INTRODUCTION

The parameter that describes how easy or difficult it is for water to flow through soil is correctly
called the soils permeability. Knowing a soil’s permeability plays a significant role in the civil
engineering industry. As soils are utilized in nearly all building process, it is crucial to understand
how soils will react to the situation imposed or to choose the soil with the correct properties for the
task at hand.

The Permeability of a soil is directional proportional to a soils grading and porosity. That is an
increase in void space will results in increased permeability, as water will flow increasingly freely
through the soil. i.e., for a well graded soil consisting of small particles, permeability is expected to be
very low.

The ability of water flow is proportional to porosity, however actual flow of water in soils is a
response to a difference in total head between two points or more precisely, it occurs in response to a
gradient in total head. The definition of total head is that fluid flow depends on both the pressure in
the water, and the elevation of the water source in the soil. That is water will flow in the direction to
reduce difference in head and pressure.

There are several methods to measure soil permeability. For the purpose of this report the constant-
head and falling-head permeability tests will be conducted. The constant head method works by
constantly adding water to the sample imposing constant head differences across a soil sample. With
head conditions stable, the test is conducted by simply measuring the flow (Q) through a soil sample
(cross sectional area of the sample, A), i.e., volume of water passing through the sample over time:

Since there is a constant difference in heads, the hydraulic gradient (i) is simply the difference in head
between 2 points (∆H) over length (L) between manometers. The constant head test is suitable for
sands and gravels. However, for finer materials, the flow rate through such a test would be very low,
and it would take a long time to gather a measurable quantity of water. For such cases, an alternative
is to use the Falling Head Test. The falling head test works on the same principle as the constant head
test. However the test is based on data readings with small amounts of water. With stand pipes of
small diameter feeding into a soil sample, the difference in head of the stand pipes over a time period
is how the rate of flow (Q) is calculated and the hydraulic gradient (i) is calculated by the change in
head over the sample length.

AIM
To determine the permeability coefficients of two soil types – sand and a sandy-clay,
using the constant-head and falling-head permeability apparatus.
METHOD

CONSTANT HEAD

Sand was lightly compacted into the Perspex cell (figure1). The cell was then subjected to water flow
and the sand sample was saturated. The Perspex cell was connected to three manometers measuring
the head at three different points of the sample; three manometers were used to get an average value
across the sample. A Small controlled flow (in order to keep turbulent flow from happening and
causing Darcy’s law to become invalid) was fed to the Perspex cell and the head of all three
manometers was recorded once a steady level was reached (table 1). The length and cross sectional
area of the sample was recorded as well as the temperature of the water in order to make to make
coefficient corrections (table 2). Since the presence of air can seriously affect the results, a large
amount of water was allowed to flow into the cell to ensure full saturation and remove any air voids.
To initiate the test, a measuring cylinder was placed at the outflow of the Perspex cell and the rate of
flow was calculated by volume over time. The same procedure was carried out once more but with an
increase of flow into the cell (table 1). The soils permeability was then calculated using the flow rate
(Q), the hydraulic gradient (i) and the cross sectional surface area (A) by Darcy’s law:

Figure 1. Perspex Cell for Constant Head

testing
FALLING HEAD

A compacted saturated sandy-clay specimen was slightly compacted in the falling head testing cell.
The cell was connected to three standpipes. All three standpipes were filled and the water head for
each recorded. The area of all three standpipes, water temperature, the area of the soil sample and
sample length were recorded (table 3). To begin the test, each stand pipe was one by one gravity fed
into the soil sample for 20 seconds and the change in heads was recorded. All three pipes were refilled
and the same process was carried out again. Permeability for the soil was then calculated using the
accepted equation for falling head testing:

k = {2.3 a L log (h1 / h2)} /(At )

L = specimen length (mm)

A = area of test specimen (mm2)
h1, h2 = initial and final standpipe water levels, respectively (mm)
a = area of standpipe (mm2)
t = elapsed time (s)
RESULTS & DISCUSSION

CONSTANT HEAD;

Table 1. Constant Head Data

Test No. 1 2

Manometer No. 1 2 3 1 2 3

Length of L(mm) 65 130 195 65 130 195

Specimen
Area of A(mm2) 5026.55
Specimen
Time t(sec) 210 210 210 137 137 137

Flow Q(mm3/s) 2380.95 3649.64

Water Head H(mm) 140 190 240 110 190 270

Temperature T(˚C) 24 24 24 24 24 24

Test 1;

Hydraulic gradient (i) = ∆H/L

In between Manometer 1 &2 = 50/65 =0.769

In between Manometer 1 &3 = 100/130 =0.769

In between Manometer 2&3 = 50/65 = 0.769

As the hydraulic gradient in between all 3 manometers was equal, it can be assumed there were no
obstructions and that the soil was a homogenous saturated mixture.

Permeability, K;

= 2380.95/(5026.55 * 0.769)

= 0.616 mm/s
Test 2;

Hydraulic gradient (i) = ∆H/L

In between Manometer 1 &2 = 80/65 =1.23

In between Manometer 1 &3 = 160/130 =1.23

In between Manometer 2&3 = 80/65 = 1.23

As the hydraulic gradient in between all 3 manometers was equal, it can be assumed there were no
obstructions and that the soil was a homogenous saturated mixture.

Permeability, K;

= 3649.64/5026.55 * 1.23

= 0.5903 mm/s

Average Permeability (K) for constant head testing = (0.5903+ 0.616) /2 = 0.603 mm/s

However for all permeability data to be consistent and repeatable water temperature must be kept
constant or temperature corrections must be made. As water at different temperatures will have
different permeability. For the case of this experiment permeability data will be calculated for water at
20⁰C.

k 20 = K *K_t

Table 2. Temperature correction coefficient

Temp ,T(⁰C) K_t Temp, T(⁰C) K_t
1.77
0 9 25 0.906
1.55
4 5 30 0.808
1.29
10 9 40 0.67
1.13
15 3 50 0.55
20 1 60 0.468
70 0.41
Since water for constant head testing was 24⁰C;

K_t = {(1 – 0.906)/5} *4+0.906 = 0.9812

Therefore average k 20 for constant head test = k 20 = K *K_t

k 20 = 0.603 * 0.9812 = 0.592mm/s

 FALLING HEAD;

Table 3. Falling Head Data

Test No. 1 2

Stand Pipe No. 1 2 3 1 2 3

Area of stand
50.27 78.54 153.94 50.27 78.54 153.94
pipe, a(mm2)
Cross-sectional
area of soil
8494.87
specimen,
A(mm2)
Length of soil
115
specimen,
L(mm)
Initial reading
of stand pipe, 103.5 97 105 104.5 103.5 102
h1(mm)
Final reading of
stand pipe, 65.2 75.5 94.2 61 82.1 93
h2(mm)
Time, t(sec) 20 20 20 20 20 20
Test
temperature, 24 24 24 24 24 24
T(˚C)

k = {2.3 a L log (h1 / h2)} / (At)

Where, L = specimen length (mm)
A = area of test specimen (mm2)
h1, h2 = initial and final standpipe water levels, respectively (mm)
a = area of standpipe (mm2)
t = elapsed time (s)

Utilizing the above formula:

Test No. 1 2

Stand Pipe No. 1 2 3 1 2 3

permeability 0.015706 0.0133063 0.0112970 0.0182964 0.012300

0.00961438
at T = 24 ˚C 5 1 6 6 3
 However as with constant head testing, permeability data for water at 20 ˚C, k 20 is sought.

k 20 = K *K_t

As previously calculated water at 24 ˚C has a correction coefficient (K_t) of = 0.9812

Therefore

Test No. 1 2

Stand Pipe No. 1 2 3 1 2 3

permeability at 20 0.015411
0.01305615 0.01108468 0.01795249 0.01206905 0.00943363
C, k20 22

Average k20 = 0.01316 mm/s

As expected the sandy-clay permeability was much smaller than the permeability for sand. This is
simply due to the sand being more porous allowing more water to move through the sample. Whereas
as the sandy-clay is well graded, minimising the void spaces and in the turn waters ability to flow
through the soil.

CONCLUSION
The experiment undertaken proved to be succesful producing results as expected from the soils tested.
Two different soil types were test, sand and sandy clay. Constant head testing was conducted on the
sand, the test determined the sand had a permeabilty coefficeint of 0.592mm/s. For soil of finer
composition, the falling head testing method is better suited. Therefore the sandy-clay was tested in
this manner. It was found the sandy-clay had a permeabilty coefficeint of 0.01316mm/s. To be able to
reproduce permeability data water must be of a constant temperature, therefore permeability testing is
based on water at 20⁰C. As the water during testing was at 24⁰C, mathematical corrections were
made. As permeability is a measure of the ability of water to pass through a soil sample it is in direct
relation to soils porosity and grading. From the data attained the theoretical understanding of
permeability was justified as the sand had a far greater permeability than the sandy-clay.

REFERENCES
2010, Soil Mechanics 2102ENG Lecture notes, Griffith School of engineering

IMAGES
Figure 1. Perspex Cell for Constant Head testing

2010, Soil Mechanics 2102ENG Lecture notes, Griffith School of engineering

 PERMEABILITY

2102ENG Soil Mechanics

Daniel Varela;
S2679594

Course Convenor – Dr. Erwin Oh

Questions

Q1.Permeability values (from 2010, Soil Mechanics 2102ENG Lecture notes, Griffith School of
engineering)

Experimental value for Sandy-Clay ;0.01316

Experimental value for sand; 0.592
The value is far greater than the
published
Falls in the samevalue suggesting
category as the the soil
was ungraded
published value and mainly composing
of sand

Q2

The samples used are disturbed therefore are not a true representation of in situ permeability.

Even if the sample was not disturbed it only represents a single point in the soil, the area and layers
would have to be homogeneous (unlikely) in composition for it to be a true representation.
Permeability values vary widely even within the same area, therefore a large number of tests are
required to characterize the permeability.

Also for both tests vertical permeability is quantified however horizontal permeability is greater than
vertical permeability. Therefore, measuring the vertical permeability gives no indication of the
horizontal permeability.

Q3.

Field tests for measuring permeability across larger areas are done by:

Drilling holes into the soil and installing piezometers. Piezometers work similarly to the falling head
method in the sense that they also measure the volume of water going into the earth over a period of
time

Or by

Q4.
As permeability is a measure of the ability of water to pass through a soil sample it is in direct relation
to soils density and voids. An increase in voids results in an increase in permeability as water is able
to flow more freely. An increase in soil density would have the opposite effect as an increase in
density means a decrease in voids.

Q5.

Hydraulic gradient, water level elevation & pressure, porosity, soil type, water temperature, soil
saturation

Q6.

Constant Head tests are preferred for poorly graded soils and soils with large particles. Falling head
Method is preferred for the exact opposite as only minute amounts of water flow are needed in order
to determine soil permeability.

Q7.

When the hydraulic gradient is too large, the effective vertical stress can become negative.
This implies that there is no inter-particle contact stress, and the grains are no longer in
contact. (ie quicksand)

Q8.

Water flow, gradient

Q9.

Does not obstruct flow of water

Q10. Permeability data is needed for earthworks to;

Determine seepage between 2 water levels, rate of water flow through the soil.

Q11.
(i) High
(ii) Medium
(iii)Low
(iv) Very low
(v) Impermeqble

Q12

K = Q/Ai K = 15.76/ 41.83 *4.46 = 0.09 cm/s

A= pie*Rᶟ = pie * (7.3/2) ᶟ = 41.83cmᶟ

945.7g = 945.7cmᶟ
Q = volume/time = 945.7 / 60 = 15.76cmᶟ/s
i= ∆H/L = 75/16.8 = 4.46