NPTEL Civil Geoenvironmental Fundamentals

NPTEL Civil Geoenvironmental Engineering
Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 1 of 14

Module 1
FUNDAMENTALS OF GEOENVIRONMENTAL
ENGINEERING

A) Scope of geoenvironmental engineering
Any project that deals with the interrelationship among environment,
ground surface and subsurface (soil, rock and groundwater) falls under the
purview of geoenvironmental engineering (Fang and Daniels 2006). The scope is
vast and requires the knowledge of different branches of engineering and
science put together to solve the multi-disciplinary problems. A geoenvironmental
engineer should work in an open domain of knowledge and should be willing to
use any concepts of engineering and science to effectively solve the problem at
hand. The most challenging aspect is to identify the unconventional nature of the
problem, which may have its bearing on multiple factors. For example, an
underground pipe leakage may not be due to the faulty construction of the pipe
but caused due to the highly corrosive soil surrounding it. The reason for high
corrosiveness may be attributed to single or multiple manmade factors, which
need to be clearly identified for the holistic solution of the problem. The
conventional approach of assessing the material strength of the pipe alone will
not solve the problem at hand.
A lot of emphasis has been laid for achieving a green environment.
Despite a lot of effort, it is very difficult to cut off the harmful effects of pollutants
disposed off into the geoenvironment. The damage has already been done to the
subsurface and ground water resources, which is precious. An effective waste
containment system is one of the solutions to this problem. However, such a
project has different socio-economic and technical perspectives. The realization
of such projects require the contribution of environmentalist, remote sensing
experts, decision makers, common public during its planning stage, hydrologists,
geotechnical engineers for its execution stage and several experts for
management and monitoring of the project. The totality of the problem can be

visualized under the umbrella of geoenvironmental engineering. Therefore, the
real challenge for a geoenvironmental engineer is how well he can integrate the
multi-disciplinary knowledge for achieving an efficient waste containment.
As mentioned earlier, in most parts of the world, damage has already
been done to the geoenvironment and groundwater reserves due to
indiscriminate disposal of industrial and other hazardous wastes. Owing to the
excessive demand, it becomes important to remediate and revive the already
polluted geoenvironment and groundwater. A geoenvironmental engineer has a
great role to play for deciding the scheme of such remediation practice. A lot of
concepts from soil physics, soil chemistry, soil biology, multi-phase flow, material
science and mathematical modelling, need to be taken for planning and
execution of an efficient remediation strategy. Therefore, it is essential for the
geoenvironmental engineer to think out of the box, to an extent that the
knowledge can help him visualize the problem better and suggest efficient
solution. Else, the solution to such problems becomes a trial and error process or
rather, learn from mistakes and rectify. Since such projects are cost intensive
one cannot afford to take too much of chances.
Another important issue is the reuse and recycling of waste materials,
which reduces the burden on our environment manifold. A very good example is
exploring the possibility of mass utilization of fly ash for geotechnical
applications. However, while using waste materials for meaningful applications
there are issues such as short term and long term impact, which is a governing
factor for deciding its selection as a viable material. Although, short term
behavior can be assessed using planned laboratory evaluations it often becomes
difficult and complex for understanding the long term behavior. The scope of
geoenvironmental engineering is to simplify the process of understanding the
behavior and resort to reliable predictions and estimations. This would require a
thorough knowledge on material science and chemistry and the reaction it
undergoes with time. This is indeed a tough task, but needless to say, such
challenges make this subject quite interesting.

The frequent occurrence of landslides especially during rainy season has
drawn the attention of researchers and practicing engineers. The conventional
slope stability analysis is partially helpful in understanding the problem. A wider
perspective of the problem would be to include factors such as infiltration and
seepage of rain water through the slope. Such factors are going to add on to the
instability of slope. The scope and challenge for the geoenvironmental engineer
is to couple the geotechnical, geological and hydrologic concepts to explain
rainfall induced slope failure. Construction of flood protection works such as
embankments and levees also comes under the purview of geoenvironmental
engineering. Unless a thorough hydraulic study is conducted, any geotechnical
measures for flood protection would prove to be futile. This is specifically true for
large rivers and for meandering sections.
Geoenvironmental engineering is more research oriented and new
concepts and methodologies are still being developed. Therefore, this particular
course intends to introduce different avenues and overall scope of
geoenvironmental engineering to the reader. The course would highlight the
uncertainties and complexities involved and the wide research potential of the
subject. Special emphasis has been laid on the basics of soil-water interaction,
soil-water-contaminant interaction, which are essential for understanding the
impact of geoenvironmental contamination, its minimization and remediation.

B) Multiphase behavior of soil
Conventional or classical soil mechanics assumes soil media to be
completely water or air saturated. This is a typical example of a two phase media
consisting of soil solids and water/air. The assumption of two phases
considerably simplifies the mathematical quantification of the complex
phenomena that take place in porous media. Off late, geotechnical and
geoenvironmental engineering problems require the concept of three or
multiphase behaviour of soil for realistic solution of several field situations. For
example, a partially saturated soil is a three phase porous media consisting of
air, water and soil. The three phases result in transient and complex behaviour of

unsaturated soil. Such cases are encountered while designing waste
containment facility where flow characteristics of unsaturated soil need to be
determined. When it comes to soil-water-contaminant interaction there are multi-
phase interactions involved. The migration of non-aqueous phase liquid (denoted
as NAPL) through porous media is a typical example. Fluidized bed, debris flow,
slurry flow, gas permeation through unsaturated soil media are some problems
where multiphase behaviour becomes important. Such studies are handy while
designing remediation scheme for contaminated soil and groundwater, which are
very important issues for the geoenvironmental engineer to solve. Understanding
the complex interaction of different phases is challenging and has paved way for
the study of multiphase behaviour of porous media. Such a realization has
generated a lot of interest in the research fraternity for developing experimental
and mathematical procedures for clearly delineating the phenomena in
multiphase porous media.

C) Role of soil in geoenvironmental applications
All civil engineering structures are ultimately founded on soil and hence its
stability depends on the geotechnical properties of soil. Conventional
geotechnology is more concerned about rendering soil as an efficient load
bearing stratum and designing foundations that can transfer load efficiently to
subsurface. Apart from this, soil is directly related to a number of environmental
problems, where the approach should be a bit different. Consider the case of
groundwater recharge as shown in Fig. 1.1. The infiltration and permeation
property of homogenous or layered soil mass above water table decides the rate
of recharge. In this case, a geotechnical engineer has to work closely with
hydrogeologists for deciding different schemes of artificial groundwater recharge.



Fig. 1.1 Artificial groundwater recharge

Consider the case of waste dumped on ground surface. During
precipitation, water interacts with these wastes and flow out as leachate. When
the leachate flows down, soil act as buffer in retaining or delaying several harmful
contaminants from reaching groundwater. Such a buffering action obviously
depends on the texture and constituents of soil mass. While designing a waste
containment facility, the role of soil in such projects is enormous. A coarse
grained soil with filter property is required for leachate collection where as a fine
grained soil is required for minimizing flow of leachate. These are two entirely
different functions expected from soil in the same project. The cap provided for
waste dumps also necessitate the use of specific type of soils with the required
properties. The amount of water that infiltrates into the waste below is minimized
by soil used in such caps. Special type of high swelling soils is used as backfills
for storing high level radioactive waste in deep geological repositories. Another
important geoenvironmental problem, namely, carbon sequestration uses the
geological storage capacity for disposal of anthropogenic CO
2
to mitigate the
global warming. Therefore, soil plays a very vital role in geoenvironmental
projects and the property by which it becomes important is problem-specific.

Precipitation
Artificial recharge
Aquifer
Groundwater
Bed rock

D) Importance of soil physics, soil chemistry,
hydrogeology and biological process
Soil physics is the study of the physical properties and physical processes
occurring in soil and its relation to agriculture, engineering and environment. It
deals with physical, physico-chemical and physico-biological relationship among
solid, liquid and gaseous phase of soil as they are affected by temperature,
pressure and other forms of energy. Hence, the knowledge of soil physics
becomes important for solving geoenvironmental problems. The concepts of soil
physics is used for determining the transport of water, solute and heat (matter
and energy) through porous media, which is important to solve the problems
related to subsurface hydrology, groundwater pollution, water retention
characteristics of soil, improving crop production, rainfall induced landslides etc.
Soil physics is mostly quantitative and mathematical in nature and requires the
knowledge of soil physical properties. The important soil physical properties
include soil texture which deals with the particle gradation; soil water which
include mechanisms such as retention, infiltration, run off, permeation,
evaporation, transpiration, irrigation scheduling etc; soil aeration to take into
account exchange of gases such as oxygen and carbondioxide by plant roots
and microorganisms present in the soil. While defining these physical properties
of soil, it is very important to consider representative elementary volume (REV)
which is required to describe or lump the physical properties at a geometrical
point (Scott 2000). REV therefore describes mean property of the volume under
consideration.
Soil chemistry is the study of chemical characteristics of the soil and is
one of the important information required for many of the geoenvironmental
problems. The emergence of discipline soil chemistry began when J. T. Way
(father of soil chemistry) realized that soil could retain cations such as NH
4+
, K
+
in
exchange for equivalent amounts of Ca
+2
(Thomas 1977). This means that soils
act as ion exchangers. This aspect is vital for using soil in waste management
application. The contaminants leaching out of the waste dumps find its way to

groundwater flowing past the soil porous media. The concentration of
contaminant at a distance away from the source for a given time is fully governed
by the chemical interaction of contaminant and the soil. There are several simple
and complex chemical reactions that may take place in soil-water system
depending upon the prevailing favourable condition. An example is the
phenomenon of solubility and precipitation as governed by the pH of the soil-
water-contaminant system. The knowledge of soil chemistry is important to
understand interactions between soil solids, precipitates and pore water,
including ion exchange, adsorption, weathering, buffering, soil colloidal
behaviour, acidic and basic soils, salinity etc. There is an interesting story which
resulted in the effects of soil acidity and alkalinity. The investigation on poor crop
productivity in eastern United States in early 1800s lead to the understanding of
high soil acidity, which was regulated by the addition of lime. This resulted in high
yield of crops. Similarly the deleterious condition of soil due to high alkalinity was
realized and investigated in detail. After 1920s the understanding on structural
soil chemistry and soil organic chemistry improved a lot. The acidity and
complexation potential of organic matter was appraised. A lot of chemists
researched on the structure and reactivity of water on soil mineral surface. These
and many other findings lead to the development of soil chemistry and today it is
one of the important branches of science required to explain several phenomena
in geoenvironmental engineering.
Understanding subsurface for geoenvironmental problems requires
extensive knowledge of hydrogeology. Hydrogeologic parameters influence a lot
on how a waste containment facility performs over its design life. Therefore, while
deciding the location for such facility it is important that the subsurface
hydrogeology condition is fully explored and studied. Different in-situ
methodologies are used for remediation of a contaminated site. For effective
functioning of such methods one has to study the hydrogeological aspects of the
site. Hydrogeologists play a vital role in locating groundwater aquifer, its
management and optimal extraction. Efficient watershed management by
artificial recharge is possible only if the hydrogeology of a particular area is

known. The knowledge of hydrogeology is also required for understanding the
direction of groundwater flow. This is often required for assessing the extent of
contamination occurring due to a particular source of pollution and for risk
assessment.
Off late a lot of emphasis is laid on biological processes occurring in soils.
Initially, agriculturists were more bothered about this subject. But the subject has
caught the attention of many researchers due to its potential in solving different
geoenvironmental problems. For example, some type of microorganisms such as
Pseudomonas aeruginosa is used for remediation of hydrocarbon contaminated
site. It is very essential to understand the rate of such reaction and the impact of
such remediation. A lot of researchers worldwide are working on this interesting
problem. Biological process in soils is dependent on temperature and climatic
condition of a place, which need to be studied in detail. The soil biological
process is found to influence the exchange of greenhouse gases between soil
and atmosphere and many other soil physical parameters such as water
retention characteristics.

E) Sources and type of ground contamination
Solid, liquid and gaseous waste forms contaminates subsurface and
groundwater due to indiscriminate disposal. Solid wastes come from municipal,
domestic and industrial sources. Municipal wastes amounts to around 50 percent
of the total wastes produced. Household, hospital, agricultural wastes forms part
of municipal wastes. Returning these wastes to soil is considered to be a low
cost option. Abandoned e-waste, batteries, vehicles, furniture, debris from
construction industry is considered as solid waste and is produced from both
urban and rural areas. Large scale industrial development produces huge
quantities of hazardous waste and the sources are iron and steel industries,
packaging factories, paints, dyes, chemicals, glass factories, fertilizer and
pesticide industries, mine excavation waste etc. Coal mining, radioactive fuel
mining, petroleum mining and thermal power plants generate hazardous solid
waste that requires effective management.

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, SO
2
, volatile
hydrocarbons etc. Chemical reaction may take place in air producing secondary
pollutants. SO
2
combines with oxygen to produce SO
3
, which in turn combines
with suspended water droplets to produce H
2
SO
4
and fall on ground as acid rain.
Natural breakdown of uranium in the geoenvironment emits cancer causing
radon gas into atmosphere.

F) Impact of contamination on geoenvironment
In most of the cases, wastes are disposed off indiscriminately in low-lying
areas without taking adequate engineering measures to effectively contain it.
This results in a highly unhygienic and unhealthy environment leading to
breeding of pests, mosquitoes and several harmful microorganisms. Many of the
emerging diseases found these days are direct impact of geoenvironmental
contamination due to wastes. During precipitation, or groundwater coming in
contact with these wastes generates contaminated water called leachate that can
travel far field and pollute the surface and groundwater resources. Many of the
harmful heavy metals can also travel along with the leachate if it is not contained
properly. Some of the solid waste such as excavation and mining waste, fly ash
(wet and dry) from thermal power plants requires large area of land for its storage
as wastes. This in turn would interact with rain water and can cause
contamination. Several harmful heavy metals well above the contamination limit
can enter the life cycle of organisms living in close proximity with such disposal
sites.

One of the complexities of contamination impact is its long term effects
without a chance for realization. Most of the impacts are realized much later from
rigorous studies, and by the time the damage would have been done. Hence,
remediation becomes a tedious and cost-intensive affair. This makes
geoenvironmental engineering a challenging and much needed subject. There is
a need to focus on research that would help to predict and minimize the long
term impact of indiscriminate and mismanaged waste contamination.

G) Case histories on geoenvironmental problems
Use of readily available local soil instead of expensive
commercial soil (like bentonite) for waste management
Engineered waste management scheme necessitates the construction of
highly impermeable barrier so that waste disposed on it does not find its way to
ground water resources. Mostly these barriers are made of high plastic clays
which are commercially available. This would considerably increase the cost of
such geoenvironmental projects. Exploring the possibility of using local soils for
such applications, therefore, becomes an important geoenvironmental problem.
Any success in this direction would add to the economy of the project. This in
turn would result in sustainable development of such very important project. The
following research paper is an excellent case history of finding solution to one of
the geoenvironmental problems.
Taha and Kabir (2005) have explored the possibility of using tropical
residual soil for waste containment, which is readily available over a considerable
part of peninsular Malaysia. Hydraulic conductivity is used as the criterion for
evaluation of soil suitability for the said application. The soil was compacted at
different water content and compaction effort and then permeated with de-aired
tap water. The results of hydraulic conductivity test indicates that the required
flow of less than 10
-9
m/s can be achieved by using a broad range of water
content and compaction effort. The soil has minimum shrinkage potential and
adequate strength to support the load of waste overburden. These properties

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
OKane 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. OKane, 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

Knowledge of soil-water interaction and soil-water-contaminant interaction is very
important for solving several problems encountered in geoenvironmental
engineering projects. The following section introduces soil mineralogy and
various mechanisms governing soil-water-contaminant interaction.

2.1 Soil mineralogy characterization and its significance
in determining soil behaviour
Soil is formed by the process of weathering of rocks which has great variability in
its chemical composition. Therefore, it is expected that soil properties are also
bound to the chemical variability of its constituents. Soil contains almost all type
of elements, the most important being oxygen, silicon, hydrogen, aluminium,
calcium, sodium, potassium, magnesium and carbon (99 percent of solid mass of
soil). Atoms of these elements form different crystalline arrangement to yield the
common minerals with which soil is made up of. Soil in general is made up of
minerals (solids), liquid (water containing dissolved solids and gases), organic
compounds (soluble and immiscible), and gases (air or other gases). This section
deals with the formation of soil minerals, its characterization and its significance
in determining soil behaviour.

2.1.1 Formation of soil minerals
Based on their origin, minerals are classified into two classes: primary and
secondary minerals (Berkowitz et al. 2008). Primary minerals are those which are
not altered chemically since the time of formation and deposition. This group
includes quartz (SiO
2
), feldspar ((Na,K)AlSi
3
O
8
alumino silicates containing
varying amounts of sodium, potassium), micas (muscovite, chlorite), amphibole
(horneblende: magnesium iron silicates) etc. Secondary minerals are formed by

the decomposition and chemical alteration of primary minerals. Some of these
minerals include kaolinite, smectite, vermiculite, gibbsite, calcite, gypsum etc.
These secondary minerals are mostly layered alumino-silicates, which are made
up of silicon/oxygen tetrahedral sheets and aluminium/oxygen octahedral sheets.
Primary minerals are non-clay minerals with low surface area (silica minerals)
and with low reactivity (Berkowitz et al. 2008). These minerals mainly affect the
physical transport of liquid and vapours (Berkowitz et al. 2008). Secondary
minerals are clay minerals with high surface area and high reactivity that affect
the chemical transport of liquid and vapours (Low 1961).
Silica minerals are classified as tectosilicates formed by SiO
4
units in frame like
structure. Quartz, which is one of the most abundant minerals comprises up to
95percent of sand fraction and consists of silica minerals. The amount of silica
mineral is dependent upon parent material and degree of weathering. Quartz is
rounded or angular due to physical attrition. The dense packing of crystal
structure and high activation energy required to alter Si-O-Si bond induce very
high stability of quartz. Therefore, the uncertainty associated with these materials
is minimal. In the subsurface, quartz is present in chemically precipitated forms
associated with carbonates or carbonate-cemented sandstones.
Clay minerals, which can be visualized as natural nanomaterials are of great
importance to geotechnical and geoenvironmental engineers due to the more
complex behaviour it exhibits. Therefore, this chapter emphasise more on
understanding clay mineral formation and its important characteristics. Basic
units of clay minerals include silica tetrahedral unit and octahedral unit depicted
in Fig. 2.1.



Fig. 2.1 Basic units of clay minerals (modified from Mitchell and Soga 2005)

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 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.

Aluminium, Iron or
Magnesium

Oxygen
Oxygen

Oxygen
Silicon

Oxygen
Silica
tetrahedron
Hydrox
yl

Oxygen
Aluminium
octahedron
(Si
4
O
10
)
-4

(a) Silicate layer
S
Symbol
Al
4
(OH)
12

G
Symbol
(b) Gibbsite layer


Fig. 2.2 Basic layer of mineral formation (modified from Mitchell and Soga 2005)

Gibbsite layer is otherwise termed as dioctahedral structure in which two-third of
central portion is occupied by Al
+3
. Similarly, brucite layer is termed as
trioctahedral structure in which entire central portion is occupied by Mg
+2
. These
basic layers stack together to form basic clay mineral structure. Accordingly,
there is two and three layer configuration as indicated in Fig. 2.3. More than
hundreds these fundamental layers join together to form a single clay mineral.

Fig. 2.3 Fundamental layers of clay minerals (modified from Mitchell and Soga 2005)

Description on common clay minerals
Some of the important and common clay minerals are described below in
Table 2.1.

Mg
6
(OH)
12

B
Symbol
(c) Brucite layer
G
S
B
S
G
S
S
B
S
S
Two layer
Three layer

Table 2.1 Summary of important clay minerals
Mineral Origin Symbo
l
Bond Shape Remark
Kaolinite Orthoclase
Feldspar
(Granitic
rocks)

Strong
hydrogen
bond
Flaky
and
platy
Approximately
100 layers in a
regular
structure
d =7.2A
0

Halloysite
(Kaolinite
group)
Feldspar
Tropical
soil

Less strong
bond
Tubular
or rod
like
structur
e
At 60
0
C it
looses water
and alter soil
properties
Illite Degradatio
n of mica
under
marine
condition
Feldspar

K
+
provides
bond
between
adjacent
layers
Thin
and
small
flaky
material
Bond is
weaker than
kaolinite
d =10A
0
High stability
Montmorillonit
e
(Smectite
group)

Weathering
of
plagioclase
H
2
O
molecules
pushes apart
mineral
structure
causing
swelling

Presence of
cations
Very
small
platy or
flaky
particle
Exhibits high
shrinkage and
swelling
Weak bond
d >10A
0

Vermiculite

Weathering
of biotite
and chlorite

Presence of
H
2
O and
Mg
+2

predominantl
y Mg
+2

Platy or
flaky
particle
Shrinkage and
swelling less
than
montmorillonit
e
G
S
G
S
G
S
G
S
H2O
G
S
S
G
S
S
K
+
K
+

d
G
S
S
G
S
S
H2O
H2O

B
S
S
B
S
S
H2O
Mg
+
2



Kaolinite formation is favoured when there is abundance of alumina and silica is
scarce. The favourable condition for kaolinite formation is low electrolyte content,
low pH and removal of ions that flocculate silica (such as Mg, Ca and Fe by
leaching). Therefore, there is higher probability of kaolinite formation is those
regions with heavy rainfall that facilitate leaching of above cations. Similarly
halloysite is formed by the leaching of feldspar by H
2
SO
4
produce by the
oxidation of pyrite. Halloysite formations are favoured in high-rain volcanic areas.
Smectite group of mineral formation are favoured by high silica availability, high
pH, high electrolyte content, presence of more Mg
+2
and Ca
+2
than Na
+
and K
+
.
The formation is supported by less rainfall and leaching and where evaporation is
high (such as in arid regions). For illite formation, potassium is essential in
addition to the favourable conditions of smectite.

2.1.2 Important properties of clay minerals
Some of the important properties that influence the behaviour of clay minerals
are presented below:

Specific surface area
Specific surface area (SSA) is defined as the surface area of soil particles per
unit mass (or volume) of dry soil. Its unit is in m
2
/g or m
2
/m
3
. Clay minerals are
characterized by high specific surface area (SSA) as listed in Table 2.2. High
specific surface area is associated with high soil-water-contaminant interaction,
which indicates high reactivity. The reactivity increases in the order Kaolinite <
Illite < Montmorillonite. For the purpose of comparison, SSA of silt and sand has
also been added in the table. There is a broad range of SSA values of soils, the
maximum being for montmorillonite and minimum for sand. As particle size
increases SSA decreases.


Table 2.2 Typical values of SSA for soils (modified from Mitchell and Soga 2005)
Soil SSA (m
2
/g)
Kaolinite 10-30
Illite 50-100
Montmorillonite 200-800
Vermiculite 20-400
Silt 0.04-1
Sand 0.001-0.04

For smectite type minerals such as montmorillonite, the primary external surface
area amounts to 50 to 120 m
2
/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).

Plasticity and cohesion
Clay attracts dipolar water towards its surface by adsorption. This induces
plasticity in clay. Therefore, plasticity increases with SSA. Water in clays exhibits
negative pressure due to which two particles are held close to each other. Due to
this, apparent cohesion is developed in clays.

Surface charge and adsorption
Clay surface is charged due to following reasons:
Isomorphous substitution (Mitchell and Soga 2005): During the formation of
mineral, the normally found cation is replaced by another due to its abundant
availability. For example, when Al
+3
replace Si
+4
there is a shortage of one
positive charge, which appears as negative charge on clay surface. Such
substitution is therefore the major reason for net negative charge on clay particle
surface.

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.

Due to the surface charge, it would adsorb or attract cations (+ve charged) and
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.

Exchangeable cations and cation exchange capacity
Due to negative charge, clay surface attracts cations towards it to make
the charge neutral. These cations can be replaced by easily available ions
present in the pore solution, and are termed as exchangeable ions. The total
quantity of exchangeable cations is termed as cation exchange capacity,
expressed in milliequivalents per 100 g of dry clay. Cation exchange capacity
(CEC) is defined as the unbalanced negative charge existing on the clay surface.
Kaolinite exhibits very low cation exchange capacity (CEC) as compared to
montmorillonite. Determination of CEC is done after removing all excess soluble
salts from the soil. The adsorbed cations are then replaced by a known cation
species and the quantity of known cation required to saturate the exchange sites
is determined analytically.

Flocculation and dispersion
When two clay particles come closer to each other it experiences (a)
interparticle attraction due to weak van-der-Waals force (b) repulsion due to ve
+ +
Typical charged clay
surface

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).

Fig. 2.4 Different arrangement of clay particle
A lot of micro and macro level behaviour of clays are associated with these
arrangement of clay particles (Mitchell and Soga 2005).

Swelling and shrinkage
Some clay minerals when exposed to moisture are subjected to excessive
swelling and during drying undergo excessive shrinkage. A lot of engineering
properties of soil is affected by this behaviour and the stability of structures
founded on such soils become detrimental. The swelling of clay minerals
decreases in the order montmorillonite > illite > kaolinite.

2.1.3 Minerals other than silica and clay
Other than silica and clay, subsurface contains a variety of minerals such
as oxides and carbonates that governs the reactivity of soil and its interaction
with the environment. Some of the abundant metal oxide minerals present are
iron oxides (hematite, magnetite, goethite etc.) and aluminium oxides (gibbsite,
boehmite). Other oxide minerals (such as manganese oxides, titanium oxides)
are far less than Fe and Al oxides, but because of small size and large surface
area, they would affect very significantly the geochemical properties of
subsurface. These oxides are mostly present in residual soils of tropical regions.
Other major components include soluble calcium carbonate and calcium
+
+ +
+
+
+
(a) Flocculant
+
+ +
+
+ +
+
+ +
+
+ +
(b) Dispersed

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.

2.1.4 Soil mineralogy characterization
One of the very well established methods for mineralogy characterization
of fine-grained soils is by using X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis. Majority of the
soil minerals are crystalline in nature and their structure is defined by a unique
geometry. XRD identifies minerals based on this unique crystal structure. In
XRD, characteristic X-rays of particular wave length are passed through a
crystallographic specimen. When X-ray interacts with crystalline specimen it
gives a particular diffraction pattern, which is unique for a mineral with a
particular crystal structure. The diffraction pattern of the soil specimen (according
to its crystal structure), which is based on powder diffraction or polycrystalline
diffraction, is then analyzed for the qualitative and quantitative (not always)
assessment of minerals. Sample preparation method for XRD should be done
with great care as the XRD reaches only a small layer (nearly 50 m) from the
surface of the sample. Hence, homogeneity is very important. Soil sample is
initially dried and sieved through 2 mm sieve. Sieved sample is homogenized in a
tumbler mixer for 30 min. A control mix of 30 g was taken and ground in lots of 15
g in a gyratory pulverizer. 15 percent by weight of KIO
4
(internal standard) was
added to 5 g of specimen and again homogenized in a mixer. The prepared
specimen is then subjected to analysis. .
X-ray wave of monochromatic radiation (K
) is commonly obtained from copper

radiation, which is commonly known as Cu- K
. A typical XRD output is

represented by Fig. 2.5. It can be noted from the figure that ordinate represent
relative intensity of X-ray diffraction and abscissa represents twice of angle at
which a striking X-ray beam of wave length makes with parallel atomic planes.
Based on this diffraction pattern, the minerals can be identified by matching the

peak with the data provided by International Centre Diffraction Data (ICDD)
formerly known as Joint Committee on Powder Diffraction Standards (JCPDS).
100
200
300
400
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
0
250
500
750
1000
Q
A
Mo
K

Cu-Ko (2u Deg.)
R
e
l
a
t
i
v
e

I
n
t
e
n
s
i
t
y

A=Anorthite I=Illite K=Kaolinite Mo=Montmorillonite Q= Quartz

CS
K K
K
K
I
K
K
I

WC

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

which regression equation is determined. This regression equation is further
used for mineral quantification. In the second method, known weight of pure
standard mineral is added to clay containing the same components, and the
change in the reflection peak-area intensity of each component is measured to
estimate the weight proportion of that component.
The fundamental discussion on the theory of XRD is quite extensive and cannot
be dealt in this course. Interested readers can go through literature available on
XRD in detail (Whittig and Allardice 1986; Moore and Reynolds 1997; Chapuis
and Pouliot 1996; Manhaes et al. 2002).

2.1.5 Applications of soil mineral analysis in geoenvironmental
engineering
As explained above, the soil-water and soil-water-contaminant interaction
and hence reactivity is greatly influenced by the mineralogy.
Chapuis and Pouliot (1996) have demonstrated the use of XRD for determining
bentonite content in soil-bentonite liners employed in waste containment.
Predicting global hydraulic performance of liner is very difficult with small scale
permeability test conducted in the field. There are no methods available for the
prediction of global permeability from small scale permeability test. For this
purpose, the XRD quantified bentonite content is used for understanding the
global hydraulic performance of liners. The soil used in this study was subjected
to heating at 550 C in order to reduce its tendency for hydration, there by
eliminating the possibility of variation in diffraction intensity due to difference in
hydration. An internal standard was used for controlling X-ray absorption and has
been added to all specimens in equal quantity. In this study, authors also indicate
the usefulness of using XRD for knowing the quality and constancy of bentonite
supplied for the project.
When there are problems associated with expansive soils, the best
method for identifying the problem is by conducting XRD and checking for
expansive clay minerals. Bain and Griffen (2002) highlights that acidification of
soil can be understood by understanding the transformation of minerals. This is

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.

2.2 Soil-water-contaminant interaction
Under normal conditions, water molecules are strongly adsorbed on soil
particle surface. Unbalanced force fields are generated at the interface of soil-
water, which increases soil-water interaction. When particles are finer, magnitude
of these forces are larger than weight of these particles. This is mainly attributed
to low weight and high surface area of fine particles. Before discussing the
concepts of soil-water interaction, a brief discussion is given on forces between
soil solids.
Forces between soil solids
There are essentially two type of bonding: (1) Electrostatic or primary valence
bond and (2) Secondary valence bond. Atoms bonding to atoms forming
molecules are termed as primary valence bond. These are intra-molecular
bonds. When atoms in one molecule bond to atoms in another molecule
(intermolecular bond), secondary valence bonds are formed. What is more
important in terms of soil solids is the secondary valence bonds. van der Waals
force and hydrogen bonds are the two important secondary valence forces.
Secondary valence force existing between molecules is attributed to electrical
moments in the individual molecules. When the centre of action of positive
charge coincide with negative charge, there is no dipole or electric moment for
the system and is termed as non-polar. However, for a neutral molecule there
can be cases where the centre of action of positive and negative charge does not
coincide, resulting in an electric or dipole moment. The system is then termed as
polar. For example, water is dipole. Also, unsymmetrical distribution of electrons
in silicate crystals makes it polar. Non-polar molecules can become polar when

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.

2.2.1 Soil-water interaction
Water present in pore spaces of soil is termed as soil water or pore water.
The quantity of water present in the pores will significantly influence its physical,
chemical and engineering properties. It can be classified as (a) free water or
gravitational water and (b) held water or environmental water. As the name
suggests, free water flows freely under gravity under some hydraulic gradient
and are free from the surface forces exerted by the soil particle. This water can

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.

Fig. 2.6 Water adsorption by hydrogen bond in soil minerals

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.

Fig. 2.7 Water adsorption by ion hydration
Clay
surfac
e
Water
dipole
+
-
+
+

+

+
+

+
-
+
-
+
- +
-
+
-
+
-
+
-
+
-
+
-
Cations
H
+

present in
outer OH
-

of soil
mineral
Oxygen
of water
Surface
oxygen of
soil
mineral
H
+
of water

b) Osmosis: Concentration of cations increases with proximity to clay surface.
The relatively high concentration would induce osmotic flow of water to neutralize
the high concentration of cations. Such an osmotic phenomenon is true in the
case of clays which act as semi-permeable membranes (Fritz and Marine 1983).
c) Attraction by Van der Waals-London forces causes attraction of water
molecules towards clay surface.
d) Capillary condensation: A range of pore size is possible in soils due to the
different particle size distribution and packing density. For saturation less than
100 percent, water and water vapour can get retained in soil pores by capillary
forces and attraction to particle surfaces.

Properties of adsorbed water
Several studies have been conducted to understand structural, chemical,
thermodynamic and mechanical properties of soil water by using different
techniques such as X-ray diffraction, density measurements, dielectric
measurement, nuclear magnetic resonance etc.
Density: At low water content, less than that needed to form three layers on clay
surfaces, the density of adsorbed water is greater than that for normal water. For
higher water content the density variation with reference to free water is less.
Viscosity: There is not much difference in viscosity between adsorbed and free
water. This is a very important observation relative to analysis of seepage,
consolidation etc. for unsaturated soils.
Dielectric constant: Dielectric property of a material depends on the ease with
which the molecules in the material can be polarized. It is observed that dielectric
constant of adsorbed water is less (50) as against 80 for free water.
Freezing of adsorbed water: Adsorbed water exhibit freezing point depression as
compared to free water. This is mostly attributed to the less molecular order of
adsorbed water as compared to free water.
Other properties: Energy is released when water is adsorbed by clay surface.
There is a time-dependent increase in moisture tension of water after mechanical
disturbance of at-rest structure of clay-water. The thermodynamic, hydrodynamic

and spectroscopic properties of adsorbed water vary exponentially with distance
from particle surface. The surface interaction effect is evident to a distance of 10
nm from the surface. This corresponds to around 800 percent water content in
smectite and 15 percent in kaolinite (Mitchell and Soga 2005).

Diffused double layer (DDL)
Diffused double layer (DDL) is the result of clay-water-electrolyte
interaction. Cations are held strongly on the negatively charged surface of dry
fine-grained soil or clays. These cations are termed as adsorbed cations. Those
cations in excess of those needed to neutralize electronegativity of clay particles
and associated anions are present as salt precipitates. When dry clays come in
contact with water, the precipitates can go into solution. The adsorbed cations
would try to diffuse away from the clay surface and tries to equalize the
concentration throughout pore water. However, this movement of adsorbed
cations are restricted or rather minimized by the negative surface charge of
clays. The diffusion tendency of adsorbed cations and electrostatic attraction
together would result in cation distribution adjacent to each clay particle in
suspension. Fig. 2.8 presents such a distribution of ions adjacent to a single clay
particle. The charged clay surface and the distributed ions adjacent to it are
together termed as diffuse double layer (DDL). Close to the surface there is high
concentration of ions which decreases outwards. Thus there are double layers of
ions (a) compressed layer and (b) diffused layer and hence the name double
layer. The variation in concentration of cations and anions in pore water with
distance from clay surface is also presented in Fig. 2.8. A high concentration of
cations close to clay surface gradually reduces, and reaches equilibrium
concentration at a distance away from clay surface. For anions, concentration
increases with 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).
C
l
a
y

s
u
r
f
a
c
e

+
_
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
+
_
_ _
_
_
_
_
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

Cations
Anions
Distance from clay
surface

d) Permittivity of medium adjacent to particle surface is independent of position.
Permittivity is the measure of the ease with which a molecule can be
polarized and oriented in an electric field.
Concentration of ions (no of ions/m
3
) of type i, n
i
, in force field at equilibrium is
given by Boltzmann equation as follows:
n
i
= |
.
|
\
|
kT
E E
exp n
i io
0 i
(2.1)
E is the potential energy, T is the temperature in Kelvin, k is the Boltzmann
constant (1.38 x 10
-23
J/K), subscript 0 represents reference state which is at a
large distance from the surface.
Potential energy of an ion i in electric field is given by Eq. 2.2.
E
i
= v
i
e (2.2)
where v
i
is the ionic valence, e is the electronic charge (=1.602 x 10
-19
C) and
is the electrical potential at a point. is defined as the work done to bring a
positive unit charge from a reference state to the specified point in the electric
field. Potential at the surface is denoted as
0
. is mostly negative for soils
because of the negative surface charge. As distance from charged surface
increases, decreases from
0
to a negligible value close to reference state.
Since = 0 close to reference state, E
i0
= 0.
Therefore, E
i0 -
E
i
= -v
i
e and Eq. 2.1 can be re-written as
n
i
= |
.
|
\
|
kT
e v
exp n
i
0 i
(2.3)
Eq. 2.3 relates ion concentration to potential as shown in Fig. 2.9.


n
i

0

-v
i
e negative -v
i
e positive
Anion distribution
Cation distribution
n
i0

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 v
i
and

are negative and hence -v
i
e will be negative. For cations, v
i
is positive and is
negative and hence -v
i
e will be positive. For negatively charged clay surface,
n
i,cations
> n
i0
and n
i,anions
< n
i0
.
One dimensional Poisson equation (Eq. 2.4) relates electrical potential , charge
density in C/m
3
and distance (x). is the static permittivity of the medium (C
2
J
-
1
m
-1
or Fm
-1
).

c
2
2
dx
d
(2.4)
= e v
i
n
i
= e(v
+
n
+
- v
-
n
-
)
(2.5)
n
i
is expressed as ions per unit volume, + and subscript indicates cation and
anion.
Substituting Eq. 2.3 in 2.5
= e v
i
|
.
|
\
|
kT
e v
exp n
i
0 i
(2.6)
Hence,
c
=
e
dx
d
2
2
v
i
|
.
|
\
|
kT
e v
exp n
i
0 i
(2.7)
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.

Different models representing double layer (Yong 2001)
A) Helmholtz double layer: This model follows the simplest approximation that
surface charge of clays are neutralized by opposite sign counter ions placed at a
distance of d away from the surface. The surface charge potential decreases
with distance away from the surface as shown in Fig. 2.10.

Fig. 2.10 Variation of surface charge potential with distance from clay surface (modified from Mitchell and Soga
2005)
In this model, double layer is represented by negatively and positively charged
sheets of equal magnitude (Yong 2001). In this model, positive charges are
considered to be stationery, which is against the reality that cations are mobile. It
is opined that this model is too simple to address the real complexities of double
layer.
B) Gouy Chapman model: Gouy suggested that interfacial potential at the
charged surface can be attributed to the presence of a number of ions of given
sign attached to the surface and to an equal number of opposite charge in the
solution. The counter ions tend to diffuse into the liquid phase, until the counter
potential set up by their departure restricts its diffusion. The kinetic energy of
counter ions affects the thickness of resulting double layer. Gouy and Chapman
proposed theoretical expression for electric potential in double layer by
combining Boltzman equation (2.1) and Poisson equation (2.4), where in Eq. 2.1
relates ion distribution to electric potential and Eq. 2.4 relates electric potential
and distance (Reddi and Inyang, 2000). This combination is given by Eq. 2.7. For
Surface
charge
potential
Distance away from surface

the case of a single cation and anion species of equal valency (i=2) and n
0
= n
0
+

= n
0
-
and v
+
= v
-
= v, then Eq. 2.7 simplifies to Poisson-Boltzmann equation (Eq.
2.8).

kT
ve
sinh
ve n 2
dx
d
0
2
2
c
=
(2.8)
Solutions of the above are usually given in terms of the dimensionless quantities
as stated below.
y =
kT
ve
Potential functions (2.9)
z =
kT
ve
0

= Kx Distance function (2.10)
where K
2
=
kT
v e n 2
2 2
0
c
or K =
DkT
n v e 8
0
2 2
t
(2.11)
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:
y = 0 and
d
dy
= 0 at = and y = z =
kT
ve
0
at = 0

0
is the potential at the clay surface.
For z << 1, =
0
e
-Kx

(2.12)
For z = , =
2
Kx
coth ln
e
kT 2
(2.13)

For some arbitrary z and >>1, =

|
|
.
|
\
|
+
e
1 e
1 e
e
kT 4
2 / z
2 / z

(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.
For cations: n
+
= |
.
|
\
|
kT
e v
exp n
i
0 i

(2.15)
For anions: n
-
= |
.
|
\
|
kT
e v
exp n
i
0 i
(2.16)
This model is accurate only if the soil behaves like a true parallel particle system.
It does not satisfactorily provide description of 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 . 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 (
s
) is counter
balanced by Stern layer charge
and diffuse layer charge

dl.
The surface
potential (
s
) depends on electrolyte concentration and surface charge (whether
it is constant or pH dependent). It decreases from
s
to

when the distance

increases from surface to the outer boundary of Stern layer. Beyond this
distance, 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.

Cation exchange capacity
From previous discussion, it is clear that clay surface adsorbs specific
amount and type of cations under a given environmental conditions such as
temperature, pressure, pH and pore water chemistry. The adsorbed cations can
get partly or fully replaced by ions of another type subject to changes in the
environmental condition. Such changes can alter the physico-chemical
characteristics of soil. The most common cations present in the soil are sodium,
potassium, calcium and magnesium. Marine clays and saline soils contain
sodium as the dominant adsorbed cation. Acidic soils contain Al
+3
and H
+
. The
most common anions are sulphate, chloride, phosphate and nitrate.
Cation exchange capacity (CEC) is defined as the sum of exchangeable
cations soil can adsorb per 100 g of dry soil. Its unit is meq./100 g and normally
its value ranges between 1 and 150 meq./100 g. The value represents the
amount of exchangeable cations that can be replaced easily by another incoming
cation. The replaceability of cations depends on valency, relative abundance of
different ion type and ion size. All other factors remaining same, trivalent cations
are held more tightly than divalent and univalent ions. A small ion tends to
replace large ions. It is also possible to replace a high replacing power cation by
one of low replacing power due to the high concentration of latter in the pore
solution. For example, Al
+3
can be replaced by Na
+
due to its abundance. A
typical replaceability series is given as follows: (Mitchell and Soga 2005)
Na
+
< Li
+
< K
+
< Cs
+
< Mg
+2
< Ca
+2
< Cu
+2
< Al
+3
< Fe
+3

The rate of exchange reaction would essentially depend on clay type, pore
solution concentration, temperature, pH etc. In kaolinite, the reaction takes place
quickly. In illite, a small part of the exchange sites may be between unit layers of

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

e
1
s
N
M
k
N
M
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
+
+
+
(2.17)

( )
e
2
1
2
2
s
2
P
M
k
P
M
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
+
+
+
(2.18)
where k
1
and k
2
are selectivity constants, which can be obtained experimentally.
Following, Eq. 2.18 it can be further written as

e
2
1
2 2
s
2 2
2
Mg Ca
Na
k
Mg Ca
Na
|
|
|
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
| +
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
+ +
+
+ +
+
(2.19)
The concentration of cation is in milliequivalents per litre. The quantity
e
2
1
2 2
2
Mg Ca
Na
|
|
|
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
| +
+ +
+
is termed as sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) in (meq./litre)
1/2
. If
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).

ESP = ((Na
+
)
s
/(total exchange capacity)) x100
(2.20)
ESP and SAR are considered to be a reliable indicator of clay stability against
breakdown and particle dispersion especially for non-marine clays (Mitchell and
Soga 2005). Clays with ESP > 2 percent is considered as dispersive.
Other quantitative attributes of cation exchange in soils is the property known as
the percentage base saturation (Eq. 2.21), which denotes the measure of the
proportion of exchangeable base on the soil exchange complex.
Base saturation (%) =
+2 +2 + +
Ca +Mg +K +Na
100
CEC
(2.21)

Factors influencing CEC of the soil
a. pH of the soil
It is observed that CEC of the soil increases with an increase in pH.
Therefore, it is recommended to maintain a neutral pH (= 7.0) for determining
CEC of the soil.
b. Presence of organic matter
The presence of organic carbon in clays reduces its CEC (Syers et al.,
1970). However, some studies report an increase in CEC with increasing organic
matter contents and this effect was more pronounced in coarser fractions.
c. Temperature
The ion exchange capacity decreases with an increase in temperature.
d. Particle size
It is observed that CEC increase with decreasing particle.
e. Calcium carbonate contents (CaCO
3
)
Higher amount of CaCO
3
in soil leads to higher CEC.
f. Mineralogy
Active clay minerals increase CEC of the soil.


Determination of CEC by Ammonium replacement method
Horneck et al. (1989) have proposed a method for determining the CEC of
soils by using ammonium replacement technique. This method involves
saturation of the cation exchange sites on the soil surface with ammonium,
equilibration, and removal of excess ammonium with ethanol, replacement and
leaching of exchangeable ammonium with protons from HCl acid. It must be
noted that this method is less suited for soils containing carbonates, vermiculite,
gypsum and zeolite minerals. The procedure is discussed as follows:
Take about 10 g of soil, in 125 ml flask, add 50 ml of ammonium acetate solution
and place the flask in reciprocating shaker for 30min. The shaking process is
repeated with blank solution as well.
1 liter vacuum extraction flask is connected to a funnel with Whatman no.5 filter
paper. The soil sample is then transferred to the funnel and leached with 175 ml
of 1 N ammonium acetate. The leached solution is analyzed for extractable K,
Ca, Mg, and Na.
The soil sample in the funnel is further leached with ethanol and the leachate is
discarded.
Transfer the soil to a 500 ml suction flask and leach the soil sample with 225 ml
of 0.1N HCl to replace the exchangeable ammonium. Make up the leachate to a
final volume of 250ml in a standard flask using deionized water.
The concentration of ammonium in the final leachate is measured, and CEC is
calculated using Eq. 2.22.
CEC (meq./100g of soil) =
0.25 100
ammonium concentration
14 sample size(g)
| |

|
\ .

(2.22)
IS code (IS 2720, Part 24 1976) and USEPA (EPA SW-846) also provides
alternate methods for determining CEC of the soil. The range of CEC values for
different soil minerals are listed in Table 2.3 (Caroll 1959). It can be noted that
highly active soil minerals such as montmorillonite and vermiculite exhibit high
CEC. Therefore, CEC is important in assessing the chemical properties of the
soil in terms of its reactivity, contaminant retention mechanism etc.


Table 2.3 CEC values of common soil minerals
Mineral CEC (meq./100g) at pH
7
Kaolinite 3-15
Illite 10-40
Montmorillonite 70-100
Vermiculite 100-150
Halloysite 2H
2
O 5-10
Halloysite 4H
2
O 40-50
Chlorite 10-40
Allophane 60-70

Quantification of soil water
One of the main attributes that makes soil mechanics different from solid
mechanics is the presence of water in the void spaces. The quality and quantity
of water will significantly influence physical, chemical and engineering properties
of soil such as plasticity, permeability, water retention, mass transport etc. The
water present in the soil voids are quantified as water content, which is also
referred to as capacity factor. Energy status of water is called intensity factor.
Water content is further divided into gravimetric and volumetric water content.
When water content is defined as the ratio of weight of water to the weight of soil
solids (weight basis) it is termed as gravimetric water content, denoted as w.
Volumetric water content is expressed as the ratio of volume of water (V
w
) to the
total volume of soil (V) and denoted by .
= V
w
/V (2.23)
= W
w
/
w
1/V
= W
w
/
w
(W
d
/W
d
) 1/V
W
d
/V =
d

W
w
/ W
d
= w
= w (
d
/
w
) (2.24)
Also, = w (G
w
/(1+e))/
w

= w ((S
r
e)/ w) 1/(1+e)
= e/(1+e) S
r


= n S
r
(2.25)
Where W
w
is the weight of water,
w
is the unit weight of water, W
d
is the weight
of dry soil,
d
is the dry unit weight of soil, G is the specific gravity of soil, e is the
void ratio, n is the porosity and S
r
is the degree of saturation. Eqs. 2.24 and 2.25
relates with w and S
r
, respectively. For a fully saturated soil, S
r
= 1 and hence
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,
rel
= /
sat
(2.26)
Reduced or effective water content, S
e
= (-
r
) /
sat
-
r
) (2.27)
Where
sat
and
r
are saturated volumetric water content and residual water
content. The same expressions are valid in terms of gravimetric water content
also.

Mechanical energy of water
Kinetic energy (KE) of water present in porous media is considered to be
negligible due to the low flow velocity in moderate and low permeable soil.
However, KE is important in granular soils where velocity is significant and also
in the case of preferential flow in soils. Preferential flow is caused in soils due to
the formation of macrocracks which is mostly attributed to the shrinkage cracks in
soil, holes or burrows created by animals, cracks caused by the roots of plants
etc. Water would find an easy path through these cracks and hence known as
preferential path ways.
Potential energy (PE) is the most important energy component of water present
in the porous media. It is the difference in PE between two spatial locations in
soil that determines rate and direction of flow of water. The rate of decrease in
PE is termed as hydraulic gradient (i). PE of water is termed as soil-water
potential. The total soil-water potential (
t
) is the summation of different PE
components as given by Eq. 2.28.
t
=
g
+
m
+
p
+

o
(2.28)

Where
g
is the gravitational potential,
m
is the matric potential,
p
is the
pressure potential and
o
is the osmotic potential.
g
is due to the difference in elevation between two reference points and hence it
is also known as elevation head (z). For this a reference datum position is always
defined from which elevation is measured. The point above the datum is
negative, and below is positive.
m
is caused due to the adsorptive and capillary
forces present in the soil. Such a force always retains water towards the soil
surface and hence the potential is always taken as negative.
p
is the pressure
potential below the ground water table and hence the potential is always positive.
It is the head indicated by a piezometer inserted in the soil and hence it is termed
as piezometric head. Such a potential is valid for fully saturated state of the soil.
However, saturation due to capillary rise is not considered since such water is
held under tension.
o
is caused due to salts and contaminants (solutes) present
in the soil pore water. Since the solute present in the water try to retain water
molecules,
o
is negative.
In the absence of solutes,
m
can be expressed as follows (Scott 2000):
m
=
0
e
e
ln
M
RT
(2.29)
Where R is the universal gas constant (8.314 J/K.mol), T is the temperature in
Kelvin, M is the mass of a mole of water in kg (0.018015),
m
is in J/kg, e is the
vapour pressure of soil pore water, e
0
is the vapour pressure of pure water at the
same temperature. e is less than e
0
due to the attraction pore water on soil
solids. The term e/ e
0
is relative vapour pressure.

Problem: Relative vapour pressure at 20 C is 0.85. Calculate
m
. If relative
vapour pressure becomes 0.989 then what happens to
m
.

m
=
85 . 0 ln
018 . 0
293 314 . 8 x

= -21989 J/kg
When relative vapour pressure is 0.989, then
m
= -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
o
due to the semi-permeable membrane
effect produced by plant roots, air-water inter phase and clays. As concentration
of solute increases,
o
also increases.
According to Vant-Hoffs equation,
o
= RTC
s
(2.30)
Where
o
is in J/kg, C
s
is the concentration in mol/m
3
, R and T as defined earlier.
According to US Salinity laboratory,
o
= -0.056 TDS

(2.31)
Where TDS is the total dissolved solids of soil pore water in mg/L and
o
is in
kPa.
Also,
o
= -36 EC

(2.32)
Where EC is the electrical conductivity of soil pore water in dS/m and
o
is in
kPa.
o
can also be expressed as
0
w
e
e
ln
M
RT

(2.33)
where
w
is the density of water in kg/m
3
, 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, e
0
is the vapour pressure of pure water in the
absence of solute, and
o
is in kPa.
Problem: Calculate total potential of a saturated soil at 20
0
C 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
t
=
g
+
p
+
m
+
o

g
= 0 (at reference datum)
m
= 0 (soil is saturated)
0
= -RTC
s
C
s
is moles/m
3
in pore water

Therefore we need to find the volume of pore water.
Given,
sat
= 0.5 = V
w
/V
V
w
= 0.5x1x10
-6
m
3

1cm
3
of soil mass will have C
s
= 3x10
-4
/ 0.5x10
-6

Thus
0
= -[8.31x293x(3x10
-4
/ 0.5x10
-6
)]
= -1.46x10
6
J/kg
1J/kg = 10
-6
kPa
0
= 1.46x10
6
J/kg = -1.46 kPa
p
= 1.2x9.8 = 11.8 kPa
t
=
p
+
o

t
= 10.34 kPa
Note: It is important to put the sign for each of the potential.

Movement of water: Soil water moves from higher
t
to lower
t
. If we are
concerned only about liquid flow, then the contribution of
0
is considered
negligible because the solutes also move along with the flowing water. While
considering flow of water,
t
can be rewritten as
g
+
p
+
m
. This total potential
is termed as hydraulic potential causing flow. Under hydraulic equilibrium,
t
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
t
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.
o
is not considered.
(a) Reference datum at ground surface
Z (cm)
g

o

p

m

t


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

g
is the distance of the point from the reference datum. Since it is downwards it
is ve. Since, there is no mention of contamination
o
is taken as zero at all
points.
p
occurs only below water table. Water level is at 8 cm above 40 cm
depth. Therefore, at 40 cm the
p
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
m
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
(
t
) 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.
t
at
40 cm and 50 cm is obtained as -32 cm. Since it is under hydraulic equilibrium
(given),
t
at all the points have to be -32 cm. Once
t
at all the points are know,
then
m
at all locations can be determined. For example, at 10 cm depth,
m
=
[
t
-(
g
+
m
+
p
+

o
] will give -32+10 = -22 cm.

(a) Reference datum at water table
Z (cm)
g

o

p

m

t

0 32 0 0 -32 0
10 22 0 0 -22 0
20 12 0 0 -12 0
30 2 0 0 -2 0
40 -8 0 8 0 0
50 -18 0 18 0 0


With the change in reference datum,
g
also changes. Due to this change,
t

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)
m

g

o

p

t

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
o
and

p
will be zero at all points. Only
g
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.

Problem: A 10 cm tile drain with water height 2 cm is placed on clay layer at a
depth of 40 cm from ground surface. Find component potential and total potential

at 10 cm interval upto 50 cm depth. Determine the flow direction. Take reference
datum at ground surface. Assume matric potential as one half of the distance to
top of water table.
Z (cm)
g

o

p

m

t
Flow direction
0 0 0 0 -19 -19 Downward
10 -10 0 0 -14 -24 Downward
20 -20 0 0 -9 -29 Downward
30 -30 0 0 -4 -34 Downward
40 -40 0 2 0 -38 No flow
50 -50 0 12 0 -38 No flow

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
(h
c
) marked in the Fig. 2.11 is expressed as
h
c
=
gr
2TCos
w
(2.34)
T is the surface tension of water,
w
is the density of water, g is the acceleration
due to gravity, r is the soil pore radius, 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.



Fig. 2.11 Various hydrologic horizons

Unsaturated soil (vadoze zone)
Unsaturated soil or partially saturated soil and its behaviour come under
the purview of soil-water interaction problem. The classical soil mechanics deals
with a two phase system and the concepts are based on the assumption that soil
is fully saturated (solid particles and water) or fully dry (solid particles and air).
But this assumption may not be valid for some of the real life situations such as
highway and railway embankments, airfields, dams, tunnels, natural slopes,
linings and covers of waste containment facilities, back fill of retaining walls,
stability of vertical excavations, where in soil is generally unsaturated and
becomes a three or multiphase system. Therefore, its behaviour does not comply
with the concepts developed for saturated soil medium.
The interaction of solid, water and air phase present in the soil develops a
complex energy state resulting in negative pore water pressure known as soil
suction. Soil suction is defined as the energy required for extracting unit volume
of water from soil (Fredlund and Rahardjo 1993). The suction present in the
unsaturated soil makes its behaviour highly transient (varies with time) as
compared to the steady state behaviour of saturated soils. Therefore, all constant
parameters such as water potential, permeability, strength etc. of saturated soil
Ground surface
Water table
Groundwater zone or aquifer
Impermeable
layer
Root zone
Vadoze zone
Capillary zone
h
c


become a function in unsaturated soil. The study of unsaturated soil behaviour is
dependent on the basic relationship between suction and water content (either,
gravimetric or volumetric) or saturation. Such a graphical plot as shown in Fig.
2.12 is popularly known as soil-water characteristic curve (SWCC) or water
retention characteristic curve (WRCC) in general.
Numerous research works have demonstrated that the WRCC is
mandatory for studying the behaviour of unsaturated soil (Fredlund and Rahardjo
1993). For accurate determination of WRCC, the precise measurement of soil
suction becomes very important. The major components of soil suction include
matric suction (
m
) and osmotic suction (
o
). The sum of these two components
is termed as total soil suction (). Please note that
m
and
o
is same as the soil-
water potential discussed in the previous section. However, is not same as
total water potential since the former constitute only negative water potentials.
m

is due to the adsorptive and capillary force existing in the soil matrix where as
o

is the result of salts or contaminants present in the soil pore-water. In the
absence of any contamination,
m
is equal to . The common units for soil
suction are kPa, Atm, pF, centibar. The unit pF is defined as the common
logarithm of height in centimeters of the water column needed to provide the
suction. Table 2.4 summarizes the relationship between different commonly used
units of suction.
Table 2.4 Relationship between different units of soil suction

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
Height in cm
of H2O column

pF
(log cm of
H2O column)
kg/cm
2

kPa Bar Atmosphere
(atm)
10 1 0.01 1 0.01 0.01
100 2 0.1 10 0.1 0.1
1000 3 1 100 1 1
10000 4 10 1000 10 10

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,
s
, 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),
a
, 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 (
r
) is the minimum water content below which there is
no appreciable change in . Suction corresponding to
r
is called residual soil
suction,
r
.
4. The water-entry value,
w
, 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
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
r
, 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 (>
r
), 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).



Fig. 2.12 Details of idealized WRCC

The slope of WRCC is termed as specific capacity or differential water
capacity and represented by C() =(d/d). This is an important property
describing water storage and water availability to plants. As C() is more, water
drained out or water availability from that soil is more. For a particular increase in
, the coarse grained soil releases more water than fine grained soil.
A large variety of instruments are available for measuring
m
or in the
field or in the laboratory, either directly or indirectly. A summary of various
instruments used for measuring soil suction is presented in Table 2.5. Each of
these measurement techniques has its own limitations and capabilities, and
active research is ongoing for further improvement.

Table 2.5 Details of different suction measuring instruments

w
(
a
,
s
)
(
r
,
r
)
(kPa)

(
%
)

Drying
curve
Wetting
curve
3

1

2


M
e
t
h
o
d

Instrument Suctio
n
Usag
e

Range
(kPa)
Equilibrium
time
D
i
r
e
c
t

Tensiometer M F 0-80 Hours
Pressure plate apparatus M L/F 0-5000 Hours
Pressure membrane
extractor
M L/F 0-1500 Hours
Ridley and Burlands
apparatus (suction probe)
M L 100-1000 Minutes
NTU Mini suction probe M L 100-1500 Minutes
Suction plate M L 0-90 Hours
Gypsum block M F 60-600 Days
Standpipe lysimeter M L 0-30 Days -
Months
I
n
d
i
r
e
c
t

Filter paper-contact M L/F 100-1000 2-5 Days
Filter paper-non contact T L/F 1000-
10000
2-14 Days
Transistor psychrometer T L 100-10000 Hours
Thermocouple
psychrometer
T/ M L 100-7500 Hours
Thermal conductivity
sensor
M L/F 10-1500 Hours-Days
TRL suction probe T F 1000-
30000
Weeks
Gypsum block M F 60-600 Days
Centrifuge method M L High Depends on
soil
WP4 dewpoint
potentiameter
T L 0-40000 Minutes
Pore fluid squeezer O L Entire
range
-
Time domain
reflectometry
M L Entire
range
6-48 Hours
Electrical conductivity
sensor
M L/B 50-1500 6-50 Hours
Chilled-mirror
psychrometer
T L 500-
300000
Minutes
Vacuum dessicator T L 10
3
-10
5
Months
Porous block M F 30-30000 Weeks
Thermal block M F 0-175 Days
Equitensiometer M F 0-1000 Days
Xeritron sensor T L Entire
range
Hours


WRCC models and estimation
It is noted that most of the instruments reported above have limited range
of suction measurement. Therefore, several empirical or semi-empirical
mathematical models have been developed for representing WRCC. The
parameters of these models can be obtained by using the limited range of
measured suction data. Once the parameters are known, the same can be used
for extrapolating or interpolating the results by using the WRCC model. These
WRCC parameters are important input for many of the mathematical models
dealing with unsaturated soils. Two such models which are used widely in the
literature are van Genuchten (1980) model and Fredlund and Xing (1994) model
represented by Eqs. 2.35 and 2.36, respectively.
( ) ( )
vg
vg
-1
m
n
r s r
vg
= + - 1+
a
(
(
| |
(
(
|
( |
(
\ .
(

(2.35)
( )
f
f
-1
m
n
r
s
6
f
r
ln 1+
h

= 1- ln exp(1) +
a
10
ln 1+
h
( (
( (
(
(
(
| |

( (
(
(
|
( (
( ( (
\ .

( (

(
(

(2.36)
where () is the volumetric water content at any suction, ;
r
is the residual
volumetric water content;
s
is the volumetric water content at saturation; a
vg
and
a
f
are fitting parameters primarily dependent on the air entry value (AEV); n
vg
and
n
f
are fitting parameters that are dependent on the rate of extraction of water
from the soil; m
vg
and m
f
are fitting parameters which depend on
r
; h
r
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
F: Field L: Laboratory M: Matric T: Total

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)

Complexity in modelling the behaviour of unsaturated soil
As discussed above, all the properties of unsaturated soil such as
seepage, strength, and volume change behaviour are dependent upon the
suction existing in the soil. These properties changes when the state of
unsaturation changes and suction changes. The state of unsaturation is defined
by , w or S
r
. As against the steady state behaviour in saturated soil, an
unsaturated soil therefore exhibit transient behaviour. The complex behavioural
modelling of unsaturated soil is explained with respect to unsaturated hydraulic
conductivity (k
u
) and flow as an example.
In the case of saturated soil, hydraulic conductivity (k
s
) remains constant
with time. This is mainly due to the fact that all the pores are filled with water. In
the case of unsaturated soil there is retention forces (suction) acting on water
that would restrict easy movement. Due to this, hydraulic conductivity of
unsaturated soil drastically reduces and is essentially a function of water content
or suction present in the soil. For a particular soil, k
u
increases as suction
decreases till it approaches k
s
as shown in Fig. 2.13 (Malaya 2011). This is
mainly due to the fact that suction decreases due to the increase in water content
which results in the increase in k
u
. Therefore, it is clear that k
u
is a function and
changes with water content or suction. These functions are highly non-linear and
laborious to determine experimentally. Mostly k
u
functions are estimated

indirectly from water-retention characteristic curve (or SWCC), which is relatively
easy to determine experimentally.

10
-1
10
0
10
1
10
2
10
3
1x10
-13
1x10
-11
1x10
-9
1x10
-7
1x10
-5
k
s

k
u

(
m
/
s
)
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 Darcys law
expressed in the form of Eq. 2.37 where the flux density q is given by
q = k(h)
z
H
c
c
(2.37)
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.

z
H
c
c
is the hydraulic gradient represented by i which can also equal to
z
H
.


Average i =
z
H
=
) z (z
) z (h ) z (h
n 1 n
n n 1 n 1 n
+ +
+
+ +

n increases downwards and reference datum is ground surface.

z
H
=
|
.
|
\
|
+ =
+
z
h
1
z
z h

Problem: For a soil, matric potential head is -75 cm and -50 cm at depth 150 cm
and 200 cm, respectively. Given = a h
-b
h > 45 cm and k = me
n
. 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.

Average i =
|
.
|
\
|
+
z
h
1
=
|
.
|
\
|
+
+
+
200 150 -
50 75 -
1
=0.5
= a (h)
-b

= 1000x 62.5
-2
h is the average value (75+50)/2
= 0.256
k=10
-12
xe
(45x0.256)

= 1.007x10
-7
m/s
Flux q =k
z
H

= 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.

Soil water diffusivity
While dealing with most of the flow problems in hydrology and
geoenvironmental engineering, the term soil water diffusivity becomes important.

According to Darcys law, flow density is defined by Eq. 2.37 which is re-written
below:
q =- k(h)
z
H
c
c

In the above,
z
H
c
c
can be re-written as
H
c
c
x
z
c
c

H
c
c
is the inverse of specific water capacity (C) where in H is considered as the
suction head.
Therefore the above equation becomes q =
C
k(h) -
z
c
c

In the above representation,
C
k(h)
is known as soil-water diffusivity (D) and its
unit is m
2
/s.
q =-D
z
c
c
(2.38)
Eq. 2.38 is identical to Ficks 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.

2.2.2 Different soil-water-contaminant interaction mechanisms
The contaminants that can pose serious threat to humans persist in short
or long interval of time. These contaminants can be naturally occurring ones such
as arsenic, fluoride, traces of mercury or anthropogenic substances such as
chlorinated organics, dissolved heavy metals etc. The major role of a
geoenvironmental engineer is to predict the fate of contaminants in the
subsurface and minimize its migration towards groundwater source. Fate
prediction is very essential to understand the presence of contaminants in
groundwater sources or subsurface for long term (50 to 200 years). This would
essentially depend on different interaction mechanisms between contaminant
and soil solids and also between contaminant and dissolved solutes present in

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

contaminant concentration reaching a particular target is considerably less than
the source concentration. Chemical mass transfer and irreversible sorption
removes the contaminants from the moving pore fluid. This is a very important
aspect for a contaminant barrier system, where in the contaminants reaching
ground water is minimized. Retardation is mainly governed by reversible sorption
and hence release of contaminant would eventually occur. This will ensure the
delivery of the entire contaminant load to the final target (example ground water),
but with much delay. The process of retention and retardation is depicted in Fig.
2.14. From the figure, it can be noted that for retention process, the area under
the curves (concentration) goes on reducing. For retardation, the area remains
constant (mass conservation), however the concentration of a particular
contaminant reduces. In nature, the effect of contaminated pore fluid is reduced
when it interacts with fresh water (especially during precipitation). This process of
dilution also delays the contaminant migration. However, the process of dilution
is mostly independent of soil interaction.

Fig. 2.14 Attenuation process due to soil-contaminant interaction
For an effective waste management, retention process is more ideal than
retardation. For proper prediction of contaminant fate, it is very essential to know
whether the contaminant is retained or retarded. The important reactions
determining attenuation are discussed as follows:
1) Hydrolysis
Hydrolysis is the reaction of H
+
and OH
-
ions of water with the solutes and
elements present in the pore water. Such a reaction would continue only if the
reaction products are removed from the system. Water is amphiprotic in nature
Distance from source Distance from source
C
o
n
t
a
m
i
n
a
n
t

C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

C
o
n
t
a
m
i
n
a
n
t

C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

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 + H
2
O 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) + H
2
O (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.

2) Oxidation-reduction (redox) reaction
Oxidation-reduction (redox) reaction involves transfer of electrons
between the reactants. In general, transfer of electrons is followed by the proton
transfer also. Soil pore water provides medium for oxidation-reduction reaction
which can be biotic and/or abiotic. Microorganisms present in the soil utilize
oxidation-reduction (redox) reactions as a means to derive energy required for its
growth. Hence, these microorganisms act as catalysts for reactions (redox)
involving molecular oxygen, soil organic matter and organic chemicals. For
inorganic solutes, redox reaction results in the decrease or increase in the
oxidation state of the atom. This is important because some ions have multiple
oxidation states and hence would influence the soil-contaminant interaction. It is
found that biotic redox reactions are more significant than abiotic redox reaction.
The redox potential Eh represented by Eq. 2.41 determines the possibility
of oxidation-reduction reaction in the soil-contaminant system.
Eh =
|
.
|
\
|
F
2.3RT
pE 2.41

E is the electrode potential, pE represent negative logarithm of electron activity e
-
, R is the gas constant, T is the absolute temperature, and F is the Faraday
constant. At a temperature of 25
0
C, Eh = 0.0591pE. Factors affecting Eh include
pH, oxygen content or activity, and soil water content.
3) Complexation
Complexation is the reaction between metallic cations and anions called
ligands. The inorganic ligands such as Cl
-
, B
-
, F
-
, SO
4
-2
, PO
4
-3
, CO
3
-2
and organic
ligands such as amino acids take part in complexation reaction. For example,
Mn
+2
+ Cl
-
MnCl
+
Complexation can also occur in series, such that complex formed from one
reaction can react with another ligand as shown below (Reddi and Inyang 2000).
Cr
+3
+ OH
-
Cr(OH)
+2
Cr(OH)
+2
+ OH
-
Cr(OH)
2
+
Cr(OH)
2
+
+ OH
-
Cr(OH)
3
0

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,
SiO
2
+ 2H
2
O Si(OH)
4
(dissolution of quartz)
Kaolinite + 5H
2
O 2Al(OH)
3
+ 2H
4
SiO
4
(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.

5) Exsolution and volatilization
This process involves mass transfer between gaseous and liquid or solid
phase. Similar to precipitation this process removes mass from pore fluid to
gaseous phase. This process is mostly governed by the vapour pressure
(pressure of gaseous phase) with respect to liquid or solid at a particular
temperature. There are a lot of volatile contaminants disposed into subsurface
that finds its way to atmosphere. A thorough knowledge on the exsolution and
volatilization is required to understand the mass transfer mechanism of these
organic contaminants.
6) Radioactive decay
In this process, unstable isotopes decay to form new ones with release of
heat and particles from element nucleus. The process is known as or decay
depending on whether the element looses particle (helium) or a particle
(electron). The process of decay is irreversible and daughter isotope increases in

quantity. The disposal of radioactive waste generated from nuclear installations,
mining etc. to subsurface will considerably increase the heat. Moreover, the
radioactive isotope such as uranium, plutonium, cesium etc gets transported to
far field and would pollute the groundwater. Preventing such harmful pollution
and reducing the ill effect of overheating of subsurface is a challenging
geoenvironmental problem.
7) Sorption and partitioning
When contaminant laden pore water flow past the soil surface, mass
transfer of these contaminants takes place on to the solids. The process is
referred to as sorption or partitioning. The amount of partitioning depends on the
soil surface (sorbent) and the reactivity of contaminant (sorbate). This is one of
the predominant mechanisms governing the fate of contaminant once it is
released into the geoenvironment. The term sorption refers to the adsorption of
dissolved ions, molecules or compounds on to the soil surface. The mechanism
of sorption includes physical and chemical sorption as well as precipitation
reaction. These reactions are governed by surface properties of soil, chemistry of
contaminant and pore water, redox potential and pH of the environment. Physical
adsorption refers to the attraction of contaminant on to the soil surface mainly
due to the surface charge (electrostatic force of attraction). Physical sorption is
weak bonding and can be reversed easily by washing with extracting solution.
Chemical sorption is strong force of attraction due to the formation of bonds such
as covalent bond. High adsorption energy is associated with chemical sorption
and it can be either exothermic or endothermic reaction. The details of sorption
reaction and mass transport mechanisms will be discussed in detail in module 3
on how to use these information for predicting the fate of contaminants in
geoenvironment.
8) Biological transformation
Biological transformation is the degradation or assimilation of
contaminants (mostly organic) by microorganisms present in the soil.
Transformations from biotic processes occur under aerobic or anaerobic
conditions. The transformation products obtained from each will be different. The

biotic transformation processes under aerobic conditions are oxidation reaction.
The various processes include hydroxylation, epoxidation, and substitution of OH
groups on molecules (Yong 2001). Anaerobic biotic transformation processes are
mostly reduction reaction, which include hydrogenolysis, H
+
substitution for Cl

on molecules, and dihaloelimination (Yong 2001). The major application of
biological transformation is in organic contaminant remediation which is
discussed in module 4.


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]
7. Cerato, A. B. and Lutenegger, A. J. (2002) Determination of surface area of
fine-grained soil by the ethylene glycol monoethyl ether (EGME) method,
Geotechnical Testing Journal, ASTM, Vol. 25, No. 3, (Available online), 7
pages.
8. Chapuis, R. P. and Pouliot, G. (1996) Determination of bentonite content in
soil-bentonite liners by X-ray diffraction, Canadian Geotechnical Journal,
Vol. 33, pp. 760-769.

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.
11. Fredlund, D. G. and Rahardjo, H. (1993) Soil mechanics for unsaturated
soils, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.
12. Fredlund, D. G., Fredlund, M. G. and Wilson, G. W. (1998) Estimation of
unsaturated soil properties using a knowledge-based system, Proceedings
of the Second International conference on unsaturated soils, UNSAT98
Beijing, China, August 17-30.
13. Fredlund, M.D., Wilson, G. W. and Fredlund, D.G. (2002) Use of grain size
distribution for estimation of the soil water characteristic curve, Canadian
Geotechnical Journal, Vol.39, pp. 1103-1117.
14. Fritz, S. J. and Marine, I. W. (1983) Experimental support for a predictive
osmotic model of clay membranes, Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, Vol.
47, 1515-1522.
15. Horneck, D. A., Hart, J. M., Topperand, K., and Koespell, B. (1989) Methods
of soil analysis used in the soil testing laboratory at Oregon State University,
Ag. Expt. Station SM 89:4.
16. IS 2720, Part 24, (1976) Methods of test for soils: determination of cation
exchange capacity, Indian Standards Institute, New Delhi, India, pp. 3-10.
17. Langmuir, I. (1938) The role of attractive and repulsive forces in the
formation of tactoids, thixotropic gels, protein crystals and coacervates,
Journal of Chemical Physics, Vol. 6, pp. 873-896.
18. Low, P. F. (1961) Physical chemistry of clay-water interaction, Advances in
Agronomy, Vol. 13, Academic, New York.
19. Malaya, C. (2011) A study on measuring methodologies and critical
parameters influencing soil suction-water content relationship, Ph. D. thesis

submitted to Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology
Guwahati.
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

The knowledge of clay minerals is important in geoenvironmental engineering.
Explain?
Summarize important properties of clay minerals.
Bring out the major difference between the three clay minerals: Kaolinite, Illite
and montmorillonite.
What are the important mechanisms of soil-water interaction?
Explain the formation of diffused double layer.
What are the important assumptions for formulation DDL theory?
Discuss in brief, Gouy Chapman DDL model.
Explain the significance of cation exchange capacity and method of its
determination.
How does CEC and SSA influence reactivity of soil?
Define volumetric water content? How does the volumetric water content
influence the flow properties of a soil medium?
Derive relationship between volumetric and gravimetric water content.
What are the different components of soil-water potential?
Compare saturated and unsaturated state of soil?
Explain important features of water retention curve?
Explain the complexity in modeling unsaturated behavior as compared to that of
saturated soil.
Discuss soil-water diffusivity.
Explain in detail the various contaminant retention and transport mechanisms in
soil.
What is the difference between retardation and retention of contaminants?
Discuss in detail, the important contaminant attenuation reaction in soil.
Explain the significance of soil sorption behavior in waste management?
Fig. Q2.1 represents the equilibrium condition (after time t) of water separated
from NaCl by using a semi-permeable membrane at a room temperature of 27
0
C.
There is a rise in solution level by 5 cm.

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
NaCl water
Fig. Q2.1
Waste minimization (Reduction)
Reuse
Value addition of waste (Recycle)
Incineration
Land disposal with
energy recovery
Land
disposal
without
energy
recovery
Module 3
WASTE CONTAINMENT SYSTEM

3.1 Evolution of waste containment facilities and
disposal practices
Increased events of environmental pollution and its realization have led to
the evolution of planned and engineered waste management facilities. The waste
management essentially comprises of collection, transport, disposal and/or
incineration of wastes. A sustainable waste management is founded on 3 Rs,
namely Reduce, Reuse and Recycle so that the quantity of waste to be disposed
on land is considerably reduced. For better clarity, the waste management
hierarchy is presented in Fig. 3.1. The major focus is to reduce the quantity of
waste production by efficient process control, try to reuse the by-products or
waste products from a process, and try to recycle the left out waste products by
value added transformation.

Fig. 3.1 Waste management hierarchy (Modified from Munier 2004)
Some of the major challenges faced in the implementation of an efficient waste
management scheme are the non-awareness of public and the need for
systematic functioning of various divisions like collection, transportation, disposal
and site management.
The concept of waste management started in 1800 century. However, the
need for an integrated solid waste management program (ISWMP) has been
realized in late 1980s. The main aim of ISWMP is to optimize all aspects of solid
waste management to achieve maximum environmental benefits cost-effectively.
It essentially consists of
1) Waste source identification and characterization.
2) Efficient waste collection
3) Reduction of volume and toxicity of waste to be discarded.
4) Land disposal and/or incineration.
5) Optimization of first four steps to reduce cost and environmental impact.
The wastes which are produced include non-hazardous municipal solid
waste, construction and demolition waste, partially hazardous medical wastes,
agricultural waste, highly hazardous industrial and nuclear waste. The handling
and management of hazardous and non-hazardous waste varies a lot.
When the wastes are disposed on to the land, the percolating rainwater
interacts with it and produces liquid known as leachate (contaminated liquid that
comes out of the waste matrix). In the due course of time, the leachate
percolates through the soil and reaches the groundwater and moves along with it
as shown in Fig. 3.2.

Rain water
Waste Primary containment/ landfill
Ground surface
Leachate
flowing out
of landfill
Unsaturated
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
to what has been discussed in the previous paragraph where there is no
provision below the wastes to minimize the migration of harmful contaminants.
The unsaturated subsurface below the wastes naturally attenuate harmful
contaminants before it reaches ground water. It is presumed that the
contaminants reaching ground water will be well within the permissible limit, even
though in most of the cases it would not be. For the same reason, these types of
landfills are not preferred in spite of its simplicity.
In the containment landfill, there is an engineered layer of soil known as
liner on which the waste is disposed or dumped. Liners are tailor made soil layer
with some desirable properties meeting the regulations set by the pollution
control board. The design of these liners is done in such a way that the
contaminants leaching out seeps at a very low pace and gets attenuated. The
concentration of contaminants reaching the ground water within the prescribed
design life is expected to be well within the permissible limit. This type of landfill
is mandatory for containing hazardous wastes such as industrial and nuclear
wastes. All the working elements of such landfills are properly designed. This
module essentially deals with the role of geoenvironmental engineers in deciding
and designing engineered containment landfills.

Fig. 3.3 Conceptual depiction of types of landfill (a) Natural attenuation (b) Containment

Cover
Waste
Groundwater
Aquifer
Rock
Cover
Waste
Groundwater
Aquifer
Rock
Containment liner
(a) (b)
3.2.1 Engineered landfills
The first and foremost task in the planning of engineered landfills is its site
selection. There are several socio-economic concerns which need to be satisfied
before a site can be decided for waste disposal. The major concern is social
since nobody likes wastes to be dumped in their neighbourhood. This would
necessitate mass education and awareness program on the pros and cons of the
waste management project. Apart from public acceptance the other factors which
are important in site selection are locational, geotechnical and hydrogeological
criteria. Another important aspect in landfill site selection is establishing search
radius, which is the maximum distance of waste hauling (transport). Waste
hauling is one of the costliest items in landfill operations.
Three important steps of landfill site selection are
a) Data collection
b) Locational criterion
c) Obtaining public reaction and acceptance
a) Data collection: The data pertained to landfill site selection are summarized as
follows:
i) Topographic maps: This include information on contour, natural surface, water
drainage, location of streams, wetlands etc. Ideally landfills should be avoided on
land contributing to groundwater recharge. The surface flow should be in such a
way that water flow away from the landfill site. In case the flow is towards the
landfill then adequate measure has to be taken to prevent excessive water
seeping into the landfill.
ii) Soil maps: Gives information on the type of soil available at a particular place.
This information is important before going for an in depth subsurface
investigation. A high permeable soil strata is normally avoided for landfills.
iii) Land use maps: These maps are very important as it gives the land value and
its importance. There will be some zoning restriction for some lands laid down by
the government, which can be assessed based on land use maps. For example,
landfills should be located away from the flood plain.
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.

3.2.2 Methods for landfill site selection
There are different qualitative and quantitative methods available for
landfill site selection by assessing the extent of environmental impact caused by
the project. Essentially the decision on landfill siting is done based on subsurface
and burrow source investigation. The subsurface investigation includes the
assessment of hydrogeology of a place to understand permeability, strength,
compressibility, contaminant interaction, presence of faults and folds, seismic
hazard investigation etc. Borrow source investigation reveals the quality of
material available near to the probable landfill site and its utility in landfill
construction. If soil near by is suitable, it would considerably reduce the cost of
the project by minimizing transportation and material expenditure.
Some of the qualitative and quantitative methods for landfill site selection
are briefly discussed below. Qualitative methods for landfill site selection are
only used for preliminary evaluation as discussed below:
(a) Check list: It is a simple list consisting of different criteria that are important
for knowing potential impact due to a project on the environment. It includes
factors related to environment, social and ecosystem considering its
beneficial or adverse impact. For instance:
1. Population likely to be affected by project.
2. Soil, air, water.
3. Flora and fauna
4. Land use etc.
A descriptive check list gives list of impacts during the various stages of
project which can be used as criteria for understanding environmental impact.
A weight scale check list is used to recognize the relative importance of
different factors or environment.
(b) Network analysis: In this method, cause and effect relationship is detected by
analyzing different areas likely to be affected by the project. A block diagram
shown in Fig. 3.4 is used to show the connectivity between action and
consequence. The connectivity is shown by solid arrow for direct
consequence and broken for indirect consequence. It provides an effective
and visual way to illustrate positive or adverse impacts of a project.

Fig 3.4 Network analysis block diagram (Munier 2004)

(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,

Consequence 3

Consequence 2

Consequence 1

Action 1 Action 3

Action 2

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

A matrix is formed by assigning importance values to the environmental
parameters selected for the problem. Further a value is assigned in the matrix
which shows the magnitude of impact (positive or negative depending upon the
sign of magnitude) due to the activity on the environment. Importance values are
multiplied with magnitude of impact and summation is done for rows as well as
for columns. Best site is then decided based on the maximum summation value
of row, column or both.

(b) Multi-criteria analysis
In this method, best possible optimal criteria are selected for evaluation of
sites. A total score of 1000 is apportioned among the assessment criteria based
on their importance .There is no hard and fast rule for total score. A site
sensitivity index (SSI) is developed for different attribute qualities on a scale of 0
to 1. Based on SSI, score for each parameter of various sites is computed.
Ranking is done for the individual site alternatives based on summation of the
score.
(c) Hatzichristos and Giaoutzi (2006) demonstrated the use of fuzzy set approach
integrated with geographical information system (GIS) for landfill siting. The fuzzy
set is considered effective to take decisions on those criteria that are not discrete
and which overlap with one another. It is opined that the fuzzy set approach
integrated with GIS platform is most relevant for applications where the decision
criteria are not discrete and the boundaries between regions are fuzzy or
overlapping.
(d) Chang et al. (2008) have presented a fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis
along with a geospatial analysis for the selection of landfill sites. The study
developed a spatial decision support system (SDSS) for landfill site selection in a
fast-growing urban region. Thematic maps in Geographical information system
(GIS) are used in conjunction with environmental, biophysical, ecological, and
socioeconomic variables leading to support the fuzzy multi-criteria decision-
making (FMCDM). It differs from the conventional methods of integrating GIS
with multi-criteria decision making for landfill site selection because the approach
follows two sequential steps rather than a full-integrated scheme. The purpose of
GIS was to perform an initial screening process to eliminate unsuitable land
followed by utilization of FMCDM method to identify the most suitable site using
the information provided by the regional experts with reference to different
chosen criteria.

3.3 Subsurface investigation for waste management
Subsurface investigation for waste management is required for deciding
the site for landfills and also for delineating the extent of contamination. Several
hydrogeological parameters required for landfill site selection are obtained from
subsurface investigation conducted for different potential sites. The methodology
for subsurface investigation remains similar to any other geotechnical
investigation (for example, open pit, bore holes). In addition, several geophysical
methods such as electrical resistivity imaging, seismic refraction, ground
penetration radar, etc. are used for defining the zone of contamination,
establishing the depth of aquifer, and also to reduce the number of bore holes.

3.4 Design of landfills
An engineered landfill essentially consists of a barrier layer or liner which
is a low permeable zone to prevent the leaching of waste from the landfill. Above
the liner, a drainage layer is placed which collects the leachate from the waste for
treatment. Such a layer also minimizes the head causing flow in liner due to the
timely removal of leachate from the landfill. The third important layer is the cover
to the landfill, which is a multi-layered system to cut off the harmful effect of
waste on the atmosphere. The various aspects required for planning and design
of landfill are as follows:
1. Waste Characterization
2. Assessment of leachate and gas generation
3. Landfill elements to be provided
4. Liner and cover materials
5. Landfill design approach

3.4.1 Waste Characterization:
Waste characterization is important to understand the following:
1. Physical and chemical tests are preformed to evaluate whether waste is
hazardous or non-hazardous.
2. Whether waste can be landfilled directly or necessitate processing (reduction,
recycling etc.) before disposal.
3. Approximate rate of waste volume generated.
4. Assessment of leachate quantity.
5. Assessment of leachate quality for judging liner compatibility, treatment plant
design, ground water monitoring program design.
6. Safety precautions to be followed during landfill operations.
7. Identify waste reduction alternatives.

3.4.2 Assessment of leachate and gas generation
Leachates are produced when water or other liquids percolates and
interacts with waste. The information on quality and quantity of leachate and gas
generated during active life and after closure are important for realistic and
efficient design of a landfill. Leachate contains a lot of dissolved and suspended
materials. Gases produced include CH
4
, CO
2
, NH
3
and H
2
S due to anaerobic
decomposition of waste. These gases either escape to atmosphere or dissolve in
water leading to further reactions. Contaminated liquids of high concentration are
formed due to chemical reaction taking place within the waste. The percolating
water increases the quantity of leachate but would help to dilute the
concentration.

Factors influencing leachate quality
a) Refuse composition
b) Elapsed time: Leachate quality (concentration) increases and reaches peak
during the working period of landfill and then start decreasing with time as shown
in Fig. 3.5. All the contaminants present in the leachate do not exhibit peak at the
same time and may not be of same shape.

Fig. 3.5 Variation of leachate quality (concentration) with elapsed time

c) Temperature: Temperature affects bacterial growth and chemical reactions,
there by affecting leachate quality.
d) Available moisture influences biodegradable and subsequent leaching of
wastes.
e) Available oxygen influences leachate quality due to the fact that chemicals
released due to aerobic decomposition is different from anaerobic
decomposition. Anaerobic condition would arise due to landfill cover or covering
due to fresh waste.

Factors influencing leachate quantity
a) Amount of precipitation received.
b) Ground water interaction when the landfill base is below groundwater table.
c) Moisture content of waste increases biodegradation and increases leachate
production. Such a scenario is mostly applicable in the case of municipal solid
waste and due to sludge that are disposed.
d) Final cover reduces leachate quantity due to low percolation through
compacted covers. Also vegetation in the top soil of final cover reduces
infiltration by increased evapotranspiration.

C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

Time
Estimation of leachate quantity
The quantity of leachate is directly dependent on precipitation received.
Pre-closure and post-closure leachate generation from a landfill vary significantly.
Pre-closure leachate generation rate is required for designing leachate collection
pipes in the landfill, fixing the size of leachate collection tank and treatment plant.
Post-closure leachate generation rate is required to plan the management of
leachate and cost incurred for it. Leachate quantity considerably reduces after
closure and construction of covers.
Leachate volume (Lv) is given by Eq. 3.1.
L
v
= P + S - E - AW 3.1
Where P is the precipitation volume, S is the volume of pore liquid squeezed
from the waste, E is the volume lost by evaporation and AW is the volume of
liquid lost through absorption in waste.

Pore squeeze leachate volume (S)
When sludge in disposed, liquid within the pores gets squeezed due to
self- weight of sludge and weight of waste dump and cover soil. Such an action is
similar to the consolidation process occurring in a saturated soil. Primary
consolidation of waste accounts for the majority of pore squeeze leachate. The
primary consolidation properties of sludge are used to predict leachate
generation rate.
Loss due to evaporation depends on ambient temperature, wind velocity,
difference in vapour pressure etc. Leachate absorbed in waste (AW) is depended
on field capacity (FC) of waste. FC is the maximum moisture content that waste
can retain against gravitational force without producing down ward flow. When
the moisture content is within FC, the waste has the capacity to retain water
without causing downward flow.

Post closure leachate generation rate
Only water that can infiltrate through the final cover of the landfill
percolates through the waste and generates post closure leachate. Water
balance method expressed by Eq. 3.2 is a popular method for estimating post
closure leachate generation.
L
V
= P - ET - R - S 3.2
Where L
V
is the volume of post closure leachate, P is the volume of precipitation,
ET is the volume lost though evapotranspiration, R is the volume of run off and S
is the volume of moisture stored in soil and waste. Potential ET is obtained based
on appropriate empirical equation.
R = C
r
I A 3.3
Where C
r
is the run off coefficient, I is the rainfall intensity and A is the area of
landfill surface.
Soil moisture storage (S): A portion of infiltrating water is stored by soil and only
a part of this is used for vegetation. Soil moisture storage capacity is the
difference between field capacity and wilting point. Wilting point is the moisture
content at which plants cannot draw moisture and starts wilting. Normally,
moisture content corresponding to 1500 kPa matric suction is taken as wilting
point.
Water balance method if not done properly results in large errors
especially when used for long term leachate generations rate. The disadvantages
of water balance method are: (i) it does not account permeability of cover layer
(ii) evapotranspiration is sometimes wrongly calculated due to over prediction of
root length in vegetation layer. In reality root would not have penetrated entire
thickness of vegetation layer. Some of the freely downloadable software such as
hydrologic evaluation of landfill performance (HELP) model by US Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA) is a handy tool for performing water balance studies.

Gas generation rate
Gas generation rate is mostly valid for municipal solid waste (MSW)
landfill where organic matter decomposition results in the production of gases.
Gas production in MSW landfill occurs due to anaerobic degradation resulting
from hydrolysis and fermentation (attributed to bacterial activities), acetogenesis
and dehydrogenation, and methanogenesis. Hydrogen gas is produced due to
the oxidation of soluble products to organic acids. Some of the other gases
produced from MSW are methane, carbondioxide, hydrogen sulphide and
nitrogen. Gas production reaches a stable rate and then decreases as biological
activity in MSW landfill start decreasing. The assessment of time dependent
percentage production of methane from a MSW landfill is important for
recovering methane as an energy source, and there by reducing greenhouse gas
effect.

3.4.3 Engineered containment landfills
The engineered landfill includes designed man made barrier layers for
minimizing the migration of harmful contaminants from the place of disposal to
the groundwater. The provisions in engineered landfill depends upon the type of
waste is receives. For example, comparison of a typical MSW landfill and
hazardous landfill is shown in Fig. 3.6.

Fig. 3.6 A typical engineered landfill provision
Municipal solid
waste
Soil filter or
geotextile

Leachate collection
layer
Clay barrier
Permeability
less than 10
-7
cm/s
15 cm
30 cm
60 cm
Hazardous waste
Soil filter or
geotextile

Leachate collection
layer
Clay barrier
Permeability
less than 10
-7
cm/s
15 cm
60 cm
100 cm
Water table
Minimum 3 m
Major role of soil in engineered landfill
As indicated in Fig. 3.7, the major role of soil in an engineered landfill can
be summarized as follows:

Fig. 3.7 Role of soil in an engineered landfill
1) Compacted liner or barrier which minimize the migration of contaminant to
groundwater and hence it is the most integral and important part of a
landfill. The reduction in migration is due to low permeability and
contaminant retention capacity of the clayey soil used in liners.
2) Leachate collection system provided below the waste to collect the
leachate and effectively drain to a collection source for further treatment.
3) After the service life of the landfill, an integrated multi layer cover system
is provided on top of the waste to isolate it from the environment and
minimize the generation of post closure leachate.
4) Natural soil is used as daily cover material for waste during the operational
phase of landfill.
5) The unsaturated natural soil below the liner act as an additional buffer
layer in reducing the migration of contaminants to groundwater.
6) In addition, suitable geosythetics, geotextiles, geomembrane, geonets etc.
are used individually or in combination with soil to act as liner, drainage
layer, filtration layer or separation layer. The use of geosynthetic helps to
reduce the thickness of liner layer.
Multi layer cover on waste
Waste
Leachate collection layer
Daily cover (natural soil)
Liner or barrier

Natural soil
3.4.3.1 Compacted liner
Soil used for compacted liners include natural clays, glacial till, residual
soil, shale, mud, bentonite etc. Natural or locally available soils with high clay
content are preferred to commercial soil like bentonite due to cost effectiveness.
In the absence of suitable natural soil, swelling clays like bentonite is mixed with
locally available soil, fly ash, sand etc. to achieve the desired performance of
liners. In recent years, geosynthetic materials have been used along with clays to
enhance the performance of liners due to its low permeability. A typical eg; is
geosynthetic clay liner popularly known as GCL. These are factory manufactured
hydraulic and gas barriers typically consisting of bentonite clay or other low
permeability clay materials sandwiched between synthetic materials such as
geomembranes or geotextiles or both, which are held together by needling or
chemical adhesives. The thickness of GCLs is much less than that of compacted
clay liners. The main advantage in using geosynthetic materials are their ready
availability, small volume consumption, better performance, durability, low cost
and homogeneity as compared to soils. The simplest compacted liner is that of
compacted clay liner (CCL), which is widely used as hydraulic barriers for water
and waste containment. Other configurations of liners include single, multiple and
composite layers and are used depending on the importance of the project and
vulnerability of waste. The thickness of liner varies from 60 cm for an ordinary
solid waste facility to approximately 300 cm for highly hazardous waste. It is
reported that even for a homogenous liner, a thickness of less than 60 cm would
result in a sharp increase of leakage through the liner (Kmet et. al., 1981). As the
liner thickness is increased, the flow through the liner is significantly decreased.
The trend of decreasing flow is observed until a thickness of 1.2 m to 1.8 m is
reached. Beyond this, the decrease in flow with further increase in thickness is
minimal (Benson et. al., 1999). As such, it is recommended that a minimum liner
thickness of 1.2 m to 1.8 m be used to provide an effective flow barrier. This
factor of safety is required to account construction errors and to compensate the
difficulty of ensuring quality control for such a large aerial extent of liner.
It is very important to assess the suitability of geomaterial for compacted
liner construction. One of the universally accepted criteria to be satisfied by
compacted liner is that the permeability (k) should be 10
-9
m/sec. Therefore,
this requirement becomes the primary criterion for deciding the suitability of
geomaterial as compacted liner. There are different other criteria available in the
literature for assessing the suitability of material for liner construction based on
soil properties such as unconfined compressive strength (UCS), index properties
etc (Younus and Sreedeep 2012 a, b). UCS of not less than 200 kPa is desirable
for liner material to bear the overburden placed above. In some cases plasticity
characteristics are used for initial assessment of geomaterials. Clay with liquid
limit less than 90%, plasticity index (PI) between 6% and 65% and clay content
greater than 10% is found suitable for liners. However, these guidelines are
qualitative and need to be ascertained with the permeability characteristics of
compacted liner material. Daniel and Benson (1990) recommend that the soil
liner materials should contain at least 30% of fines, where as other state
regulatory agencies recommend at least 50% fines.
Compaction is one of the most important factors that govern permeability
of liners. Most of the liners are compacted with footed rollers, which are fully or
partially penetrating the soil layer. The dry unit weight of compaction in the field
should be 96-98 % of maximum dry unit weight established in the lab. Water
content of the soil is normally 0 to 4% of OMC on wet of optimum. A broader
range of compaction water content resulting in target permeability is desirable
from workability point of view. Sufficient care is required to guard against
desiccation of the compacted liner due to the loss of water content. Desiccation
results in cracks and preferential pathways for liquid leading to enhanced
permeability. The problem of desiccation can be alleviated by covering the liner
by natural soil, using clayey sand with low shrinkage, specify the range of
compaction water content and dry unit weight that ensures both low permeability
and low shrinkage.

3.4.3.2 Design philosophy of compacted liner
For the design of compacted liner it is important to understand the
governing mechanism of contaminant transport through soil. Knowing the
governing mechanism, the appropriate governing differential equation is
formulated. The solution of governing equation is used to predict the
concentration of contaminant with respect to space and time. Such predictions
are used to evaluate whether the thickness of compacted liner (with a specific set
of properties) would be able to protect the groundwater aquifer from pollution for
the period of design life (which may be as high as 100 years). If not, then the
thickness or the material of liner is modified to meet the requirements. To start
with, the governing mechanisms of contaminant transport are discussed below:

1) Advection: It is the movement of contaminant along with the flowing water.
Seepage velocity (v
s
) become important. Movement of contaminant with velocity
equal to ground water is termed as plug flow.
Mass flux of contaminant transported by advection is f = n. v
s
. C = v. C (3.4)
Mass flux is defined as the amount of mass transported across a given cross
section in unit time. n is the porosity and C is the concentration.
Total mass flux due to advection m
a
= A *
}
t
d f
0
. t (3.5)
= A *
}
t
s
d C v n
0
. . . t
m
a
is the mass of contaminant transported from landfill by advection. A is the
cross section area through which contaminant passes. For non-reactive
contaminant, contaminant moves with a velocity equal to flow velocity. If velocity
is negligible, contaminant movement by advection is minimal.

2) Diffusion: It is the process of solute transport from a region of higher
concentration to a region of lower concentration. The process is termed as
molecular diffusion, D
m
, when the solute migrates in pure water. However,
diffusion in the porous media is restricted only to pore space and can be
expressed by Ficks first and second laws (Rowe et al. 1988), which corresponds
to steady (Eq. 3.6) and transient diffusion (Eq. 3.7), respectively.
|
.
|
\
|
c
c
=
z
C
D F
e d
n (3.6)
where,
m e
D D t = and
2
e
L
L
|
|
.
|
\
|
= t

2
z
C
2
e
D
t
C
c
c
=
c
c
n (3.7)
where F
d
is the mass flux due to diffusion of solute per unit area per unit time, D
e

is the effective diffusion coefficient, D
m
is the molecular diffusion coefficient, t is
the tortuosity coefficient,
z
C
c
c
is termed as concentration gradient, L is the straight
line distance of the flow path, L
e
is the actual distance traveled by the solute
through the pore space and z is the distance of solute travel.
Total mass flux due to steady state diffusion m
d
= A *
}
c
c
t
e
d
z
C
D n
0
). . . ( t (3.8)

Advective-dispersive transport:
Mechanical dispersion (D
md
) 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= (D
e
+D
md
) (3.9)
For low permeable soils like clays, D
e
dominates and for high permeable soils
like sands D
md
dominates. D
md
is represented as a linear function of velocity as
represented by Eq. 3.10.
D
md
= .v (3.10)
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
m
d
= A *
}
c
c
t
d
z
C
D n
0
s
). . . C . v n. ( t
(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
C
s
= (C
i
C
e
).(V/M
s
) (3.12)
Where C
i
is the initial concentration of contaminant in pore water, C
e
is the
concentration of contaminant in pore water at equilibrium sorption reaction, C
s
is
the concentration of contaminant sorbed on soil mass, V is the volume of pore
water which has interacted with M
s
mass of soil. V/M
s
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.
C
s
= f(C
e
) (3.13)
The simplest case of sorption can be modelled using linear isotherm represented
by Eq. 3.14.
C
s
= K
d
. C
e
(3.14)
K
d
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
isotherms are Langmuir isotherm and Freundlich isotherm as represented by
Eqs. 3.15 and 3.16, respectively.
1
m e
s
e
S bC
C
bC
=
+
(3.15)
n
s f e
C K C = (3.16)
Where
m
S is the maximum capacity of sorption at all available sorption site (mono
layer), b is a constant representing rate of sorption, K
f
and n are empirical
constants. Once the sorption isotherm are defined for a particular contaminant-
soil system, then the solute sorbed on soil for any concentration of solution can
be determined.

Sorption characteristics of contaminant-soil system are determined by
batch test procedure (ASTM D 4646). The liquid to solid ratio and required pH for
the batch sorption test is decided. Based on the expected range in the field, the
range of concentration of solution is finalized. The soil is mixed with solution in
the chosen liquid to solid ratio and shaken for 16 hrs using a mechanical shaker.
The solution is then filtered and analyzed for equilibrium concentration (C
e
).
Knowing the initial concentration, the sorbed mass (C
s
) can be determined based
on Eq. 3.12. Plot the results of C
s
vs. C
e
and use appropriate sorption isotherm to
define the trend mathematically.

Governing differential equation for contaminant transport
By considering conservation of mass within small soil volume and
summing up the process explained above, the governing differential equation for
contaminant transport (Fetter 1992) can be expressed as
n C n
t
S
z
f
t
C

c
c
c
c
=
c
c
(3.17)
f is the mass flux due to advective-dispersive transport =
z
C
D n
c
c
. . C . v n.
s
, S is
the sorbed concentration of contaminant and equal to C
s
(Eq. 3.13), n is the
porosity, C is the concentration of pore water at time t and distance z, D is the
hydrodynamic dispersion coefficient, is the dry density of soil, represent first
order decay reaction such as radioactive decay.
Substituting for f, assuming the simplest linear sorption isotherm (
t
S
c
c
=K
d
t
C
c
c
)
and neglecting first order decay Eq. 3.17 can be represented as
n
t
C
K
z
C
nv
z
C
nD
t
C
d
s
c
c
c
c
c
c
=
c
c

2
2
(3.18)
z
C
v
z
C
D
t
C
n
K
s
d
c
c
c
c
=
c
c
|
.
|
\
|
+
2
2
1

(3.19)
|
.
|
\
|
+
n
K
d
1 is termed as retardation coefficient R when linear sorption is

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 (v
s
/v
ion
) is represented as
v
s
/v
ion
=
|
.
|
\
|
+
n
K
d
1
v
ion
is the average velocity of reactive (non-conservative) contaminant

species.
For a non-reactive (conservative) contaminant, K
d
will be negligible and hence v
s

is equal to v
ion
. Eq. 3.19 is valid only for saturated soil where porosity is equal to
volumetric water content (). For unsaturated soil n is replaced by .

Determination of hydrodynamic dispersion and retardation
coefficient
A simple soil column test set up can be used to determine hydrodynamic
dispersion and retardation coefficient simultaneously in the laboratory. A detailed
description of these test procedures are discussed in the literature (Rowe et al.
1988). The soil sample is packed in the soil column with the compaction state
expected in the field. The soil sample is saturated with water and the required
contaminant solution of particular concentration is transferred on top of the
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 C
t
(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 C
t
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) = C
o
(initial concentration) t 0
C (, t) = 0 t 0
(
|
|
.
|
\
| +
+
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
Dt
t v z
erfc
D
z v
Dt
t v z
erfc
C
C
s s s t
2
exp
2
2
1
0
(3.20)
(
|
|
.
|
\
| +
+
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
R Dt
t v z
erfc
D
z v
R Dt
t v z
erfc
C
C
s s s t
/ 2
exp
/ 2
2
1
0
(3.21)
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 v
s
, D and R is obtained as discussed above for the liner
material and model contaminant used. v
s
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.

Determination of diffusion coefficient
For determining diffusion coefficient of the contaminant the half-cell
assembly, depicted in Fig. 3.8 (Sreedeep 2006), can be employed. This is mostly
applicable for unsaturated soil where the flow component (advective component)
is negligible. The contaminated soil half (source) is packed along with the
uncontaminated soil half (receiver) as shown in the figure. With time, the
contaminant migrates only by diffusion from source to receiver. After the test
duration, the soil mass is sliced and analyzed to obtain concentration variation
with depth. The analytical or numerical solution for differential equation for
diffusion (Eq. 3.22) (Shackelford 1991) is fitted to the experimental results to
obtain D
e
and R parameters.
2
t
2
e t
C
R
D
t
C
z c
c
=
c
c
(3.22)
where C
t
is the concentration at any time t, D
e
is the effective diffusion coefficient,
R

is the retardation coefficient and z is the distance.


Fig. 3.8 Details of the half-cell
Solution of Eq. 3.22 depends on the boundary conditions, as presented below:
(i) When the concentration profile does not reach at the ends of half-cell, the soil
medium can be considered to be infinite and the origin for x-axis is taken at
the interface of the half-cell, as depicted in Fig. 3.8 (a). The initial and
boundary conditions for this case can be stated as follows:
Initial conditions: C
t
(z, t) = C
0
(for z0, t=0); C
t
(z, t) = 0 (for z>0, t=0)
Boundary conditions: C
t
(z, t) = C
0
(for z = -, t>0); C
t
(z, t) = 0 (for z = ,
t>0)
The solution for Eq. 3.22 corresponding to case (i) can be represented by
Eq. 3.23 (Crank 1975):

|
|
.
|
\
|
=
R t D
z
erfc
C
C
e
t
/ 2
2
1
0
(3.23)
(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: C
t
(z, t) = C
0
(for z0, t=0); C
t
(z, t) = 0 (for z>0,
t=0)
Boundary conditions: 0 =
c
c
z
C
t
(for z=0, t>0); 0 =
c
c
z
C
t
(for z=L
c
, t>0)
where L
c
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):
C
t
/C
0

Source Receiver
L
c

0 +z -z
Direction of diffusion
(a) Infinite cell

Source
Receiver
L
c

z
0
z
0
Direction of diffusion
(b) Finite cell
C
t
/C
0

|
|
.
|
\
|
|
|
.
|
\
|
+ =

= c c m
c d e
c
t
L
mz
L
mz
m
L R t m D
L
z
C
C
0
1
2 2 2
0
0
sin cos .
) / exp( 2 t t t
t
(3.24)
where z
0
is the interface between source and receiver.

References

1. ASTM D 4646 (2004) Standard test method for 24-h batch-type
measurement of contaminant sorption by soils and sediments, Annual Book
of ASTM Standards, Vol. 04.11, ASTM International, West Conshohocken,
PA, USA.
2. Benson, C. H., Daniel, D. E. and Boutwell, G. P. (1999) Field performance of
compacted clay liners, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 125, No. 5, pp. 390-403.
3. Carslaw, H. S. and Jaeger, J. C. (1959) Conduction of heat in solids, Oxford
University Press, New York.
4. Chang, N. Parvathinathanb, G. and Breedenc, J. (2008) Combining GIS with
fuzzy multicriteria decision making for landfill siting in a fast-growing urban
region, Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 87, No. 1, pp. 139-153.
5. Crank, J. (1975) The mathematics of diffusion, Oxford University Press,
New York.
6. Daniel, D. E. and Benson, C. H. (1990) Influence of clods on hydraulic
conductivity of compacted clay Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE,
Vol. 116, No. 8, pp. 1231-1248.
7. Fetter, C. W. (1992) Contaminant hydrogeology, Macmillan publishing
Company, New York.
8. Hatzichristos, T. and Giaoutzi, M. (2006) Landfill siting using GIS, fuzzy logic
and the Delphi method, Journal of Environmental Technology and
Management, Vol. 6, No.2, pp.218231.
9. Kmet, P., Quinn, K. J. and Slavic, C. (1981) Analysis of design parameters
affecting the collection efficiency of clay-lined landfills, Proc., Fourth Annual
Madison Conf. of Appl. Res. and Practice on Municipal and Industrial Waste,
Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis., Sept., 250265.
10. Munier, N. (2004) Multicriteria environmental assessment, Kluwer Academic
Publishers, Netherlands.
11. Rowe, R. K., Caers, C. J. and Barone, F. (1988) Laboratory determination of
diffusion and distribution coefficients of contaminants using undisturbed
clayey soil, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 25, pp. 108-118.
12. Shackelford, C. D. (1991) Laboratory diffusion testing for waste disposal- a
review, Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, Vol. 7, pp. 177-217.
13. Sreedeep, S. (2006) Modeling Contaminant Transport in Unsaturated Soils,
Ph. D. Thesis submitted to the Department of Civil Engineering, Indian
Institute of Technology Bombay, India.
14. Younus, M. M. and Sreedeep, S. (2012a) Evaluation of bentonite-fly ash mix
for its application in landfill liners, Journal of Testing and Evaluation, ASTM,
in print.
15. Younus, M. M. and Sreedeep, S. (2012b) Re-evaluation and modification of
plasticity based criterion for assessing the suitability of material as compacted
landfill liners, Journal of Materials, ASCE, in print.

Model Questions

1. Explain the concept of 3Rs and waste management hierarchy?
2. What is the aim of integrated solid waste management program?
3. Bring out the difference between a natural attenuation landfill and an
engineered landfill.
4. Explain the important details required for deciding landfill site.
5. Discuss in detail the multicriteria method for landfill site selection.
6. What is the importance of waste characterization?
7. What are the factors influencing leachate quality and quantity?
8. How to estimate leachate and gas generation rate?
9. With a neat figure, explain a conceptual liner and cover in landfill.
10. What is the major role of soil in a waste containment facility?
11. What are the requirements of compacted liner?
12. Explain in steps the design philosophy of waste containment liner system.
13. Starting from the basics, derive the differential equation for defining
contaminant transport for reactive contaminant. Every phenomena
governing differential equation need to be discussed in detail.
14. With neat figures, explain laboratory method for establishing a)
hydrodynamic dispersion coefficient, b) retardation coefficient, c) diffusion
coefficient of unsaturated soil with low water content d) partition
coefficient.
15. What are the major differences between physisorption and chemisorption?
16. Explain the batch method for establishing sorption characteristics of the
soil-contaminant system.
17. Explain the physical significance of sorption characteristics and its
importance in contaminant transport modeling.
18. What are the different isotherms used for establishing sorption
characteristics?
19. What are the different contaminant transport phenomena?
20. What is diffusion and when it is expected to dominate contaminant
transport phenomena?
21. What is retardation coefficient and how it is helpful in determining ionic
velocity?
22. A column test was conducted to determine dispersion coefficient. The soil
used was a silty clay with specific gravity 2.7. The diameter and height of
the saturated soil column is 5 cm and 7cm, respectively with a water
content of 35%. Calculate the pore volume of the soil column. An
advective flux equal to 0.003 kg/day/m
2
of 1000 mg/l SrCl
2
has flown
through the soil column for 5 hrs. Determine the total pore volume and
number of pore volume for 5 hrs. The longitudinal hydrodynamic
dispersion coefficient is 1.267 x 10
-9
m
2
/s with a tortuosity coefficient of
0.7. The molecular diffusion coefficient of Sr
+2
is 7.9 x 10
-10
m
2
/s.
Determine the longitudinal dispersivity for the soil-contaminant system.
23. A batch test was conducted for 3 soil samples A, B, C with an initial
concentration of 100 mg/l of SrCl
2
. 5 g of each of the soil sample is mixed
with 50 ml, 100 ml, and 250 ml of SrCl
2
and the values of C
e
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.

26. Determine the quantity of flow and seepage velocity for constant head set
ups given below (Fig. Q3.2) in SI units.

Total height of air tube is 10 cm
in which 2 cm is below water
20 cm
10 cm
5 cm
5 cm
10 cm
ksat= 3*10
-5
cm/s
saturated volumetric water content = 0.5

Total height of air tube is 10 cm
in which 2 cm is below water
20 cm
10 cm
5 cm
5 cm
10 cm
ksat= 3*10
-5
cm/s
Specific gravity = 2.65; w=25 %

Datum and water exit
A
C B
3.3 m
1.5 m 0.5 m
Sand
Silty
clay
Water level
Fig. Q3.1
Fig. Q3.2
Module 4
CONTAMINATED SITE REMEDIATION

Soil contamination by organic or inorganic pollutants is caused by a number of
industries such as chemical, pharmaceuticals, plastics, automobile, nuclear
industries, biomedical wastes, mining industries, municipal solid waste. At times
it becomes essential to decontaminate soil. Broadly the soil decontamination is
done in two ways: (a) pump and treat in which the pollutant is pumped out using
external energy source, treated using methods such as incineration, radiation,
oxidation etc (b) removal of contaminated soil, treat it and then returning back to
its original place. This module is meant to briefly introduce various soil/ water
decontamination processes. The scientific basis and the reactions involved in
these processes are acid-base chemistry, solubility-precipitation, ion exchange,
redox, complexation, sorption, etc. which are discussed in module 2.

4.1 Contaminated site characterization/ assessment
Broadly, site characterization or contaminated site assessment (CSA) is
important for:
a) Determining concentration and spatial distribution of harmful pollutants under
consideration.
b) Determining the extent of site remediation (zonation) based on which the
suitable remediation technique is selected.
c) For assessing environmental and human health risk due to contamination.
More specifically, CSA is required to answer the following questions:
a) What is the source of contaminants?
b) What is the type and physical form of contaminants?
c) Spatial and depth wise extent of contamination
d) Whether the contaminants are stationery or movable?
e) If they are movable, then identify the significant pathways.
f) Identify the potential receptors of contaminants.
4.2 Selection and planning of remediation methods
Fig. 4.1 (USEPA 1991) presents a flowchart on various processes
involved in the planning of site remediation.

Fig. 4.1 Processes involved in deciding contaminated site remediation

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
Data Details Method of acquisition
1) Site history
and
land use
pattern
a) Population density within 3 km
from the contaminated site
b) Proximity to important
geographical features like airport,
railways, river etc.
c) Ownership of the land
d) Extent of contamination

Field
2) Geologic
and
hydrologic

a) Topography
b) Soil profile up to bed rock
c) Information on aquifer
d) Groundwater depth and flow
direction

Field
3) Geotechnical a) Soil sampling and classification
b) Permeability of soil
c) Chemical characteristics of soil
Field
Field
Lab
Site reconnaissance: Assessment of distribution, reaction and migration potential
Site characterization and sampling
Mass balance analysis using predictive mathematical modeling
Sufficient information to decide remediation Select, evaluate and apply remediation
Lab/ field studies to understand distribution, reaction and migration
Sensitivity analysis to understand the effect of various design
parameters on remediation performance

Field verification of remediation effectiveness
Yes
Information sufficient to demonstrate
remediation optimization
No
No
d) Soil strength Lab
4) Waste a) Water quality
b) Identifying the type of
contamination
c) Concentration of contaminants
d) Spatial extent of contamination
e) Depth of contamination
f) Contaminant retention
characteristics
g) Contaminant transport
characteristics
h) Hazard assessment and zonation
Field/ Lab
Field/ Lab
Lab
Field/ Lab
Field/ Lab
Lab
Lab
Lab

4.3 Risk assessment of contaminated site
Risk assessment or hazard assessment is required to decide the extent of
contaminant remediation required for a particular site. The factors influencing risk
assessment are:
Toxicity
A material is deemed toxic when it produces detrimental effects on
biological tissues or associated process when organisms are exposed to
concentration above some prescribed level. Acute toxicity is the effect that
occurs immediately after exposure where as chronic toxicity deals with long term
effects. It is expressed as mass unit of toxicant dose per unit mass of receiving
organism. It must be noted that concentration is an important factor while
deciding toxicity. Only when a contaminant crosses a particular concentration, it
becomes toxic. If the concentration is within the prescribed limit then no
remediation need to be performed. Only those site which have toxic level of
contaminant concentration needs remediation. For example, toxic contamination
level leading to cancer becomes the basis for some of the site clean-up
programs.
Test protocols such as toxicity characteristics leaching procedure (TCLP)
(Method 1311, EPA) have been developed for extraction of chemicals from
wastes to verify whether the concentration is within the prescribed toxicity limit.
TCLP is designed to determine the mobility of both organic and inorganic
analytes present in liquid, solid, and multiphase wastes. Several regulatory
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
calculated. If the level of concentration at a particular site is greater than the
maximum possible concentration, then it requires remediation. This approach
would clearly indicate the extent of remediation required for the contaminated
site. Appropriate remediation scheme is then selected to bring the concentration
level much less than the maximum possible concentration. Since risk
assessment and risk management is a very broad topic, it is difficult to discuss
the mathematical formulation in this course. Interested readers are requested to
go through additional literature (USEPA 1989; Asante-Duah 1996; Mohamed and
Antia 1998).

4.4 Remediation methods for soil and groundwater
Based on the toxic level of contaminants and the risk it pose to the
environment, a suitable remediation method is selected. It must be noted that the
remediation does not aim for entire decontamination. The major focus is to bring
the contamination level well below the regulatory toxic limit. This is done by
removing the toxic contaminants and/or immobilizing the contaminant that
prevents its movement through subsurface geoenvironment. The remediation
methods are broadly classified as physico-chemical, biological, electrical, thermal
and combination of these methods.

4.4.1 Physico-chemical methods
Removal and treatment of contaminated soil
One of the simplest physical methods for remediation is by removing the
contaminated soil and replacing it with clean soil. Essentially it is a dig, dump
and replace procedure. Such a method is practically possible only if the spatial
extent and depth of the contaminated region is small. The dug out contaminated
soil can be either disposed off in an engineered landfill or subjected to simple
washing as shown in Fig. 4.2.


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
Contaminated soil
Grinding/ dispersing
and slurry preparation
Filtering (liquid solid
separation)
Polluted water for
treatment
Clean solid for reuse
To disposal Reuse of clean water
as air sparging. Sometimes biodegradation is clubbed with air sparging for
enhanced removal of VOC. Such a technique is then termed as biosparging.

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
Vadoze zone
Saturated zone
Nitrogen/
oxygen
Nitrogen/
oxygen
Aeration Aeration
Contaminated
water
extraction
Water trap
Vapour
extraction
Vacuum
Contaminated air for
treatment
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.


Fig. 4.4 A schematic diagram for in-situ chemical decontamination

Another method is to allow the contaminated pore water to flow through a
permeable reactive barrier (PRB). Hence the placement of the barrier is
determined by the direction of flow of ground water. The material packed in the
barrier will retain IHM by exchange (sorption), complexation or precipitation
reaction. The transmission and the reaction time determine the thickness of the
reactive barrier to be provided. The material to be provided in the barrier is
influenced by the knowledge of IHM to be removed. This is mainly due to the fact
that the above mentioned reaction occurs differently when IHM is present as
single or as multiple species.
The successful use of PRB or treatment wall (TW) depends upon its
location such that majority of the contaminated groundwater flows through it. It is
essential to have a good knowledge on the hydrogeological conditions where
such barriers need to be placed. In some cases, sheet pile walls are used to
confine the flow towards the permeable barrier. Some of the materials used in
PRBs are exchange resins, activated carbon, zeolites, various biota, ferric
oxides, ferrous hydroxide etc. Hydraulic conductivity of the PRB should be
greater than or equal to the surrounding soil for proper permeation to occur. The
Ground surface
Ground water
flow direction
Row of injection wells
Extraction
Permeable
reactive barrier
Contaminated
zone with
extractants and
IHM
knowledge on reaction kinetics and permeability of the barrier would determine
the thickness of the wall to be provided such that enough residence time is
achieved for the removal reaction to occur.

4.4.2 Biological methods
Remediation by biological treatment is mostly applicable for soil
contaminated with organic pollutants and the process is termed as
bioremediation. In this method, certain soil microorganisms are used to
metabolize organic chemical compounds. In the process these microorganisms
degrade the contaminant. If naturally occurring microorganisms such as bacteria,
virus or fungi is not capable of producing enzymes required for bioremediation,
then genetically engineered microorganisms would be required. At the same
time, it should be ensured that such microorganisms do not produce any
undesirable effect on the geoenvironment (such as toxins). The process of
bioremediation is dependent on reactions such as microbial degradation,
hydrolysis, aerobic and anaerobic transformation, redox reaction, volatalization
etc. An example of bioremediation is discussed in the next section where in the
process is used for the remediation of oil spill land.

4.4.3 Electro-kinetic methods
Electro-kinetic methods are popular field method for decontaminating a
particular site by using electrical principles. The procedure is more effective for
granular type of soils. Two metal electrodes are inserted into the soil mass which
acts as anode and cathode. An electric field is established across these
electrodes that produces electronic conduction as well as charge transfer
between electrodes and solids in the soil-water system. This is achieved by
applying a low intensity direct current across electrode pairs which are positioned
on each side of the contaminated soil. The electric current results in
electrosmosis and ion migration resulting in the movement of contaminants from
one electrode to the other. Contaminants in the soil water or those which are
desorbed from the soil surface are transported to the electrodes depending upon
their charges. Contaminants are then collected by a recovery system or
deposited at the electrodes. Sometimes, surfactants and complexing agents are
used to facilitate the process of contaminant movement. This method is
commercially used for the removal of heavy metals such as uranium, mercury etc
from the soil.

4.4.4 Thermal methods
Thermal methods include both high temperature (>500
0
C) and low
temperature (<500
0
C) methods and are mostly useful for contaminants with high
volatilization potential (Evangelou 1998). High temperature processes include
incineration, electric pyrolysis, and in-situ vitrification. Low temperature
treatments include low temperature incineration, thermal aeration, infrared
furnace treatment, thermal stripping. High temperature treatment involves
complete destruction of contaminants through oxidation. Low temperature
treatment increases the rate of phase transfer of contaminants from liquid to
gaseous phase there by causing contaminant separation from the soil. Radio
frequency (RF) heating is used for in situ thermal decontamination of soil having
volatile and semi-volatile organic contaminants. Steam stripping or thermal
stripping is another process useful for soils contaminated with volatile and semi-
volatile organic contaminants. It is an in situ process in which hot air, water or
steam is injected into the ground resulting in increased volatilization of
contaminants. Sometimes vacuum is applied to extract air or steam back to the
surface for further treatment. The effectiveness of this method is increased by the
use of chemical agents that are capable of increasing the volatility of the
contaminants. High cost and its ineffectiveness with some contaminants (with low
volatilization potential) make thermal method less attractive. Also, in some cases
incineration process produces more toxic gases.

4.5 Some examples of in-situ remediation
Harbottle et al. (2006) have compared the technical and environmental
impacts of taking no remedial action with those of two remediation technologies.
The main objective of this study is to verify the sustainability of remediation
technologies. The two remediation technologies evaluated in this study are
solidification/ stabilization (S/S) and landfilling. In both these methods
contaminants are contained rather than destroyed. Therefore, it is extremely
important to analyze the long-term effect to avoid any potential problems in
future. In this study, sustainable remediation project is defined as the one that
satisfies the five criteria listed as follows:
Criterion 1: Future benefits outweigh the cost of remediation.
Criterion 2: Overall environmental impact of the remediation method is less than
the impact of leaving the land untreated.
Criterion 3: Environmental impact of remediation process is minimal and
measurable.
Criterion 4: The time-scale over which the environmental consequences occur is
part of the decision-making process.
Criterion 5: The decision making process
The site selected in this study was an industrial location polluted by BTEX
(benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene) and TPH (total petroleum
hydrocarbon). About 4400 m
3
of contaminated soil has been remediated. The
stabilization mix used was cement:bentonite of 2.5:1 and water:dry grout of 3.8:1.
It was found that due to S/S, groundwater pollution reduced by 98 percent and
the leachate from S/S sample was well within the limit. S/S process resulted in
the increase in strength, reduction in permeability and increase in pH of the soil.
The same quantity of contaminated soil has been landfilled at a distance of 96
km from the source. In long term, S/S has been found to perform better than
landfill and no action taken for remediation. Other advantages of S/S are low
material usage, low off-site waste disposal, potential ground improvement for
immediate re-use, and lesser impact on the local community. However, the
contaminants remain on the site which increases the level of uncertainty in long
term. In the case of landfilling, long term impacts are less due to the fact that
contaminated soil is removed from the site. The resources that need to be
mobilized for landfill are more than S/S.
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
excavation and washing of soil in an industrial estate site of 0.12 km
2
.
Preliminary investigation of the site revealed contamination upto a depth of 6m
with TPH, volatile aromatics such as toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene. Soil was
found to be free of heavy metals. A quantitative risk assessment indicated the
need for remediation. 40000 tonnes of soil was excavated from the affected site
and subjected to soil washing. Washing has been performed in a unit with a
capacity of 70 tonnes/ hour. Washed soil has been declared safe after adequate
laboratory testing and the clean soil reused in the site. The soil has been first
homogenized and sieved. The required surfactant and extracting agents were
mixed with water and used for soil washing. The waste water which comes out
after washing has been treated and reused. Contaminated sludge and fines after
waste water treatment and oversized soil mass rejected during sieving was
transferred to landfills.
The second case study is another industrial area of 3 km
2
near Lisbon.
The industrial site comprised mainly of organic and inorganic chemistry industries
producing pesticides, acid, copper, lead, zinc, iron pyrites etc. The site consists
of 52000 tonnes of hazardous sludge from zinc metallurgy and iron pyrite ashes.
The site required investigation and remediation due to the placement of an
airport in the vicinity of this site. The groundwater exhibited high levels of arsenic,
lead, mercury, cadmium, copper, zinc, cobalt. In some areas the pH was as low
as 1, which increased metal mobility. The investigations were mainly focused on
developing a conceptual site model and environmental risk analysis for defining
remediation options. The efforts are still on for this particular site.

References

1. Asante-Duah, D. K. (1996) Management of Contaminated Site Problems,
Lewis Publ., CRC Press Inc., Boca Raton, Florida.
2. Ascenco, C. (2009) Contaminated site characterization and clean up-two
case studies, NASA/c3p- 2009 International workshop on environment and
alternative energy: Global Collaboration in Environmental and Alternative
Energy Strategies http://www.wspgroup.com/en/WSP-
Group/Sustainability/Case-Studies-3/Land- remediation (Website visited on 7-
11-2011)
3. Asquith, E. A. and Geary, P. (2011) Comparative bioremediation of
petroleum hydrocarbon-contaminated soil by biostimulation, bioaugmentation
and surfactant addition, 4
th
International Contaminated Site Remediation
Conference, Clean up 2011, Adelaide, South Australia, pp. 261-262.
4. Evangelou, V. P. (1998) Environmental soil and water chemistry: principles
and applications, Wiley-Inderscience, New York.
5. Harbottle, M. J., Al-Tabbaa, A. and Evans, C. W. (2006) Assessing the true
technical/ environmental impacts of contaminated land remediation a case
study of containment, disposal and no action, Land, Contamination and
Reclamation, Vol. 14 (1), pp. 85-99.
6. Ludwig, R. D., Wilkin, R. T. and Su, C. (2011) Treatment of Cr
6
in
groundwater using prb systems, 4
th
International Contaminated Site
Remediation Conference, Clean up 2011, Adelaide, South Australia, pp. 7-8.
http://www.cleanupconference.com/program.html (website visited on 7-11-
2011)
7. Method 1311, EPA Toxicity characteristic leaching procedure,
www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/1311.pdf (website
accessed on 7-10-2011).
8. Mohamed, A. M. O. and Antia, H. E. (1998) Geoenvironmental engineering
Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
9. Reddi, L. N. and Inyang, H. I. (2000) Goenvironmental engineering:
principles and applications, Marcel Dekker Inc., New York.
10. US EPA (1989) Risk assessment guidance for superfund Vol. 1. Human
health evaluation manual (Part A), United States Environmental Protection
Agency, Cincinnati, OH, EPA/540/1-89/002.
11. US EPA (1995) Guidance for scoping the remedial design, United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, EPA/540/R-95/025.
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/cleanup/rdra.htm (website visited on 7-11-
2011).
12. US EPA. (1991) Site characterization for subsurface remediation, Seminar
Publication, EPA/625/4-91/026, Office of Research and Development, United
States. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.

Model Questions

1) What are the important points to be kept in mind for contamination
assessment?
2) What are the processes involved in the planning of contaminated site
remediation?
3) What are the important data required for planning contaminated site
remediation?
4) Discuss the important physico-chemical methods for performing contaminated
soil remediation.
5) Prepare a scheme for the design of permeable reactive barrier.
6) Based on the literatue, explain how to plan and design electro-kinetic
remediation.
7) Discuss case histories related to contaminated site remediation and identify
the most popular method.

Module 5
ADVANCED SOIL CHARACTERIZATION

Many a times solution to geoenvironmental problems necessitates advanced
characterization of soil. These characterization results serve as inputs for
mathematical modelling, parameterization of certain soil related functions,
verification or validation of some phenomenon, field investigation, physical
modelling of soil behaviour, indirect estimation of properties etc. While the list of
such advanced soil characterization is exhaustive due to the recent
developments in electronics and instrumentation, only some of the important and
common advanced characterizations for geoenvironmental problem are
discussed in the following.

5.1 Soil contaminant analysis
A wide variety of instruments are available for analyzing the concentration
of organic and inorganic contaminants present in the soil. In most of these
methods, the contaminant present in the soil need to be first brought into solution
form by using suitable methods. The contaminated soil is washed using water or
suitable extractants in single, multiple or sequential steps (ASTM D 3974; Reddy
and Chintamreddy 2001; Dean 2003; Maturi et al. 2008). Another process for
extracting soil contaminants into solution form is by acid digestion method
(Method 3050B, EPA). The contaminant in solution form is then analyzed using
the appropriate method for contaminant analysis such as atomic absorption
spectrometer (AAS), inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometer (ICP MS),
ion chromatograph, gas chromatograph, flame photometer, UV visible
spectrophotometer. The choice of contaminant analysis methodology would
depend upon the type of contaminant and whether single or multiple
contaminants need to be analysed. The accuracy of all these methods would
depend upon the precise calibration performed by the user. In the process of
calibration, instrument parameter is correlated to the contaminant concentration
using standard contaminant solution of known concentration. Further, for a
solution of unknown concentration, instrument parameter is measured and the
concentration determined using the calibration equation.

5.2 Electrical property of soil
The knowledge of soil electrical property of soil system (solid, liquid and
gaseous phase) is required for several applications in engineering and
geosciences. Electrical properties of soil system have multiple phases due to the
following reason (Fang and Daniels 2006): (a) Soil and water has inherent
electrical characteristics, (b) electrical energy is related to thermal and magnetic
properties and difficult to separate (c) electro-chemical interaction in soil-water
system is sensitive to surrounding environment. The important factors influencing
soil electrical properties are particle size distribution, compaction, water content,
mineral structure, mineral surface condition, characteristics of pore fluid and ion
exchange reaction. The direction of electric current is the direction of flow of ions.
The zone of electric field depends on the magnitude of electric charge and soil-
water system. The electrical property of soil is defined in terms of electrical
resistivity, conductivity, capacitance and dielectric property. Resistivity and
conductivity quantifies the flow of electric current through a medium. Electrical
resistivity is the most common method for defining electrical property of soil-
water system. There are a lot of literature that describe the use of resistivity or
conductivity for indirectly assessing water content, extent of soil contamination or
salinity, unit weight, porosity, frost depth, buried objects etc. (Fang and Daniels
2006). Capacitance is the charge storage capacity of a material. Dielectric
property defined in terms of dielectric constant () implies the ability of a material
to perform as an insulator. This property is not measured but computed by Eq.
5.1.
= C x (d/A) (5.1)
C is the capacitance in Farad, d is the length of specimen and A is the cross
sectional area of specimen. is an important property that has been used
extensively for indirect correlation with different soil properties.
When the soil is fully dry the electrical resistivity is very high because
there is little interaction between the electrical charge (or energy) and ions
present in the soil. When the soil is wet, resistivity decreases and electrical
conductivity increases due to the formation of water film around soil surface.
Such a film act as a bridge between electrical charge and ions present in the soil.
Flow of electricity through soil can be due to direct current (DC) or due to
alternating current (AC) of particular frequency. The effect produced by both on
soil is different. To assess the effect of flow of alternating current in soils, it is
necessary to determine and electrical conductivity (
ec
) of the soil
corresponding to the frequency of the current (Smith-Ross 1933). This is
because these characteristics are dependent on the frequency of AC. The
density, water content of soil and frequency of AC are the important parameters
affecting electrical properties of soil under AC. The value for dry soil and
minerals varies between 2.8 to 2.6 for a frequency variation from 100 to 10000
kHz. As moisture content increases, the variation with frequency increases
considerably. For pure water, value is close to 80. Such a wide variation in
values is used for indirectly determining volumetric water content of soils.

5.2.1 Uses of electrical properties of soil
Electrical properties of subsurface are used extensively for oil and mineral
exploration, subsurface exploration, to delineate contaminated land etc. Soil
electrical properties are used for in situ soil mapping and monitoring when the
studied soil property is dependent on the mobile electrical charges in the soil. It is
used for characterizing soil morphology, develop accurate soil maps for
agricultural purposes, identify the extent of soil pollution, forensic and
environmental applications (Anatoly and Larisa 2002). The important soil
properties studied are soil salinity, texture, stone content, groundwater depth,
and horizon sequence in soil profiles (Larisa 1999). Some of the geophysical
methods measure soil electrical properties such as electrical conductivity,
resistivity and electrical potential from soil surface to a particular depth without
soil disturbance. These electrical properties are then correlated to the
appropriate soil parameters such as salinity, water content, density, porosity,
degree of saturation, permeability, swelling potential, liquefaction potential etc. by
using some empirical equation (Shah and Singh 2004, 2005; Sreedeep et al.
2004). However, the success of such methods depends upon detailed knowledge
of subsurface electrical properties and systematic procedure for data
interpretation, which is still an open area of research.

5.2.2 Measurement of electrical properties of soil
There are different types of probe and box arrangement for measuring
electrical property of compacted soil in the lab or in situ soil. Rhoades and
Schilfgaarde (1976) have used an electrical conductivity probe for determining
soil salinity based on the principle of Wenner four electrode method (Halvorson
et al., 1977). Arulanandan (1991), Rao et al. (2007) have used an impedance
analyzer to measure dielectric constant k of various soils. Fam and Santamarina
(1997) have measured dielectric permittivity of soils with a coaxial terminator
probe integrated with a network analyzer. Lee et al. (2002) have measured
capacitance of the saturated contaminated sands using impedance analyzer in
the frequency range of 75 kHz to 12 MHz. A descriptive methodology for
electrical resistivity box and probe reported by Sreedeep et al. (2004) is
discussed below.
Electrical resistivity box (ERB) consists of a perspex cubical box, 100 mm
in dimension and 10 mm thick, as depicted in Fig. 5.1, which works on the
principle of two-electrode method (Abu-Hassanein 1994). ERB can be used for
measuring electrical resistivity of disturbed and undisturbed soil samples in all
the three dimensions and can also be used for layered soil deposits. Each face of
the ERB is provided with three brass screw electrodes of length 12.5 mm and
diameter 2.5 mm, which can be screwed into the compacted soil sample. This
arrangement insures proper contact of the electrode with the soil. A known AC
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 R
ERB
and electrical resistivity
ERB

offered by the medium can be determined by Eqs. 5.2 and 5.3, respectively.
R
ERB
=V/I (5.2)
ERB
= a.R
ERB
(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 (R
ERP
) 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.

1
2

c
m

3
c
m

3
c
m

3
c
m

1
2

c
m

12 cm
3
c
m

Electrodes
Figure not to scale

Fig. 5.1 A conceptual electrical resistivity box (Sreedeep et al. 2004)

Fig. 5.2 A conceptual electrical resistivity probe (Sreedeep et al. 2004)

Ebonite rod
Stainless steel cone

C: Current electrode (1,4)
V: Voltage electrode (2,3)
C
V
C
V
1 2
4 3
C
V
V
C
5.3 Thermal property of soil
Thermal property of soil are of great importance in several engineering
projects where heat transfer takes place through the soil. These projects include
underground power cables, high level nuclear waste repository, hot water or gas
pipes and cold gas pipelines in unfrozen ground, agriculture, meteorology and
geology. The thermal properties of soil include thermal conductivity (K= 1/), is
the thermal resistivity, thermal diffusivity (D), and heat capacity (C). K is defined
as the amount of heat passing in unit time through a unit cross- sectional area of
the soil under a unit temperature gradient applied in the direction of heat flow.
Considering a prismatic element of soil having a cross-sectional area A at right
angles to the heat flow q, then K is defined as
2 1
q
K=
A(T -T )/l
(5.4)
Where, l is the length of the element, T
1
and T
2
are temperature where T
2
>T
1
.
The heat capacity C per unit volume of soil is the heat energy required to raise
the temperature of unit volume of soil by 1C. It is the product of the mass spe-
cific heat c (cal/g C) and the density (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.

5.3.1 Factors influencing soil thermal resistivity
Fine grained or cohesive soil and peaty soils exhibit high than granular
soil. Sand with quartz as the principal constituent has low . The type of clay
minerals present in soil also influences . 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 . 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. increases with decreasing particle size due to reduced surface
contact between adjacent particles.
The density of soil has an important influence on . The presence of air
with its high decreases the overall of the soil as compared to that of its solid
components. Therefore, a well compacted soil will have low due to low total
void volume and better contact between the solid grains. When water is added to
the soil, it tends to distribute itself in a thin film around solid grain of the soil. This
water film provides a path for the heat and hence bridges the air gap between the
solid particles. Additional water, over and above that required for film formation,
serves to fill voids which were initially occupied with air. Since of air is much
higher than water, inclusion of water in soil would considerably decrease of
soil. The moisture content also has an indirect influence on since higher density
can be achieved by adding water to the soil. The of soil is also influenced by
temperature, because each of the constituents has temperature dependent ther-
mal properties. The of all crystalline minerals increase with increasing
temperature, however, the of water and gases exhibit the inverse effect.

5.3.2 Measurement of soil thermal resistivity ()
Thermal resistivity () measurement of soil could be categorized as
steady state and transient state methods. For steady-state method, a known
thermal gradient is established in soil specimen with definite shape and length
and can be determined based on recording the heat flow through the soil. In
transient-state method, known time-rate of energy is applied into soil
specimen and the corresponding temperature change with time is recorded
and analyzed to determine . The thermal gradient across the soil sample
being tested may induce appreciable moisture migration in unsaturated soils
there by changing the properties it is attempting to measure. Therefore,
selection of appropriate method of measurement should be based on the
condition of the materials. Some of the methods employing steady state and
transient measuring principle are discussed below.

5.3.2.1 Steady state method
In this method, the soil sample being tested should be in steady state
when the measurements are made. Attainment of such a state is time consuming
after the initial temperature difference has been applied. Also, there is possibility
of moisture changes by the time the steady state is reached. The methods based
on steady state are described below:
Guarded hot plate method
The most important steady state method for measuring the 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.
1/ =
Q L
K=
A T
(5.5)
Where, Q is the heat flow through soil, A is the area of soil specimen, L is the
length of heat flow, and T A is the temperature drop. The GHP test is time
consuming and only suitable for laboratory use.


Fig. 5.3 Schematic diagram of the guarded hotplate method for determining thermal conductivity (ASTM C 177)

Heat flux meter
The of soil can be determined by measuring temperatures at two
points and the heat flows between these points with the help of a heat flux meter.
The heat flux meter is a thin plate of suitable material with known , and installed
with thermal couples on both side. The temperature difference (gradient) between
both sides multiplied by the of the plate gives the heat flux per unit area across
the plate. This method is described in detail in ASTM C 518. The heat flux meter
also requires long measuring time. The contact between the plate and the
specimen need to be perfect to eliminate the influence of contact thermal
resistance. Therefore, a contact pressure needs to be applied, which may alter
the soil state (density or volumetric water content).

5.3.2.2 Transient state method
In transient method, temperature of the soil varies with time. Such
methods are less time intensive and can be easily performed than the steady
state methods. Thermal probe and point-source method based on transient state
method are discussed below.
Thermal probe method
The thermal probe or needle is a rapid and convenient method for
measuring of soils in situ or in the laboratory. The theory of the probe method is
based on the theory of the line heat source placed in a semi-infinite,
Cold plate
Heater
Cold plate
Soil specimen
Soil specimen
Thermocouple
homogeneous and isotropic medium. This method is described in detail in ASTM
D 5334. The heat flowing from a line heat source through a medium of thermal
diffusivity must conform to the following equation:
2
2
x
T
D
t
T
c
c
=
c
c
(5.6)
T is the temperature at time t in x direction. For cylindrical coordinates Eq. 5.6
becomes:
|
|
.
|
\
|
c
c
+
c
c
=
c
c
r
T
r
1
r
T
D
t
T
2
2
(5.7)
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.
T=
(
|
|
.
|
\
|

4Dt
r
Ei
K
1
4
q
2
(5.8)
Where, Ei (-x) is an exponential integral and K or (1/) is thermal conductivity.
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.
This method can be utilized on both undisturbed and remolded sample.
For undisturbed sample, thermal probe shall be pushed into the pre-drilled hole
on dense specimens or directly inserted into soft ones. The length of the soil
sample should be large enough to accommodate the probe length. During the
measurement, a steady current is applied while the temperature is recorded as a
function of time. Temperature is then plotted as a function of time on semi-log
graph. A straight line is drawn through points that exhibit linear trend (pseudo
steady state portion). K can be expressed in terms of the slope of this line:
q
T= ln
4
t c
K t
+ (Jackson and Taylor, 1965) (5.9)
slope=
q
4 K t

Where q=heat flow rate (q= i
2
.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
This method eliminate the disadvantages of thermal probe due to large-
sized samples in which controlling water content becomes difficult, thermal
resistance produced between the soil sample and the probe inserted, and
movement of water occurring due to high temperature. This method is comprised
of recording the voltage variations of the thermistor and variable resistor in the
measuring circuit over a period of time. The variations in temperature and heat
production with time for the thermistor are calculated from the measured voltage
values. Then, the thermal diffusivity of sample is determined by inverse analysis
based on the Eqs. 5.6 and 5.10 (Chu 2009).
K
D=
c
(5.10)
Where, K is Thermal conductivity, D is thermal diffusivity, c is Specific heat, T is
temperature and is density of soil.
5.4 Water content and permeability measurements
5.4.1 Volumetric water content sensors
Determination of gravimetric water content, w, is simple and employs
direct methods such as oven drying, sand bath method, alcohol method, infrared
lamp method and calcium carbide method (IS 2720 part II: 1973). However,
gravimetric water content does not provide instant measurement of water content
and cannot be monitored continuously. Such requirements are common in
geoenvironmental projects where water content has to be monitored
continuously. This can be done by measuring volumetric water content (u), which
is defined as the ratio of volume of water to the total volume of soil. u is one of
the vital parameter correlated to different soil properties such as compaction
state, permeability, seepage, soil suction, volume change etc. Its determination is
mainly based on indirect techniques such as electrical resistivity, capacitance
and dielectric property of the soil mass (Topp et al., 1980). The fundamental
approach of u measurement is that electrical properties such as capacitance,
dielectric constant, resistivity is strongly related to the soil water content. A
calibration equation is developed between any of the electrical property and
known volumetric water content of the soil. The same calibration equation can be
used to monitor the variation of u by measuring electrical properties.
There are different resistivity, capacitance, dielectric, probes available in
the market such as time domain reflectometry (TDR), frequency domain
reflectometry (FDR), theta probes for insitu measurement of u. As an example,
two low cost probes EC-5 and EC-TE (Decagon Devices, Inc., USA) as shown in
Figs. 5.4 and 5.5 are explained below. The value of for water is close to 80, dry
soil minerals is around 4 and for air it is 1 (Topp et al., 1980). Therefore, of soil
medium is highly sensitive to changes in water content. is dependent on the
capacitance property or the charge storage property of the soil mass. The probe
measures the capacitance property which is converted to . u is determined
based on value.


Fig 5.4 Two prong EC-5 probe details

Fig. 5.5 Details of EC-TE probe

The probe comprises of an oscillator working at a particular frequency, which
generates an electromagnetic (EM) field. The EM field charges the soil around
the probe. This stored charge is measured using copper traces provided on the
C: Connection cable
P: Prongs
B: Body of the probe
C
P
B
P
C: Connection cable
P: Prong
P1: Gold coated Prongs
B: Body of the probe
C
P
B
P1 P1
prongs and is proportional to and u. It must be noted that the electromagnetic
field thus produced by the probe decreases with distance from the probe surface
and has little or no sensitivity at the extreme edges of the probe. The stored
charge thus measured would confine to a zone of influence of 5 cm measured
from the edge of the prong.

5.4.2 Guelph permeameter
This is a handy instrument for measuring insitu permeability of natural and
compacted soil for hydrogeological investigations at shallow depth. As depicted
in Fig. 5.6, Guelph permeameter consist of a reservoir which stores and releases
water into a hole (termed as well) under constant head. The constant head is
maintained with the help of Marriot bubble principle. There are two reservoirs,
one outer tube and smaller inner tube. For high permeable soil, bigger outer
reservoir is used and for low permeable soil smaller inner reservoir is used. The
scale attached to the inner reservoir is used to measure rate of fall of water in the
reservoir. When air tip is raised, water flows out of the reservoir into the bore hole
(or well). Water height in the well is established based on the height of air inlet
tube tip. This height (constant head causing flow) can be set and read using well
height indicator connected with the head scale. The determination of permeability
is done by either single head or double head method by the procedure discussed
in Ref. 29.

Fig. 5.6 Guelph permeameter (Ref. 31)

5.4.3 Tension Infiltrometer (TI)
Tension Infiltrometer (TI) as depicted in Fig. 5.7 is a handy instrument for
measuring infiltration characteristics and permeability of nearly saturated soil. It
consists of three major components namely, reservoir assembly, infiltrometer foot
assembly and Marriot bubbler assembly. In tension infiltrometer, water is allowed
to infiltrate the under lying soil at a slower rate than the infiltration rate that would
have been established when water is ponded on the soil surface. This is
accomplished by maintaining a small negative pressure (maximum tension of 20
cm) maintained with the help of Marriot bubbler on the water as it moves out of
the infiltrometer disc into the soil. Water can only flow out of the infiltrometer disc
at the base and infiltrate into the soil. The amount of infiltration is measured
based on the fall of water level in the reservoir. Saturated permeability is
determined indirectly based on the infiltration characteristics (Zhang 1997).
.

Fig. 5.7 Tension Infiltrometer (Ref. 31)

5.4.4 Minidisk infiltrometer
Mini disc infiltrometer as shown in Fig. 5.8 is similar to the working of
tension infiltrometer but with a lower range of suction applied to the infiltrometer
disc (Ref. 30). Since the infiltrometer is small in dimension (total length of the
infiltrometer is 32.7 cm), it can be used for measuring infiltration and near
saturation permeability in lab and field. The upper and lower chambers of the
infiltrometer are both filled with water. The top chamber controls the suction
head. The lower chamber contains the volume of water that infiltrates into the
soil. The minidisc infiltrometer is tension infiltrometer and it can measure the
hydraulic conductivity in the unsaturated medium (close to near saturation) for
adjustable suction ranging from 0.5 cm to 7 cm. At time zero, the infiltrometer is
placed on the soil surface. The volume of water that infiltrate into the ground has
been recorded as a function of time, based on which infiltration and permeability
characteristics is determined.


Fig. 5.8 Minidisk Infiltrometer (Ref. 32)

5.5 Ground Penetrating Radar for site evaluation
Ground penetrating radar (GPR) is a non destructive and non intrusive
geophysical method to measure electrical properties at various depth of
subsurface. It works by generation, transmission, propagation, reflection and
reception of discrete pulses of high frequency (1 MHz to 1 GHz) electromagnetic
energy. The depth of imaging would depend on the frequency of electromagnetic
wave. A lower frequency is essential for imaging larger depth where as shallow
imaging requires higher frequency. The fundamental issue with its application is
the efficiency in processing the electrical data to interpret subsurface information
accurately. As the electromagnetic wave propagates downwards it experiences
materials of differing electrical properties, which alter its velocity. If velocity
changes are abrupt with respect to the dominant radar wavelength, some energy
is reflected back to the surface. The reflected signal is detected by the receiving
antenna. In systems with a single antenna, it switches rapidly from transmission
to reception. The time between transmission, reflection and reception is referred
to as two-way travel time (TWT) and is measured in nanoseconds. Reflector
TWT is a function of its depth, the antenna spacing (in systems with two
antennae), and the average radar-wave velocity in the overlying material. GPR is
used to detect the underground buried objects such as pipes, beams, tunnels,
buried walls, salinity, water content, ground contamination, depth of ground water
table, and properties of ground water. GPR applicability in certain type of soils
such as clay is a subject of debate due to the high attenuation of electromagnetic
waves. A lot of research is still required for exploring the full utility of GPR for
efficient subsurface investigation.

5.6 Introduction to geotechnical centrifuge modelling
A geotechnical centrifuge is used to conduct physical modeling of
geotechnical problems for which gravity is the primary driving force. These
studies include determination of settlement of embankments, stability of slopes
and tunnels, flow and contaminant migration characteristics of soil (Cooke and
Mitchell 1991; Singh and Gupta 1999). The basic principle of centrifuge
modelling is that when a soil sample model of (N times smaller than its prototype)
is subjected to N times the acceleration due to Earths gravity (Ng) by
centrifugation, it results in identical self-weight stresses at homologous points in
the model and the prototype as depicted in Fig. 5.9 (a) (Taylor 1995). In the
figure, is the mass density of soil, g is the acceleration due to gravity, is the
angular velocity of rotation in rad/sec, r
e
is the effective radius represented by Eq.
5.11, where r
t
is the distance from axis of rotation to the top of the soil sample. It
can be clearly seen that the stress in prototype and N-g model is identical where
as the geostatic stress scale down by N in a 1-g model.


Fig. 5.9 Basic principle of the centrifuge modelling

3
L
r r
m
t e
+ =

(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
This can be achieved if there is a constant ratio of length, L, between the
homologous points in the model and the prototype.
L
m
/L
p
= = 1/N (5.12)
where subscripts m and p correspond to the model and its prototype,
respectively, and is the scale factor.

(a)
L
m
L
p
=N.L
m

Prototype (1-g)
Model (N-g)
L
m

r
e

Axis of
rotation
e
N.g = r
e
.e
2

(b)
L
p

Stress=gL
p

1-g model
N-g model
Stress=g(L
p
/N) Stress=Ng(L
p
/N)
= gL
p

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:
v
m
/v
p
= | (5.13)
a
m
/a
p
= n (5.14)
where | and n are constants.
Dynamic similarity
This similarity can be ensured if there is a constant ratio between the
forces in the model and its prototype.
F
m
/F
p
= _ (5.15)
where F is the force and _ is a constant.
5.6.2 Modeling of mass in Ng model
Mass M = .V (5.16)
is the density and V is the volume of soil mass.

p p
m m
p
m
V
V
M
M
= (5.17)
Subscripts m and p stands for model and prototype, respectively.
If the material used in model and prototype are same, then the mass density will
be same (
m
=
p
).

3
p
m
p
m
p
m
N
1
L
L
V
V
M
M
=
|
|
.
|
\
|
= = (5.18)
Unit weight = .g (5.19)
p p
m m
p
m
g
g
= (5.20)
For Ng model,
m
=
p
and g
m
= Ng
p

Therefore,
m
= N
p
(5.21)
5.6.3 Scale factor for body forces or geostatic forces
F = Mg (5.22)

3
p p
m m
p
m
N
1
g M
g M
F
F
= = for 1-g model where g
m
= g
p
(5.23)

2
p p
m m
p
m
N
1
g M
g M
F
F
= = for N-g model where g
m
= Ng
p
(5.24)
5.6.4 Potential of geotechnical centrifuge for geoenvironmental
project
Geotechnical centrifuge has potential application in geoenvironmental
problems such as fluid and contaminant transport that is mostly governed by
seepage forces. The permeability of high compacted liners is very low.
Therefore, determination of permeability and contaminant transport parameters
(advective-dispersive) is extremely time consuming with normal 1-g modelling.
For establishing advective-dispersive contaminant transport parameters, it is
essential that the contaminant solution flows through the soil column as
discussed in module 3. This is time intensive even for a small soil column. Using
geotechnical centrifuge for simulating seepage can considerably reduce the time
required for experimentation as discussed below.
Seepage force (SF) = i.
w
.V (5.25)
= (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,
w
is the unit weight of
water and W is the weight of seepage water.

p
m
m
p
p
m
p
m
W
W
.
k
k
.
v
v
SF
SF
= (5.26)
m
p
m
p
p
m
p
m
t
t
.
N
1
t
t
.
L
L
v
v
= = (5.27)
t is the time.
k can be represented by Eq. 5.28.

.g K.
= k
w

(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:
N
g
g
g . . K

g . . K
k
k
p
m
p
m
p
m
= = =

(5.29)
k
m
=N.k
p
(5.30)

2
p
m
p
m
p
m
N
1
g
g
.
M
M
W
W
= = (5.31)
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

2
m
p
2
p
m
N
1
.
N
1
.
t
t
N
1
N
1
SF
SF
= = (5.32)

2
p
m
N
1
t
t
= (5.33)
The above derivation clearly indicates that the seepage phenomenon is
accelerated at N-g due to increase in velocity of flow. The time for seepage in
model is reduced by 1/N
2
. Therefore, permeability of compacted liner can be
determined in short interval of time with the help of geotechnical centrifuge model
and the prototype permeability can be obtained by using the scale factor derived
above. The advective-dispersive transport parameters can also be established in
relatively short duration due to accelerated seepage in geotechnical centrifuge.
References

1. Abu-Hassanein, Z. S. (1994) Use of electrical resistivity measurement as a
quality control tool for compacted clay liners, M. S. Thesis, University of
Wisconsin, Madison.
2. Anatoly, P. and Larisa, P. (2002) Electrical field and soil properties, 17
th

WCSS, August, Thailand, pp. 1558-1-1558-11,
www.landviser.com/.../17WorldCongress%20of%20Soil%20Science.pdf,
(website accessed on 18-11-2011).
3. Arulanandan, K. (1991) "Dielectric method for prediction of porosity of
saturated soil, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 117, No. 2,
pp. 319-330.
4. ASTM C 177 (2010) Standard test method for steady-state heat flux
measurements and thermal transmission properties by means of the guarded-
hot-plate apparatus, Annual Book of ASTM Standard, ASTM International,
West Conshohocken, USA.
5. ASTM C 518 (2010). Standard test method for steady-state thermal
transmission properties by means of the heat flow meter apparatus, Annual
Book of ASTM Standard, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, USA.
6. ASTM D 3974-81 (1994) Standard practices for extraction of trace elements
from sediments, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 04.08, ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
7. ASTM D 5334 (2000) Determination of thermal conductivity of soil and soft
rock by thermal needle probe procedure, Annual Book of ASTM Standard,
ASTM International, West Conshohocken, USA.
8. Chu, C-A. (2009) Measurement and modeling for thermal conductivity of
geomaterials, Ph. D. Thesis submitted to Department of Civil Engineering,
National Central University, Taiwan. URL: thesis.lib.ncu.edu.tw/ETD-db/ETD-
search-c/getfile?URN...pdf (website visited on 6-4-2012).
9. Cooke, B. and Mitchell, R. J. (1991) Physical modelling of a dissolved
contaminant in an unsaturated sand, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol.
28, pp. 829-833.
10. Dean, J. R. (2003) Methods for environmental trace analysis, John Wiley
and Sons Ltd., England.
11. Fam, M. A., and Santamarina, J. C. (1997) A study of consolidation using
mechanical and electromagnetic waves, Geotechnique, Vol. 47, No.2, pp.
203-219.
12. Fang, H-Y. and Daniels, J. L. (2006) Introductory geotechnical engineering:
An environmental perspective, Routledge, Taylor and Francis, New York,
USA.
13. Halvorson, A. D., Rhoades, J. D. and Reule, C. A. (1977) Soil-four electrode
conductivity relationships for soils of the northern great plains, Soil Science
Society of America Journal, Vol. 41, pp. 966-971.
14. IS 2720, Part II, (1973) Methods of Test for Soils: Determination of water
content, Indian Standards Institute, New Delhi, India.
15. Jackson, R. D. and Taylor, S. A. (1965) "Heat transfer. in methods of soil
analysis. Part 1. Agronomy, Vol. 9 (Black C A ed.), pp. 349-356.
16. Larisa P. (1999) Electrical properties of soils, Ph. D. thesis submitted to the
department of renewable resources, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY.
17. Lee, J., Oh, M., Park, J., Ahn, K. H. and Kim, H. (2002) Application of
dielectric constant for estimating moisture content and contamination in
sand, Second Japan-Korea Joint Seminar on Geoenvironmental
Engineering, pp. 75-82.
18. Maturi, K., Khodadoust, A. P. and Reddy, K. R. (2008) Comparison of
extractants for removal of lead, zinc and phenanthrene from a manufactured
gas plant field soil, Practice Periodical of Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive
Waste Management, ASCE, Vol.12, No. 4, pp.230-238.
19. Method 3050B, EPA Acid digestion of sediments, sludges and soils,
http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/3050b.pdf (website
accessed on 16-11-2011).
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 Archies 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. 574582.
30. Zhang, R. (1997) Determination of soil sorptivity and hydraulic conductivity
from the disk infiltrometer, Soil Science Society of America Journal, Vol. 61,
pp. 1024-1030.
31. http://www.soilmoisture.com/operating.html (website visited on 4-1-2012).
32. http://www.decagon.com/products/lysimeters-and-infiltrometers/mini-disk-
tension-infiltrometer/ (website visited on 4-1-2012).

Model Questions

1. Prepare a review on different methods of soil contaminant analysis and
clearly list its limitations.
2. The concentration of contaminant sorbed on the soil need to be determined.
What are the different single and sequential procedures for extraction of
contaminants from soil?
3. Based on the available information in literature, try to device a scheme for
measuring electrical and thermal property of soil.
4. What are the uses of measuring electrical property of soil?
5. What is the difference between calibration and validation procedure?
6. Discuss about the dielectric and electrical properties of soil-water-
contaminant system and its important features.
7. Explain steady state and transient methods for measuring thermal properties
of soil.
8. What is application of thermal property of soil?
9. What are the factors influencing thermal and electrical property of soil?
10. What are the various methods used for measuring volumetric water content of
soil?
11. From the available literature, prepare the procedure for measuring
permeability using Guelph permeameter, tension and minidisk infiltrometer.
12. What are the different modeling approaches in geotechnical and
geoenvironmental engineering? Discuss the relative merits and
demerits of each method.
13. What are the different geophysical methods for subsurface investigation/
14. Explain the principle and working of ground penetrating radar for delineating
subsurface contamination.
15. Explain the philosophy of accelerated physical modeling and how the stress
similitude is achieved.
16. With respect to permeability of soil, demonstrate mathematically how
accelerated physical modeling is useful in studying any seepage induced
phenomenon.
17. Suggest and justify a less time consuming procedure in the lab for obtaining
advective-dispersive contaminant transport parameters for a compacted
bentonite soil layer
18. A falling head permeability test is conducted in centrifuge. The details of
falling head test is as follows: Area of stand pipe is 0.28 cm
2
. Area of soil
column is 80 cm
2
. Length of soil column is 10 cm. There is a change in head
from 90 cm to 84 cm for a time of 15 minutes. The centrifuge is rotated at 700
RPM. Effective radius is 50 cm. Determine prototype permeability, prototype
length, model velocity and prototype velocity, prototype seepage velocity.
(report all results in SI and time in seconds). Weight of wet soil sample is
1500 g and after oven drying the weight reduced to 1200 g. Specific gravity is
2.45. What will be the time taken in days if the same test is conducted at 1g.

NPTEL Civil Geoenvironmental Fundamentals

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

NPTEL Civil Geoenvironmental Fundamentals

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NPTEL Civil Geoenvironmental Engineering

Joint initiative of IITs and IISc Funded by MHRD Page 1 of 14

) is commonly obtained from copper

. A typical XRD output is

and diffuse layer charge

1 is termed as retardation coefficient R when linear sorption is

You might also like