4.7 Article

Swell and shrinkage characterizations of unsaturated expansive clays from exas

期刊

ENGINEERING GEOLOGY
卷 164, 期 -, 页码 187-194

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2013.07.001

关键词

SWCC; Expansive soils; Swelling and shrinkage; Unsaturated soils; Clay mineralogy

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [1031214]
  2. Directorate For Engineering
  3. Div Of Civil, Mechanical, & Manufact Inn [1031214] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Expansive soils have long been recognized as problematic because they cause failure to civil structures constructed above them. The main problem of these soils can be attributed to poor understanding of the volume changes caused by moisture fluctuations. Current swell and shrinkage characterization models are limited by both the lack of standardized tests and tests that employ volume changes in uniaxial direction. In the present research, a comprehensive laboratory investigation was undertaken to study the volume change related swell-shrinkage behaviors of five different types of expansive clayey soils sampled from various regions in Texas, USA. Extensive experimental programs consisting of basic, chemical and mineralogical soil properties were first determined. Three-dimensional free swell and shrinkage tests were performed on all soils at various compaction moisture content conditions. Soil-water characteristic curves (SWCCs) of all test soils were determined by studying the suction potentials of these soils over a wide range of moisture contents. Volume change measurements of soils showed a good correlation with soil properties, including plasticity and soil compaction properties. SWCC results also showed a clear variation in SWCC profiles of soils with respect to soil plasticity. Overall, a large database of soil properties was developed and is presented here. It includes physical and mineralogical properties, as well as engineering swell, shrinkage and SWCC test results. Published by Elsevier B.V.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据