Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
A New Method for the Estimation of Hydraulic Permeability, Coefficient of Consolidation, and Soil Fraction Based on the Dilatometer Tests (DMT) Cover

A New Method for the Estimation of Hydraulic Permeability, Coefficient of Consolidation, and Soil Fraction Based on the Dilatometer Tests (DMT)

Studia Geotechnica et Mechanica
Volume 41 (2019): Issue 4 (December 2019)
By: Simon Rabarijoely  
Open Access
|Dec 2019
Figures & tables

Figures & Tables

Figure 1

Example of the DMTA decay curve from the Stegny site.

Figure 2

Scheme of groundwater flow to the DMT membrane (DMTC) and assumed segment of sphere (Garbulewski et al., [21]).

Figure 3

Location of test sites in the region of Poland.

Figure 4

Grain size distribution curve obtained from laboratory tests for mineral soil from the described sites.

Figure 5

Typical soil profile at the Stegny Pliocene clay site showing the main dilatometer test DMT results.

Figure 6

Typical soil profile at the SGGW Campus boulder clay site showing the main dilatometer test DMT results.

Figure 7

Typical soil profile at the Nielisz dam organic mud and mud site showing the main dilatometer test DMT results.

Figure 8

Comparison of test results obtained with the proposed formula and obtained immediately after field tests with a dilatometer.

Figure 9

Comparison of the hydraulic permeability (kh) value between the measured and proposed chart from the Nielisz dam and Stegny sites.

Figure 10

Proposed relationship between DMT, tflex (in minutes) and hydraulic permeability of the soil.

Figure 11

Pressure dependencies p0 and p1 together with isolines to determine the clay fraction

Figure 12

Pressure dependencies p0 and p1 together with isolines to determine the silt fraction.

Figure 13

Pressure dependencies p0 and p1 together with isolines to determine the sand fraction.

Figure 14

Comparison of the soil fraction obtained from laboratory and dilatometer (DMT) tests results.

Index properties of mineral and organic soils at the Nielisz, Stegny and SGGW Campus test sites (Interrim reports [22])_

SitesSoil typeOrganic content Iom (%)CaCO3 content (%)Water content wn (%)Liquid Limit wL (%)Unit density of Soil ρ (t/m3)Specific density of Soil ρs (t/m3)
NieliszOrganic mud (Mor)20–30-120–150130–1501.25–1.302.25–2.3
Organic mud (Mor)10–20-105–120110–1301.30–1.452.30–2.40
StegnyPliocene clays (Cl)--19.20–28.5067.6–88.02.1–2.22.68–2.73
SGGW CampusBoulder clay (clSa)--5.20–20.1021.9–26.62.0–2.22.68–2.73
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/sgem-2019-0021 | Journal eISSN: 2083-831X | Journal ISSN: 0137-6365
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 212 - 222
Submitted on: Mar 5, 2019
Accepted on: Jul 17, 2018
Published on: Dec 30, 2019
Published by: Wroclaw University of Science and Technology
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year
Keywords:
DMT,
mineral and organic soils,
classification chart,
hydraulic permeability,
soil fraction
Related subjects:
Geosciences,
Geosciences, other,
Materials sciences,
Composites,
Porous materials,
Physics,
Mechanics and fluid dynamics

© 2019 Simon Rabarijoely, published by Wroclaw University of Science and Technology
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Volume 41 (2019): Issue 4 (December 2019)
Previous article
Next article