm at all locations can be determined. For example, at 10 cm depth, ψm =
[ψt-( ψg + ψm + ψp + ψo] will give -32+10 = -22 cm.
With the change in reference datum, ψg also changes. Due to this change, ψt
also changes. The method of obtaining other potential remains same as in the
previous case.
Problem: Assume water is evaporated from top soil and the matric potential is
given for depth at 10 cm interval upto 50 cm. Water table is at a large depth
greater than 50 cm. Determine total potential and direction of flow. Head is
measured in cm. Distance downwards is taken negative. Reference datum is
taken as ground surface.
Z (cm) ψm ψg ψo ψp ψt
0 -1200 -0 0 0 -1200
10 -250 -10 0 0 -260
20 -165 -20 0 0 -185
30 -80 -30 0 0 -110
40 -50 -40 0 0 -90
50 -40 -50 0 0 -90
Since concentration is not mentioned and water table is at a depth larger than
problem domain, both ψo and ψp will be zero at all points. Only ψg need to be
determined. Between locations at 40 and 50 cm, there will be no flow occurring
due to hydraulic equilibrium. From 40 cm depth, movement of water will occur
upwards because water potential is low at the ground and high at 40 cm depth.
Please note that the magnitude is high at the top (1200) but the potential is
negative. This will draw or attract water towards that location.
The above exercise shows that the flow of water takes place towards tile drain
from ground surface. This is based on the values of total potential. Flow takes
place from higher to lower potential. Please note that sign of the potential is very
important.
Hydrologic horizons
For defining water potential, interaction and movement in soil, it is always
convenient to define three hydrologic horizons. These horizons vary in depth and
thickness spatially and temporally. One or more of these horizons may be absent
as well at a particular place. These three horizons are otherwise termed as
zones. These zones are listed as follows and the same is depicted in Fig. 2.11.
As depicted in the figure, the boundaries of these horizons have been shown to
be horizontal for the sake of convenience. In the field these boundaries may be
irregular.
a) Groundwater zone
This zone is otherwise termed as phreatic zone. This zone exists below ground
water table and hence will be fully saturated. Mostly, the saturated soil
mechanics is applicable for this zone. Depending upon the factors such as
season, rainfall, proximity to water bodies etc. the depth of water table varies and
hence the thickness of phreatic zone. All the voids in this zone are filled with
water and water pressure will be always positive.
b) Vadoze zone
The partially saturated zone or unsaturated zone above water table is
termed as vadoze zone. This zone extends from the top of the groundwater table
to the ground surface. The voids are filled with air or water and the relative
percentage is decided by the amount of saturation. The concepts developed for
saturated soil mechanics is not applicable for unsaturated zone. Hence, the
details of this zone are described in detail in the next section. Lowest portion of
this zone can be nearly saturated due to the phenomenon of capillary rise.
However, the water in this zone will be held under tension. The capillary height
(hc) marked in the Fig. 2.11 is expressed as
2TCosθ
hc = (2.34)
ρ w gr
T is the surface tension of water, ρw is the density of water, g is the acceleration
due to gravity, r is the soil pore radius, θ is the contact angle made by water-air
interface where it contacts the soil solids.
c) Root zone
This zone corresponds to the top portion of vadoze zone close to ground
surface where the plants and tress grows. Moisture dynamics is more in this
zone due to the fact that roots draw water and nutrients from the soil. This zone
is also subjected to evaporation and evapotranspiration and is in direct
interaction with the atmosphere. During precipitation, infiltration and flow of water
to the subsurface occurs through this zone.
Ground surface
Root zone
Vadoze zone
Capillary zone
Water table
hc
Groundwater zone or aquifer
Impermeable
layer
Fig. 2.11 Various hydrologic horizons
WRCC obtained by drying and wetting the soil sample is termed as desaturation
(desorption) and saturation (adsorption) curve, respectively. A typical drying and
wetting WRCCs is presented in Fig. 2.12, which indicates a continuous „S‟
shaped hysteretic relationship. Due to hysteresis, drying WRCC has higher
suction than wetting curve for particular water content. Following are some of the
key points that are relevant for WRCC:
1. The volumetric water content at saturation, θs, describes the water content at
which the soil is completely saturated and typically depicts the initial state for
the evaluation of the drying path.
2. The air-entry value (AEV), ψa, is the suction at which air enter the largest pore
present in the soil sample during a drying process. AEV is less for coarse soil
as compared to fine soils.
3. Residual water content (θr) is the minimum water content below which there is
no appreciable change in θ. Suction corresponding to θ r is called residual soil
suction, ψr.
4. The water-entry value, ψw, on the wetting WRCC, is defined as the matric
suction at which the water content of the soil starts to increase significantly
during the wetting process.
A fully saturated soil specimen having a volumetric water content of θ s
desaturates in three stages as depicted in Fig. 2.12. In stage 1 termed as
capillary saturation zone extending up to AEV, the soil remains saturated with the
pore-water held under tension due to capillary forces. In the desaturation zone
(stage 2), ranging from AEV to ψr, there is a sharp decrease in water content and
the pores are increasingly occupied by air. The slope of the WRCC in this portion
describes the rate of water lost from the soil. In the third stage known as zone of
residual saturation (>ψr), there is little hydraulic flow. However, there may be
some water vapour movement. Beyond this point, increase in soil suction does
not result in significant changes in water content. The zone of residual saturation
is terminated at oven dry conditions (i.e. water content equal zero),
corresponding to a theoretical soil suction of approximately 10 6 kPa (Fredlund
and Rahardjo 1993).
(ψa, θs)
1 2 3
Drying
curve
curve
ψw
ψ (kPa)
Fig. 2.12 Details of idealized WRCC
ψ -1
ln 1+ nf
mf
ψ
θ ψ = θs 1-
hr
ln exp(1) +
10
6
a f (2.36)
ln 1+
h r
where θ(ψ) is the volumetric water content at any suction, ψ; θr is the residual
volumetric water content; θs is the volumetric water content at saturation; a vg and
af are fitting parameters primarily dependent on the air entry value (AEV); n vg and
nf are fitting parameters that are dependent on the rate of extraction of water
from the soil; mvg and mf are fitting parameters which depend on θr; hr is the
suction (in kPa) corresponding to residual state. There are several such
simplified and complex models reported in the literature for defining WRCC.
The experimental procedures adopted for determining SWCC are time
consuming and cost-intensive. Therefore, attempts have been made by
researchers to develop functions (such as pedo transfer functions) for the quick
estimation of WRCC without performing extensive suction measurements. In
such cases, WRCC is based on soil physical parameters that can be quickly
determined in the lab. This indirect approach is less time-consuming, simple, and
more economical. However, such estimations can be soil-specific and case-
specific and would depend mostly on the data used for developing the procedure.
Therefore, estimated WRCC should be used with caution and only in those cases
where suction measurements cannot be performed. For important projects it is
always preferable to obtain measured WRCC for the soil. For more details on
WRCC estimation, readers are requested to go through the wide range of
literature available (Fredlund et al. 1998; Mbagwu and Mbah 1998; Fredlund et
al. 2002; Matula et al. 2007; Nimmo et al. 2007; Soil vision 4.10)
1x10
-5 ks
-7
1x10
ku (m/s)
-9
1x10
-11
1x10
-13
1x10
-1 0 1 2 3
10 10 10 10 10
m (kPa)
Fig. 2.13 Variation of unsaturated hydraulic conductivity with suction (Malaya 2011)
The 1-D flow through unsaturated soil can be represented by Darcy‟s law
expressed in the form of Eq. 2.37 where the flux density q is given by
H
q = k(h) (2.37)
z
where q is the flux density or Darcy velocity, H is the total soil water potential, z is
the distance in the direction of flow, k(h) is the hydraulic conductivity which is a
function of matric suction head.
H=z+h
z is the gravitational head and h is the matric suction head or pressure head in
general. In the case of unsaturated state of the soil, pressure head will be matric
suction head or negative pressure head.
H
is the hydraulic gradient represented by “i” which can also equal to
z
ΔH
.
Δz
ΔH (h n 1 z n 1 ) (h n z n )
Average i = =
Δz (z n 1 z n )
n increases downwards and reference datum is ground surface.
ΔH Δh Δz Δh
= 1
Δz Δz Δz
Problem: For a soil, matric potential head is -75 cm and -50 cm at depth 150 cm
and 200 cm, respectively. Given θ = a h -b
h > 45 cm and k = menθ. a= 1000, b
= 2, m = 10-12, n = 45, k is in m/s. Determine soil water flux in m/s and flow
direction. Distance downward is –ve and reference is ground surface.
Δh
Average i = 1
Δz
- 75 50
= 1
- 150 200
=0.5
θ = a (h)-b
= 1000x 62.5 -2 h is the average value (75+50)/2
= 0.256
k=10-12xe(45x0.256)
= 1.007x10-7 m/s
ΔH
Flux q =k
Δz
= 1.007x10-7 x 0.5
= 5x10-8 m/s
Total potential: at 150 cm = -225 cm and at 200 cm = -250 cm. The flow will take
place in the downward direction.
According to Darcy‟s law, flow density is defined by Eq. 2.37 which is re-written
below:
H
q =- k(h)
z
H H θ
In the above, can be re-written as x
z θ z
H
is the inverse of specific water capacity (C) where in H is considered as the
θ
suction head.
- k(h) θ
Therefore the above equation becomes q =
C z
k(h)
In the above representation, is known as soil-water diffusivity (D) and its
C
unit is m2/s.
θ
q =-D (2.38)
z
Eq. 2.38 is identical to Fick‟s first law of solute diffusion. Analytical solutions are
proposed by researchers for the above differential equation for simple boundary
conditions. This equation is suitable for highly unsaturated state of the soil and is
not valid of near saturated soil. For nearly saturated soil C approaches zero.
pore water. The knowledge is required to assess the risk or threat posed by
these contaminants to humans and other organisms. Also, the performance and
acceptable criteria of engineered barriers, which minimizes the risk of these
contaminants is assessed based on fate predictions.
Fate of contaminant in geoenvironment is decided by retention and
transport of contaminants. The important mechanisms governing these factors
are as follows (Yong 2001):
(A) Chemical mass transfer and attenuation
(a) Sorption- contaminant partitioning
(b) Dissolution/ precipitation- addition or removal of contaminants
(c) Acid-base reaction- proton transfer
(d) Redox reaction- electron transfer
(e) Hydrolysis/ substitution/ complexation/ speciation- ligand-cation complexes.
(B) Mass transport
(a) Advection- fluid flow
(b) Diffusion- molecular migration
(c) Dispersion- mixing
(C) Other factors
(a) Biological transformations
(b) Radioactive decay
An adequate knowledge of these mechanisms is required to predict the
fate of contaminant. When the contaminated pore fluid passes through the soil
mass, it is bound to undergo weak or strong reactions. Sorption process in which
the contaminants clings on to the soil solids is one of the predominant reactions.
Such a reaction does not ensure permanent removal of contaminants from the
pore fluid, rather attenuation takes place. Attenuation is the reduction in
contaminant concentration during fluid transport due to retardation, retention and
dilution. The extent of interaction between the contaminants and soil fraction
determines reversible or irreversible nature of contaminant partitioning. The term
retention is used for strong sorption of contaminants on the soil particles such
that the concentration of pore fluid decreases with time. The amount of
Concentration
Contaminant
Contaminant
Retardation Retention
(Yong 2001), which means it can act as acid or base. According to Bronsted-
Lowry concept an acid is a proton donor and base is a proton acceptor.
According to Lewis, acid is an electron acceptor and base is an electron donor.
As discussed earlier, soil minerals have ionized cations and anions (metal ions)
attached to it that results in a particular pH level in soil-water system. Hydrolysis
reaction of metal ions can be represented as
MX + H2O MOH + H+ + X- (2.39)
The reaction increases with decrease in pH, redox potential and organic content
and increases with temperature. Hydrolysis can be an important reaction in the
process of biodegradation. For example,
(R-X) + H2O (R-OH) + X- + H+ (2.40)
where R is an organic molecule and X is halogen, carbon, nitrogen or
phosphorus and is resistant to biodegradation. The reaction introduces OH in
place of X making organic molecule susceptible to biodegradation.
This indicates that the concentration of metals in the form of complexes also
needs to be taken into account in addition to the free metal ion concentration.
Else, the concentration of the metal transported downstream would always be
more than the predicted concentration of metal ion.
4) Precipitation and dissolution
The process of precipitation and dissolution is an important mass transfer
mechanism in the subsurface, where in dissolution increases and precipitation
decreases the concentration of contaminants in pore water. Water is a good
solvent for a variety of solids, liquids and gases. Dissolution is the process of
complete solubility of an element in groundwater. Some natural minerals also
undergo dissolution. For example,
SiO2 + 2H2O Si(OH)4 (dissolution of quartz)
Kaolinite + 5H2O 2Al(OH)3 + 2H4SiO4 (dissolution of kaolinite)
Precipitation is reverse process of dissolution where in dissolved element comes
out of the solution due to the reaction with dissolved species. Due to
precipitation, the concentration of the element reduces in pore water. For
example, Lead gets precipitated from pore water due to its reaction with sulfides,
carbonates or chlorides. Iron, zinc and copper precipitates due to hydrolysis
reaction, and chromium, arsenic precipitates due to redox reaction. In some
cases, both dissolution and precipitation occurs one after the other as the pore
water advances.
pH is important factor governing dissolution and precipitation. An element
has a solubility limit in water. Beyond the solubility limit the solution becomes
supersaturated and starts precipitating. pH governs the solubility limit and hence
when pH changes, there is a possibility of precipitation reaction. It is found that
solubility reduces with pH, reaches a minimum value and then again increases.
This indicates that there exists an optimal pH where precipitation will occur. Metal
hydroxides are amphoteric (increasingly soluble at both low and high pH) and the
pH for minimum solubility (optimum precipitation) is different for different metal.
For example, cadmium-pH 11, copper-pH 8.1, chromium-pH 7.5, zinc-pH 10.1,
nickel-pH 10.8. A small change in pH would therefore result in considerable
changes in precipitation reaction.
References
1. Al-Rawas, A. A., Hago, A., Sutherland, H. H., Yousif, A. A., Al-Shihi, M. And
Al-Shihi, B. (2001) “A comparative quantitative study of an omani soil using
x-ray diffraction technique”, Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, Vol.
19, pp. 69-84.
2. Arnepalli, D. N., Shanthakumar, S., Hanumantha Rao, B., and Singh D. N.
(2008) “Comparison of methods for determining specific surface area of fine-
grained soils”, Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp.
121-132.
3. Bain, D. C. and Griffen, D. T. (2002) “Possible effects of land use on the clay
mineralogy of a brown forest soil”, Clay Minerals, Vol. 37, pp. 663-670.
4. Berkowitz, B., Dror, I. and Yaron, B. (2008) “Contaminant geochemistry-
interactions and transport in the subsurface environment”, Springer,
Germany.
5. Bruggenwert, M. G. M. and Kamphorst, A. (1979) “Survey of experimental
information of cation exchange in soil systems”, in Soil Chemistry, Part B:
Physico-Chemical Models, Elsevier, New York, pp. 141-203.
6. Carroll, D. (1959) “Ion exchange in clays and other minerals”, Geological
Society of America Bulletin, Vol. 70(6): doi:10.1130/0016-
7606(1959)70[749:IEICAO]
9. EPA SW-846, “Test method for cation exchange capacity of the soils, „CEC‟”,
www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/test/sw846.htm. (website visited on 11-11-
11)
10. Fredlund D. G., and Xing, A. (1994) “Equations for the soil-water
characteristic curve.” Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 31(3), pp. 521-
532.
20. Manhaes, R. S. T., Auler, L. T., Sthel, M. S., Alexandre, J., Massunaga, M.
S. O., Carrio, J. G., dos Santos, D. R., da Silva, E. C., Garcia-Quiroz, A., and
Vargas, H. (2002) “Soil characterisation using X-ray diffraction,
photoacoustic spectroscopy and electron paramagnetic resonance”, Applied
Clay Science, Vol. 21, pp. 303-311.
21. Matula, S., Mojrova, M. and Spongrova, K. (2007) “Estimation of the soil
water retention curve (SWRC) using pedotransfer functions (PTFs)”, Soil &
Water Research, Vol. 2, pp. 113-122.
22. Mbagwu, J. S. C. and C. N. Mbah, (1998) “Estimation water retention and
availability in nigerian soils from their saturation percentage”,
Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, Vol. 29, pp. 913-922.
23. Mitchell, J. K., and Soga, K. (2005) “Fundamentals of soil behavior”, John
Wiley and Sons, New York.
24. Moore, D. M. and Reynolds, R. C. (1997) “X-ray diffraction and the
identification and analysis of clay minerals”, Oxford University Press, New
York.
25. Nimmo, J. R., Herkelrath, W. N. and Laguna Luna, A. M. (2007) “Physically
based estimation of soil water retention from textural data: general
framework, new models”, Vadose Zone Journal, Vol. 6, pp. 766-773.
26. Reddi, L. N. and Inyang, H. I. (2000) “Goenvironmental engineering:
principles and applications”, Marcel Dekker Inc., New York.
27. Scott, H. D. (2000) “Soil physics: agricultural and environmental
applications”, Iowa State /university Press, USA.
28. Sogami, I. and Ise, N. (1984) “On the electrostatic interaction in the
macroionic solutions”, Journal of Chemical Physics, Vol. 81, pp. 6320-6332.
29. Soilvision 4.10 www.soilvision.com/support/research.shtml (website visited
on 1-11-2011).
30. Sposito, G. (1989) “The chemistry of soils”, Oxford university press, New
York.
31. Sreedeep, S. (2006) “Modeling contaminant transport in unsaturated soils”
Ph. D. Thesis submitted to the Dept. of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of
Technology Bombay, India.
32. Syers, J. K., Campbell, A. S., Walker, T. W. (1970) “Contribution of organic
carbon and clay to cation exchange capacity in a chronosequence of sandy
soils”, Plant and Soil, Vol. 33, pp. 104-112.
33. van Genuchten M. T. (1980) “A closed form equation for predicting the
hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils”, Soil Science Society of America
Journal, Vol. 44, pp. 892-898.
34. Velde, B. and Peck, T. (2002) “Clay mineral changes in the morrow
experimental plots, University of Illinois”, Clays and Clay Minerals, Vol. 50,
pp. 364-370.
35. Whittig, L. D. and Allardice, W. R. (1986) “X-ray diffraction techniques. In:
methods of soil analysis”, Agronomy No. 9, Part 1, American Society of
Agronomy, Madison, WI, pp. 331-362.
36. Yong, R. N. (2001) “Geoenvironmental engineering: contaminated soils,
pollutant fate, and mitigation”, CRC Press, New York.
Model Questions
Illustrate using a figure, the condition at time t=0 and explain what has happened
thereafter till time t and why?
Calculate the molar concentration of the NaCl solution. The value of R is
0.0820Litre.atm/Kelvin.mole. The density of NaCl is 1.2 g/cc. (1 atm=0.1 MPa).
5 cm rise
Module 3
WASTE CONTAINMENT SYSTEM
Land
disposal
without
energy
recovery
Land disposal with
energy recovery
Incineration
Reuse
Rain water
Ground surface
Waste Primary containment/ landfill
Leachate
flowing out Unsaturated
of landfill Natural soil
(Secondary
containment)
Top of aquifer
Groundwater
flow
Impervious layer
Fig. 3.2 A conceptual waste disposal facility on a global scale
In the past, it was presumed that leachate generated from waste dumped directly
on natural soil is completely attenuated (purified) by the subsurface before it
reaches or interacts with groundwater. In the figure, subsurface is the
unsaturated natural soil which provides an indirect containment of harmful
contaminants leaching out. In view of the above, all forms of non-engineered land
disposal such as gravel pits were acceptable. Since, 1950 onwards there were
considerable increase in the ground water pollution. The cause for such pollution
was traced back to such indiscriminate casual waste disposals. This gave way to
the development of engineered waste disposal facilities known as landfills. The
properties of soils used for the construction of landfills and the natural soil
beneath the landfill become very important. In this course, major emphasis is laid
on understanding the concepts of landfill and the role of soil in minimizing the
harmful pollution of geoenvironment and ground water.
3.2 Landfills
There are two types of landfills namely natural attenuation landfill and
containment landfill as depicted in Fig. 3.3. Natural attenuation landfill is similar
Cover Cover
Waste Waste
Containment liner
Groundwater Groundwater
Aquifer Aquifer
Rock Rock
(a) (b)
Fig. 3.3 Conceptual depiction of types of landfill (a) Natural attenuation (b) Containment
iv) Transportation: The data on transportation would include the present network
and the futuristic development. It is very essential that the landfill site is easily
accessible and waste hauling is optimal. At the same time, the site should be
away from important facilities like airport. It is essential to refer road and rail
network details before site-selection.
v) Waste type and volume: The primary question is whether the waste is
hazardous or not. The philosophy of waste containment changes depending on
whether it is municipal or industrial waste. Stringent specifications need to be
followed for industrial waste and in no case the waste can be dumped in open
pits. Around 50% of the total waste comes from domestic municipal sources. A
waste generation rate of 0.9-1.8 kg/person/day is a reasonable estimate for
determining municipal waste volume. The population and its growth during the
active life of landfill need to be computed.
Waste volume per year = population per year x waste generation rate
The landfill volume is the sum of daily, intermittent and final cover volume and
waste volume. Waste: daily cover ratio of 4:1 is needed if soil is used as the
cover.
b) Locational criterion: Following are some of the important points to be followed
while deciding location for waste containment.
Lake or pond: Away by 300m. The distance can be reduced for engineered
waste containment. Surface water need to be monitored continuously for
pollution in future.
River: Away by 100 m.
Flood plain: Not to construct municipal waste containment within 100 year flood
plain. For hazardous waste containment this requirement is 500 year flood plain.
Highway and public park: Away by 300 m.
Airport: Away by 3 km to avoid bird menace.
Water supply well: Away by 400 m.
Crowded habitat, wetland, unstable area to be avoided.
The geology of the place should be suitable with no faults and folds. Maximum
horizontal acceleration for the site caused by earthquake should not exceed 0.1g
in 250 years.
c) Preliminary assessment of public reaction: Public education on the short term
and long term advantages of the facility should be carrier out extensively. Not in
my backyard (NIMBY) sentiment can prevent the execution of landfill. Some of
the major concerns are noise, odour, increase in traffic volume, reduction in
property value, fear of groundwater contamination etc. The public needs to be
assured that the above mentioned concerns would be tackled efficiently. This is
one of the challenging issues for geoenvironmental engineers and municipal
authorities in the planning and execution of such projects.
Consequence 3
Consequence 2 Consequence 1
(c) Overlays
In this method, thematic transparent maps are developed for flora, fauna,
geology, population, rivers, slopes, roads, agricultural land etc. These maps are
placed on a glass table, one on top of the other, forming layers of information
about the zone .When an intense electric lamp is placed beneath the glass table,
light reaching the top layer indicate the area that is feasible for a project under
study. The physical limitation in the application of this method is that no more
than 10 overlays can be used. These days GIS (geographic information system)
is an effective quantitative method to combine the overlays.
Some of the quantitative methods for landfill site selection include the
following:
(a) Matrix method
This method relates activities of a project and its impact on the
environment. An example problem of site selection for landfill is presented in
Table 3.1. The table corresponds to the assessment of one of the alternative
(Site 1). As listed in the table, an importance value is assigned to different
environmental parameters. Further, the impact of different activities (denoted as
A, B, C, D in table) on these environmental parameters is defined by assigning
magnitude of impact, which can be negative or positive. A, B, C, D corresponds
to activities like disposal of solid waste, reclamation, transportation etc.
Table 3.1 Details of matrix method
SITE-1
Environmental Parameters Importance Value A B C D
Air Quality 100
Water Quality 95
Health 90 3
Land Use 85
Human Settlement 80 -5
Concentration
Time
Fig. 3.5 Variation of leachate quality (concentration) with elapsed time
Municipal solid
waste Hazardous waste
Minimum 3 m
Water table
Fig. 3.6 A typical engineered landfill provision
Liner or barrier
Natural soil
expressed by Fick’s first and second laws (Rowe et al. 1988), which corresponds
to steady (Eq. 3.6) and transient diffusion (Eq. 3.7), respectively.
C
Fd nD e (3.6)
z
2
L
where, D e D m and
Le
C 2C
nDe (3.7)
t z 2
where Fd is the mass flux due to diffusion of solute per unit area per unit time, D e
is the effective diffusion coefficient, Dm is the molecular diffusion coefficient, is
C
the tortuosity coefficient, is termed as concentration gradient, L is the straight
z
line distance of the flow path, Le is the actual distance traveled by the solute
through the pore space and z is the distance of solute travel.
t C
Total mass flux due to steady state diffusion md = A * (n.D . z ).d
0
e (3.8)
Advective-dispersive transport:
Mechanical dispersion (Dmd) occurs when the flow velocity is high or when there
is sudden variation in flow velocity or due to non-homogeneity in porous media.
Dispersion and diffusion process are normally lumped together and known as
hydrodynamic dispersion coefficient (D).
D= (De+Dmd) (3.9)
For low permeable soils like clays, De dominates and for high permeable soils
like sands Dmd dominates. Dmd is represented as a linear function of velocity as
represented by Eq. 3.10.
Dmd = α.v (3.10)
α is known as dispersivity (in m). It is scale dependent and changes with the
extent of problem domain.
Total mass flux due to advective-dispersive transport is then given by
t C
md = A * ( n. v . C n.D. z ).d
0
s (3.11)
Sorption
Sorption process, as discussed in chapter 2, is an important contaminant
retention mechanism that slow down or remove the contaminant from flowing
pore water there by delaying its presence in groundwater. Therefore, for reactive
contaminants, sorption plays an important role in deciding its fate (presence of
contaminant with respect to space and time). Sorption is governed by physico–
chemical properties of both solute and soil. Many soils can preferentially adsorb
some type of contaminants to others.
When water containing dissolved contaminants (reactive) comes in contact with
soil, the total mass of the contaminant will partition between solution and the soil.
Concentration of contaminant sorbed on to the soil solids is given by
Cs = (Ci – Ce).(V/Ms) (3.12)
Where Ci is the initial concentration of contaminant in pore water, Ce is the
concentration of contaminant in pore water at equilibrium sorption reaction, Cs is
the concentration of contaminant sorbed on soil mass, V is the volume of pore
water which has interacted with Ms mass of soil. V/Ms is known as liquid to solid
ratio.
For water flowing at a sufficiently low pace, the sorption reaction reaches
equilibrium. The equilibrium sorption reaction is mathematically defined by using
sorption isotherms. These isotherms define the equilibrium relationship between
sorbed concentration on soil and equilibrium concentration present in solution.
Cs = f(Ce) (3.13)
The simplest case of sorption can be modelled using linear isotherm represented
by Eq. 3.14.
Cs = Kd. Ce (3.14)
Kd is the partition coefficient representing the amount of sorption on soil. Such
linear isotherms are good approximations for low concentration range. For higher
range of concentration, sorption is non-linear. Two commonly used non-linear
Cs K f C n e (3.16)
Where S m is the maximum capacity of sorption at all available sorption site (mono
K d C 2C C
1 D 2 vs (3.19)
n t z z
K d
1 is termed as retardation coefficient “R” when linear sorption is
n
assumed for contaminant-soil interaction. This assumption is valid for low
concentration range of contaminant.
When the contaminant is reactive with the soil, the velocity of its travel may be
less than the seepage velocity due to the retention process. To take this into
account, relative ionic velocity (vs/vion ) is represented as
K d
vs/vion = 1
n
vion is the average velocity of reactive (non-conservative) contaminant species.
For a non-reactive (conservative) contaminant, Kd will be negligible and hence vs
is equal to vion. Eq. 3.19 is valid only for saturated soil where porosity is equal to
volumetric water content (θ). For unsaturated soil n is replaced by θ.
compacted soil. Depending upon the test facilities, the flow of contaminant
solution can be under constant head or under constant flow rate. Constant flow
rate is possible only for high permeable soil. The contaminant solution after
flowing through the soil is collected as effluent from the bottom of the column.
The effluent is collected at regular intervals of time, filtered and analyzed for
concentration. This measured concentration is designated as Ct (concentration at
time t). Concentration variation of effluent can be related to time or pore volume.
Once the test is over, the soil is sliced and the concentration sorbed on soil mass
is determined. This will give the concentration variation with depth. Therefore,
measured Ct can be obtained as a function of time, pore volume or depth. The
solution to the governing differential equation (Eq. 3.19) can be best fitted to the
experimental data to obtain the values of R and D. Analytical solution for Eq. 3.19
for simple boundary conditions given below is represented by Eqs. 3.20 and 3.21
for non-reactive and reactive contaminants, respectively. The solution is
applicable for barrier which is assumed to be infinitely deep and subject to a
constant source concentration.
Initial condition C (z, 0) = 0 z >0
Boundary conditions C (0, t) = Co (initial concentration) t ≥ 0
C (∞, t) = 0 t ≥ 0
Ct 1 z vs t v z z v s t
erfc exp s erfc (3.20)
C0 2 2 Dt D 2 Dt
Ct 1 z vs t v z z v s t
erfc exp s erfc (3.21)
C0 2 2 Dt / R D 2 Dt / R
For a given liner, it is essential to check whether the provided thickness is
sufficient or not. For this purpose, the parameters governing contaminant
transport such as vs, D and R is obtained as discussed above for the liner
material and model contaminant used. vs is obtained by determining discharge
velocity and knowing the compaction state. Numerical or analytical modelling is
performed to determine the fate of model contaminant (position of contaminant
with respect to space and time). For 1-D modelling as discussed above, space
refers to depth. Based on the numerical modelling, it is checked whether the liner
of given thickness and properties will be able to contain the contaminant for the
given design life. It is expected that the concentration of contaminant reaching
groundwater aquifer should not exceed the safe drinking water standards for the
specified design or operational life. In case, it exceeds then the thickness or the
material need to be reconsidered till it becomes safe. In certain cases,
groundwater table is assumed at the bottom of the liner as worst case scenario.
This means that the role of natural soil below liner is not considered. In the above
modelling, the deterioration of liner material with aging is not considered. The
modelling is done with a gross assumption that the material properties remain
same with age.
Ct/C0 Ct/C0
Source Receiver Source Receiver
Lc Lc
-z 0 +z 0 z0 z
Direction of diffusion Direction of diffusion
(a) Infinite cell (b) Finite cell
Fig. 3.8 Details of the half-cell
Ct 1 z
erfc (3.23)
C0 2 2 D t/R
e
(ii) When the concentration profile reaches at the ends of half-cell, the soil
medium can be considered to be finite and the origin for x-axis is taken at the
end of the source half-cell, as depicted in Fig. 3.5(b). The initial and boundary
conditions for this case can be stated as follows:
Initial conditions: Ct (z, t) = C0 (for z≤0, t=0); Ct (z, t) = 0 (for z>0,
t=0)
Ct Ct
Boundary conditions: 0 (for z=0, t>0); 0 (for z=Lc, t>0)
z z
where Lc is the total length of the cell.
The solution for Eq. 3.22 corresponding to case (ii) can be represented as
follows (Carslaw and Jaeger 1959):
References
Model Questions
23. A batch test was conducted for 3 soil samples A, B, C with an initial
concentration of 100 mg/l of SrCl2. 5 g of each of the soil sample is mixed
with 50 ml, 100 ml, and 250 ml of SrCl2 and the values of Ce for A are 10,
8 and 6 mg/l, for B it is 12, 10 and 8 mg/l and for C it is 4, 3, 2 mg/l
respectively. Compare the reactivity of the soil-contaminant system of the
three soils and comment on the role of liquid to solid ratio on the sorption
capacity of the three soil. Make any suitable assumptions.
24. Specific discharge in the field is given as 1.68x10 -8 m/s. Bulk density of
fully saturated porous medium is 1.6 g/cc with volumetric water content of
0.4. Partition coefficient of lead obtained by linear isotherm is 10 ml/g.
Determine average velocity of lead. What will be the velocity of lead if it is
assumed as non-reactive with porous medium?
25. A drainage pipe became blocked during a storm event by a plug of sand
and silty clay as shown in figure Q3.1. When the storm ceased, water level
above ground is 1 m. Permeability of sand is 2 times that of silty clay.
a) Obtain variation of head components and total head for the length of
drainage pipe
b) Calculate pore water pressure at centre of sand and silty clay
c) Find average hydraulic hydraulic gradient in both soil plugs.
Water level
Fig. Q3.1
3.3 m
1.5 m 0.5 m
Datum and water exit
A Sand C Silty B
clay
26. Determine the quantity of flow and seepage velocity for constant head set
ups given below (Fig. Q3.2) in SI units.
10 cm 20 cm 10 cm 20 cm
5 cm Fig. Q3.2
10 cm 5 cm
10 cm
5 cm
5 cm
-5
ksat= 3*10 cm/s
saturated volumetric water content = 0.5 ksat= 3*10-5 cm/s
Specific gravity = 2.65; w=25 %
Module 4
CONTAMINATED SITE REMEDIATION
Yes
Select, evaluate and apply remediation Sufficient information to decide remediation
No
Information sufficient to demonstrate No Lab/ field studies to understand distribution, reaction and migration
remediation optimization Sensitivity analysis to understand the effect of various design
parameters on remediation performance
It can be noted from Fig. 4.1 that the most important step for making a decision
on site remediation is collection of data. Table 4.1 summarizes the essential data
to be collected as part of site reconnaissance and site characterization.
Table 4.1 Summary of data required for planning contaminated site remediation
agencies such as central pollution control board (CPCB), India, United States
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) have prescribed toxic concentration
levels for various chemicals that get leached from the waste samples by
conducting TCLP. In some cases, multiple extractions from the wastes become
necessary. For performing TCLP appropriate extraction fluid need to be used.
Glacial acetic acid mixed with water is used as the extraction fluid. In some cases
sodium hydroxide is also added. For detailed procedure, readers are advised to
refer to Method 1311, EPA.
Reactivity
It is the tendency to interact chemically with other substances. These
interactions become hazardous when it results in explosive reaction with water
and/or other substances and generate toxic gases.
Corrosivity
Corrosive contaminants degrade materials such as cells and tissues and
remove matter. It is defined as the ability of contaminant to deteriorate the
biological matter. Strong acids, bases, oxidants, dehydrating agents are
corrosive. pH < 2 or pH > 12.5 is considered as highly corrosive. Substances that
corrode steel at a rate of 6.35 mm/year is also considered hazardous.
Ignitability
It is the ease with which substance can burn. The temperature at which
the mixture of chemicals, vapour and air ignite is called the flash point of
chemical substances. Contaminants are classified as hazardous if it is easily
ingnitable or its flash point is low.
Based on the above four factors the risk associated with a particular site is
determined by specifying maximum acceptable risk using risk estimation
equations (Reddi and Inyang 2000). Risk assessment provides a numerical
quantification of the probability of harm from hazardous or toxic contamination.
Risk management uses this input of risk assessment in deciding how much
regulation and corrective measure need to be taken. The corrective action is
mostly the practice of remediation of the contaminated site. The maximum
possible concentration that could lead to the maximum acceptable risk is back
Fig. 4.2 Soil washing for granular soils contaminated with inorganic pollutant
However, washing procedure is mostly suitable for granular soils with less clay
content and contaminated with inorganic pollutants. For clay dominated soils, a
chemical dispersion agent need to be added to deflocculate and then chemical
washing is employed to break the retention of contaminants with the clay surface.
Incineration is suggested for soils contaminated with organic pollutants. In case,
it is necessary to remove organic pollutants then certain solvents or surfactants
are used as washing agents.
The method is directly applied in situ where solvent, surfactant solution or
water mixed with additives is used to wash the contaminants from the saturated
zone by injection and recovery system. The additives are used to enhance
contaminant release and mobility resulting in increased recovery and hence
decreased soil contamination.
Vacuum extraction
This method is one of the most widely used in situ treatment technologies.
The method is cost-effective but time consuming and ineffective in water
saturated soil. The technique, as depicted in Fig. 4.3, is useful for extracting
contaminated groundwater and soil vapour from a limited subsurface depth. The
contaminated water is then subjected to standard chemical and biological
treatment techniques. Vacuum technique is also useful when soil-water is
contaminated with volatile organic compound (VOC). The method is then termed
Vadoze zone
Saturated zone
Aeration Aeration
Fig. 4.3 A schematic diagram for vacuum extraction procedure (Reddi and Inyang, 2000)
The vacuum extraction probe is always placed in the vadoze zone. The success
of the method depends on the volatilization of VOC from water into air present in
voids. An injecting medium is used to extract soil-water and/ or soil-air. When
oxygen is used instead of nitrogen as the injecting medium, it enhances aerobic
biodegradation.
Soil structure influences a lot on the passage of extracted water and
vapour and hence on the success of vacuum extraction technique. It is not only
important that the injecting medium is delivered efficiently but also the extracted
product reaches the exit with less hindrance. Granular soils provide better
passage where as the presence of clay and organic matter impedes the
transmission of both fluid and vapour. Organic matter provides high retention
leading to less volatilization. High density and water content also minimize
transmissivity. Apart from soil, the VOC properties such as solubility, sorption,
vapour pressure, concentration etc. also influence the extraction process.
Solidification and stabilization
This is the process of immobilizing toxic contaminants so that it does not
have any effect temporally and spatially. Stabilization-solidification (SS) is
performed in single step or in two steps. In single step, the polluted soil is mixed
with a special binder so that polluted soil is fixed and rendered insoluble. In two
step process, the polluted soil is first made insoluble and non-reactive and in the
second step it is solidified. SS process is mostly justified for highly toxic
pollutants. In-situ SS process is mostly influenced by the transmissivity
characteristics of the soil, viscosity and setting time of the binder. Well
compacted soil, high clay and organic content do not favour in-situ SS.
In ex-situ methods, polluted soil is first grinded, dispersed, and then
mixed with binder material. The resultant SS material need to be disposed in a
well contained landfill. It is essential that the resultant SS product does not
undergo leaching. The common binders used in practice include cement, lime, fly
ash, clays, zeolites, pozzolonic products etc. Organic binders include bitumen,
polyethylene, epoxy and resins. These organic binders are used for soil
contaminated with organic pollutants.
Chemical decontamination
This method is mostly applicable for those soils which have high sorbed
concentration of inorganic heavy metals (IHM). The first process in this method is
to understand the nature of bonding between the pollutant and the soil surface. A
suitable extractant need to be selected for selective sequential extraction (SSE)
of IHM from the soil mass. The extractants include electrolytes, weak acids,
complexing agents, oxidizing and reducing agents, strong acids etc. The use of
these extractants in single or in combination will depend upon the concentration
of IHM and nature of the soil mass.
In-situ application (as depicted in Fig. 4.4) of extractants would remove
IHM from the soil surface and enter into the pore water. The pore water is
pumped and treated (pump and treat method) on the ground. While treating the
pumped water, both extractants and IHM are removed.
Extraction
Permeable
Ground surface Row of injection wells reactive barrier
Ground water
flow direction
Contaminated
zone with
extractants and
IHM
Ludwig et al. (2011) have explained the use of permeable reactive barrier
(PRB) for the treatment of Cr6 in groundwater. PRB in the form of trench and fill
system, chemical redox curtain or organic carbon based biotic treatment zone
induce reduction condition for converting Cr6 to relatively immobile and non-toxic
Cr3. The most efficient trench and fill application is granular zero valent Iron (ZVI)
fillings, which rapidly converts Cr6 to Cr3. Alternatively, organic mulch and
compost has been used to initiate microbially active Cr6 reduction. However, the
use of organic matter as well as organic carbon does not have the longevity of
ZVI. The study quotes an example of ZVI based PRB installed at North Carolina
in 1996. This PRB is of 10 m depth, 0.6 m wide and 46 m long. This PRB is
found to treat groundwater containing Cr6 (approximately 15 mg/l concentration)
for more than 15 years. This study also quotes the use of chemical reducing
agent such as sodium dithionite at US department of energy, Hanford, site for
treating large Cr6 containing groundwater plume.
Asquith and Geary (2011) have compared bioremediation of petroleum
contaminated soil by three methods, namely, biostimulation, bioaugmentation
and surfactant addition. Bioremediation process depends on microbial activity for
biodegrading petroleum hydrocarbons. Since it is a natural process, it is a slow
reaction. The above mentioned three methods are used for increasing the rate of
bioremediation reaction. Biostimulation enhances the growth and activity of
microorganisms by the addition of nutrients and/or additives. Bioaugmentation is
the addition of hydrocarbon degrading microbial cultures. Surfactant addition
would enhance solubility, emulsify and disperse hydrophobic contaminants to
overcome the problem of low contaminant bioavailability. Sandy loam soil with
total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH) > 30000mg/kg has been used to evaluate the
three methods. It was noted from this study that biostimulation with nutrients
enhanced bioremediation process. Organic amendments provided a better
bioremediation than inorganic amendments. Surfactant addition was found to
increase bioavailability of hydrocarbon and hence enhance bioremediation.
Ascenco (2009) has discussed about contaminated site characterization
and clean up based on two case studies. The first case study pertains to the
References
Model Questions
Module 5
ADVANCED SOIL CHARACTERIZATION
voltage V is applied between the two electrodes mounted on the opposite faces
of the box and the current I passing through the medium is measured using a
digital multimeter. Hence, the resistance RERB and electrical resistivity ERB
offered by the medium can be determined by Eqs. 5.2 and 5.3, respectively.
RERB=V/I (5.2)
ERB = a.RERB (5.3)
a is a constant that depends on the geometry of the box, which can be
determined by measuring resistance of the standard KCl and NaCl solutions of
known electrical resistivity.
Electrical resistivity probe (ERP) is more appropriate for measuring the
soil electrical resistivity in situ. As depicted in Fig. 5.2, four annular copper rings,
which act as electrodes are mounted on an ebonite rod of 16 mm outer diameter,
at a center-to-center spacing of 25 mm. The two outer electrodes are the current
electrodes while the inner electrodes are used for measuring the voltage. For
sufficient insertion and ensuring perfect contact of the ERP with the soil mass, a
100 mm long and 15 mm diameter hole is created in soil with the help of a
dummy rod. AC of intensity I is applied to the outer electrodes and the potential
drop V across the two inner electrodes is measured. Soil resistance (RERP) can
be obtained, which can be correlated to the resistivity ERP using an appropriate
parameter b that depends on the geometry of the probe, as discussed above for
ERB.
12 cm
3cm
Electrodes
3cm
12 cm
3cm
3cm
12 cm
Figure not to scale
1 2
4 3
Ebonite rod
C
C
V
V
C
C
Stainless steel cone
q
K= (5.4)
A(T2 -T1 )/l
Where, l is the length of the element, T1 and T2 are temperature where T2>T1.
The heat capacity C per unit volume of soil is the heat energy required to raise
the temperature of unit volume of soil by 1°C. It is the product of the mass spe-
cific heat c (cal/g °C) and the density ρ (g/cc). Thermal diffusivity is the ratio of
thermal conductivity to specific heat. It indicates how materials or soil adjust their
temperature with respect to the surroundings. A high value of the thermal
diffusivity implies capability for rapid and considerable changes in temperature.
Fine grained or cohesive soil and peaty soils exhibit high ρ than granular
soil. Sand with quartz as the principal constituent has low ρ. The type of clay
minerals present in soil also influences ρ. Expansive clay minerals such as
montmorillonite would cause the soil particles to be forced apart during swelling
action when it comes in contact with water, thereby increasing ρ. Well-graded
soils conduct heat better than poorly graded soils because the smaller grain can
fit in the interstitial positions between the larger grains thus increasing the density
and the mineral-to-mineral contact. The shape of the soil particles determines the
surface contact area between particles which affects the ability of the soil to
conduct heat. ρ increases with decreasing particle size due to reduced surface
contact between adjacent particles.
condition of the materials. Some of the methods employing steady state and
transient measuring principle are discussed below.
The most important steady state method for measuring the ρ of soils is the
guarded hot plate (GHP) test as depicted in Fig. 5.3 (ASTM C 177). As shown in
figure, two identical specimens are placed above and below a flat-plate main
heater unit which is surrounded by an outer guard heater. The guard eliminates
horizontal heat losses and causes heat from the main heater to flow vertically up
or down through the test specimen. Liquid-cooled heat sinks are placed adjacent
to the outer surfaces of the specimens. A certain temperature drop is obtained
across each specimen of certain thickness. K of the specimen material is
calculated from Eq. 5.5.
Q L
1/ ρ = K= (5.5)
A ΔT
Where, Q is the heat flow through soil, A is the area of soil specimen, L is the
length of heat flow, and T is the temperature drop. The GHP test is time
consuming and only suitable for laboratory use.
Cold plate
Thermocouple
Soil specimen
Heater
Soil specimen
Cold plate
Fig. 5.3 Schematic diagram of the guarded hotplate method for determining thermal conductivity (ASTM C 177)
T 2T
D 2 (5.6)
t x
T 2 T 1 T
D 2 (5.7)
t r r r
Where, r is the radial distance from the line source. Assuming heat is produced
from t=0 at a constant rate q per unit length of probe, the solution of Eq. 5.7 is
given by Eq. 5.8.
q 1 r 2
∆T= Ei (5.8)
4π K 4Dt
The apparatus for thermal probe method shall consist of the following:
1. Thermal needle probe: A device that creates a linear source and incorporates a
temperature measurement element (thermocouple or thermostat) to measure
variation of temperature at a point along the line.
2. Constant current source: A device to produce a constant current.
3. Thermal read out unit: A device to produce a digital read out of temperature in
0
C.
4. Voltage-Ohm-Meter (VOM) - A device to read voltage and current to the
nearest 0.01 V and ampere.
5. Stopwatch measuring time to the nearest 0.1 s for a minimum of 15 min.
6. Equipment capable of drilling a straight vertical hole having a diameter as close
as possible to that of the probe and to depth at least equal to the length of the
probe.
q
T= ln t c (Jackson and Taylor, 1965) (5.9)
4 K
q
slope=
4 K
Where q=heat flow rate (q= i2.r’), t is the time, T is the temperature, K is the
thermal conductivity of soil, I is the current applied, r’ is the resistance per unit
length of probe.
Point-source method
K
D= (5.10)
γc
C: Connection cable
P: Prongs
P P B: Body of the probe
C: Connection cable
P: Prong
P P1 P1 P1: Gold coated Prongs
B: Body of the probe
Lm
Axis of
N.g = re.2
Lp=N.Lm Lm rotation
re
Model (N-g)
Prototype (1-g)
(b)
Lm
re r t
3 (5.11)
5.6.1 Similitude in centrifuge modeling
The results of centrifuge model, which is used to understand a mechanism
or process, can be extrapolated to corresponding prototype condition using
suitable scaling laws. To formulate these scaling laws, three types of similitude
conditions have to be considered, as discussed in the following.
Geometrical similarity
Kinematic similarity
The model and the prototype are said to be kinematically similar if their
ratio of velocity, v, and acceleration, a, are constant. Hence:
vm/vp = (5.13)
am/ap = n (5.14)
Dynamic similarity
Fm/Fp = (5.15)
M m ρ m Vm
(5.17)
Mp ρ p Vp
If the material used in model and prototype are same, then the mass density will
be same (ρm = ρp).
M m Vm L m 1
3 (5.18)
Mp
Vp L p N
γm ρmg m
(5.20)
γp ρpg p
Therefore, γm = N γp (5.21)
F = Mg (5.22)
Fm M m g m 1
3 for 1-g model where gm = gp (5.23)
Fp Mpgp N
Fm M m g m 1
2 for N-g model where gm = Ngp (5.24)
Fp Mpgp N
= (v/k).W
V is the volume of soil mass, i is the hydraulic gradient, v is the discharge
velocity, k is the hydraulic conductivity or permeability, γw is the unit weight of
water and W is the weight of seepage water.
SFm v m k p Wm
. . (5.26)
SFp v p k m Wp
vm Lm t p 1 tp
. . (5.27)
vp Lp t m N t m
t is the time.
k can be represented by Eq. 5.28.
K.ρ w .g
k=
μ (5.28)
where w is the fluid density, is the dynamic viscosity of the fluid, and K is the
intrinsic permeability. If the same pore fluid and the soil are used in the model
and prototype, then Eq. 5.28 can be written as:
K .ρ. gm
km μ g
m N
kp K.ρ.gp gp
μ (5.29)
km=N.kp (5.30)
Wm M m g m 1
. 2 (5.31)
Wp Mp gp N
Substituting Eqs. 5.27, 5.30 and 5.31 in Eq. 5.26, and considering seepage force
as a body force with scale factor represented by Eq. 5.24, we get
SFm 1 1 tp 1 1
2 . . (5.32)
SFp N N t m N N2
tm 1
2 (5.33)
tp N
References
20. Rao, B. H., Bhat, A. M., and Singh, D. N. (2007) “Application of impedance
spectroscopy for modeling flow of ac in soils”, Geomechanics and
Geoengineering: An International Journal, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 197-206.
21. Reddy, K. R. and Chintamreddy, S. (2001) “Assessment of electrokinetic
removal of heavy metals from soils by sequential extraction analysis”, Journal
of Hazardous Material, Vol. 84, No. 2-3, pp. 279-296.
22. Rhoades, J. D. and Schilfgaarde, J. V. (1976) “An electrical conductivity
probe for determining soil salinity”, Soil Science Society of America Journal,
Vol. 40, pp. 647-650.
23. Shah, P. H. and Singh, D. N. (2004) “A simple methodology for determining
electrical conductivity of soils”, Journal of ASTM International, Vol. 1, No. 5,
published on line, 11 Pages.
24. Shah, P. H. and Singh, D. N. (2005) “Generalized Archie’s law for estimation
of soil electrical conductivity”, Journal of ASTM International, Vol. 2, No. 5,
published on line, 20 Pages.
25. Singh, D. N. and Gupta, A. K. (2000) “Permeability modeling in a small
centrifuge”, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 37, No. 5, pp. 1150-1155.
26. Smith-Ross, R. L. (1933) “Electrical properties of soils for alternating currents
at radio frequencies” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A,
Containing Papers of a Mathematical and Physical Character, The Royal
Society, Vol. 140, No. 841, pp. 359-377, http://www.jstor.org/stable/95996
(website visited on 20-1-2012).
27. Sreedeep, S., Reshma, A. C. and Singh, D. N. (2004) "Measuring soil
electrical resistivity using a resistivity box and a resistivity probe” Journal of
Testing and Evaluation, ASTM, Vol. 27, No.4, pp. 411-415.
28. Taylor, R. N. (1995) “Centrifuges in modelling: principles and scale effects”,
Geotechnical Centrifuge Technology, Taylor (ed.), Blackie Academic and
Professional, Glasgow, pp. 19-33.
29. Topp, G. C., Davis, J. L. and Annan, A. P. (1980) “Electromagnetic
determination of soil water content: Measurements in coaxial transmission
lines”, Water Resour. Res. Vol. 16, pp. 574–582.
Model Questions