Interrelationship between Elastic Deformation and

Soil-Water Characteristic Curve of Expansive Soils

Hussein Al-Dakheeli, S.M.ASCE 1; and Rifat Bulut, M.ASCE 2

Abstract: Compacted and undisturbed expansive soils have widely been modeled as dual-porosity materials with two levels of pore systems:
micropores and macropores. The micropores accommodate the soil activity of swelling and shrinkage behavior. However, the macropores
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Iowa State University on 01/23/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

experience a volume change mainly resulting from the structural rearrangement. Due to the deformation of the macropores, a plastic volu-
metric strain takes place. However, after several wetting–drying cycles, an equilibrium state is reached. Beyond the equilibrium, the volume
change becomes elastic and mainly is led by the micropores. This study investigated the volume change characteristics of expansive soils from
the viewpoint of the soil shrinkage curve. The slope of the normal shrinkage curve at equilibrium was found to be parallel to the saturation
line. Based on these observations and laboratory test results, a conceptual framework for the interrelationship between the virgin line of the
soil-water characteristic curve and the reversible volume change of the micropores is presented. Experimental data demonstrated the appli-
cability of the presented framework to slurry and compacted soils. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002020. © 2019 American Society
of Civil Engineers.

Introduction
The volumetric strain of expansive soils due to the change of water
content has significant importance in geotechnical and geoenviron-
mental engineering. The volume change can cause distress and
damage to overlying structures (e.g., pavements), buried structures
(e.g., pipelines), and lateral structures (e.g., retaining walls). Under-
standing the volume change mechanism is important in modeling
the soil behavior under hydraulic loading of wetting and drying
cycles. Numerous research studies have been undertaken and spe-
cialty conferences have been organized exclusively on this subject
(Chen 2012). The volume change potential has widely been pre-
dicted based on the principles of unsaturated soil mechanics and
soil suction. This is mainly due to the direct connection between
the physicochemical interactions and suction in the soil pores. Soil
suction is a measure of the soil’s affinity for water. It consists of two
major components, namely matric suction and osmotic suction.
Matric suction arises from the capillary action and surface energy
of the soil particles, whereas osmotic suction results from the ionic
concentration of the pore water (Bulut and Leong 2008). Moreover,
suction is one of the stress state variables governing the unsaturated
soil behavior (Fredlund and Morgenstern 1977). A single coeffi-
cient is often adopted to define the relationship between volume
change and suction, which can directly be derived from the slope
of the relationship between suction and void ratio, specific volume,
or volumetric strain. However, different methods are used to esti-
mate this coefficient, including: (1) the suction compression index
(Lytton 1977, 1994); (2) the suction index (Snethen and Huang
1992); (3) the modulus of elasticity of the change in suction
1
Ph.D. Student, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078. Email: abedalm@okstate.edu
2
Professor, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Oklahoma
State Univ., Stillwater, OK 74078 (corresponding author). Email: rifat
.bulut@okstate.edu
Note. This manuscript was submitted on October 23, 2017; approved on
September 10, 2018; published online on January 22, 2019. Discussion
period open until June 22, 2019; separate discussions must be submitted
for individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Geotechnical
and Geoenvironmental Engineering, © ASCE, ISSN 1090-0241.
(Fredlund et al. 2012); and (4) the elastic stiffness parameter of
the change in suction in the Barcelona elastoplastic model
(Alonso et al. 1990).
The soil-water characteristic curve (SWCC) has become an
important tool in predicting the soil property functions (Fredlund
et al. 2012). Various relationships have been proposed between the
soil-water characteristic curve and soil properties such as shear
strength (Vanapalli et al. 1996), hydraulic conductivity (Fredlund
et al. 1994), and effective stress (Lu et al. 2010). It has always been
of interest to directly link the soil volume change to the soil-water
characteristic curve because both mainly depend on the soil min-
eralogy such that the volume change and SWCC share the same soil
features. For example, the shape of the SWCC can be derived from
the soil grain-size distribution and Atterberg limits (Lytton 1994;
Zapata et al. 2000; Lytton et al. 2005). McKeen (1992) classified
the soil volume change potential based on the slope of the SWCC.
Most SWCC models, including those by van Genuchten (1980)
and Fredlund and Xing (1994), neglect the effect of the volume
change. However, Fredlund and Houston (2013), Fredlund and
Zhang (2013), Salager et al. (2013), Wijaya et al. (2015), and Bani
Hashem and Houston (2015) proposed that the soil shrinkage sub-
stantially delays the air entry stage by keeping the degree of sat-
uration close to unity for wide ranges of water contents. Therefore,
the volume change affects the shape of the soil-water characteristic
curve in terms of the degree of saturation (SWCC-S).
Experimental results of mercury intrusion porosimetry (MIP) of
soils compacted at the dry side of optimum from several studies
(e.g., Romero et al. 1999; Thom et al. 2007; Tarantino and De Col
2008; Koliji et al. 2010; Pedrotti and Tarantino 2014; Seiphoori
et al. 2014) indicated a dual-porosity structure for these soils.
Dual-porosity soils demonstrate two levels of pore systems: a mi-
crostructure (micropores) and a macrostructure (macropores).
Compacted soils on the dry side of optimum up to the optimum
water content can exhibit a dual-porosity structure with a bimodal
pore-size distribution (Tarantino and De Col 2008; Della Vecchia
et al. 2015). However, soils that can be modeled by a single poros-
ity, i.e., single-porosity soils, have unimodal pore-size distribu-
tions, such as soils compacted on the wet side of the optimum water
content (Tarantino and De Col 2008; Della Vecchia et al. 2015) and

© ASCE 04019005-1 J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2019, 145(4): 04019005

 slurry soils (Sheng et al. 2013; Li et al. 2014). Tarantino and De Col
(2008) attributed the difference in the hydraulic and mechanical
responses between soils compacted on the dry side of optimum
and those compacted on the wet side of optimum to the variations
of the pore structure.
The effect of void ratio was used in the SWCC-S of deformable
soils by various studies (e.g., Wheeler et al. 2003; Sun et al. 2008;
Tarantino and De Col 2008; Mašín 2010; Salager et al. 2010;
Gallipoli 2012; Mašín 2013; Salager et al. 2013; Seiphoori et al.
2014; Della Vecchia et al. 2015; Dieudonné et al. 2017). Among
them, Wheeler et al. (2003), Sun et al. (2008), and Seiphoori et al.
(2014) postulated that during wetting–drying cycles for a constant
suction, the degree of saturation may change due to the plastic
deformation (i.e., plastic change of void ratio) that the soils
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Iowa State University on 01/23/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
experience during these cycles. This plastic deformation during
wetting–drying cycles is attributed to the irreversible volume
change that the soils experience (Seiphoori et al. 2014). The irre-
versible volume change has widely been referenced to the plastic
deformation of macropore size during wetting and drying cycles
(e.g., Alonso et al. 1999; Lloret Morancho et al. 2003; Sánchez
et al. 2005). That led Mašín (2013) and Della Vecchia et al.
(2015) to distinguish between the degree of saturation for the
whole soil and the degree of saturation of macropores. However,
Gallipoli (2012) showed that the effect of the irreversible volume
change during wetting and drying cycles is limited to the initial
scanning portion of the drying and wetting SWCC. Gallipoli
(2012) stressed that the soil-water characteristic curve in terms
of the gravimetric water content (SWCC-w) and the void ratio–
suction curve (e- log s curve) have a unique slope referred to as the
virgin line. Gallipoli (2012) also showed that the virgin lines of
the SWCC-w and e- log s curves are governed by the properties
of the micropores. The reversible (i.e., elastic) volume change
occurs mostly due to the swelling and shrinkage of the micropores
(e.g., Gens and Alonso 1992). The present paper provides more
details about the latter concept.
In spite of these notable studies on the volume change and its
relationship with soil suction, there is still a need for more insight
into the relationship between the volume change of micropores, in
which reversible shrinkage and swelling occur, and the SWCC.
This paper presents a conceptual framework for the interrelation-
ship between the virgin line of the SWCC and the reversible volume
change of the micropores. The void ratio–water content curve
(e, w-plane) for single-porosity media (e.g., slurry soil) and for
double-porosity media (e.g., compacted soil) is utilized to build this
framework. More emphasis is given to the soil shrinkage curve
(SSC) in interpreting the properties of the pore regime and the vol-
ume change tendency. Experimental data for slurry and compacted
soils are also presented to demonstrate the applicability of the pre-
sented framework to slurry and compacted soils.
Pore System of Expansive Soils
In the soil science community, unsaturated soils have widely been
considered as double-porosity structures (van Genuchten and
Wierenga 1976; Rao et al. 1980; Gerke and van Genuchten 1996;
Larsson and Jarvis 1999; Larsbo et al. 2005; Gerke 2006). The last
2–3 decades have witnessed growing interest from geotechnical
researchers in modeling expansive in situ soils and compacted soils
as a dual-porosity structure (Gens and Alonso 1992; Delage and
Graham 1996; Alonso et al. 1999; Lloret Morancho et al. 2003;
Sánchez et al. 2005; Tarantino and De Col 2008; Nowamooz
and Masrouri 2010; Mašín 2013; Seiphoori et al. 2014; Wang
and Wei 2014; Della Vecchia et al. 2015; Dieudonné et al. 2017).
© ASCE 04019005-2
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2019, 145(4): 04019005
Gens and Alonso (1992) reformulated their Barcelona Basic Model
(BBM) considering two levels of soil pores, i.e., macropores and
micropores. The micropores are responsible for the swelling and
shrinkage of the soil, whereas a structural rearrangement mainly
occurs in the macropores. The assumptions of the Gens and Alonso
(1992) model include that micropores are mostly saturated. A
chemicohydromechanical equilibrium takes place between the mi-
crostructure and macrostructure. Gens and Alonso (1992) showed
that the volume change of micropores results in irreversible or plas-
tic volume change in the macropores derived from the structural
rearrangements. However, the volumetric strain of the micropores
is elastic and thoroughly reversible. The observations that the mi-
cropores are saturated and experience elastic volume change are
adopted in this paper.
Dual-porosity soils are formed when the active clay particles
interact, and are accumulated and hydrated, with water to form peds
(Fityus and Buzzi 2009), pods (Baker and Frydman 2009), or ag-
gregates (Chertkov 2008). These aggregates produce voids between
them. The pores within the peds, pods, and aggregates are consid-
ered as being micro in porosity (micropores or intra-aggregate
pores), whereas the pores between the peds, pods, and aggregates
are considered as being macro in porosity (macropores or interag-
gregate pores). The variation of the pore sizes is due to various
factors, including soil compaction, the aging effect, soil wetting–
drying processes (Li and Zhang 2009; Li et al. 2014), and the
chemical composition of the pore fluid (Musso et al. 2013). Unsatu-
rated in situ soils and compacted soils are common examples of
dual-porosity soils (Li et al. 2014). The pore-size distribution
curves of these soils may have two or more peaks (Sheng et al.
2013; Li et al. 2014). However, this is different for slurry soils.
Most of the pores in slurry soils are considered to be micropores
(Sheng et al. 2013; Li et al. 2014).
In modeling the volume change of expansive soils, the peds,
pods, and aggregates have been deemed to be saturated (Alonso
et al. 1999; Lloret Morancho et al. 2003; Baker and Frydman
2009; Fityus and Buzzi 2009; Nowamooz and Masrouri 2010;
Thyagaraj et al. 2016), and mainly consist of clay platelets and ad-
sorbed water (Baker and Frydman 2009). However, the macropores
possibly contain air and water (Frydman and Baker 2009). The con-
clusion that the micropores are fully saturated and the macropores
possibly contain water and air is supported by experimental results
from Tarantino and De Col (2008) for soils compacted with the
same compaction effort at different water contents observed by
mercury intrusion porosimetry. The micropores accommodate
the major physicochemical interactions of the adsorbed water–soil
particles phase. The macropores are compressible when subjected
to mechanical actions (e.g., mechanical loading and compaction).
In contrast, the micropores do not respond to mechanical loading or
compaction (Gallipoli 2012; Li et al. 2014). The drying and wetting
processes result in shrinkage and swelling in the micropores, re-
spectively. Furthermore, for soils subjected to suction cycles and
constant mechanical stress in a confined ring (e.g., small soil spec-
imens in the oedometer test), the volume change of the micropores
leads to either accumulated shrinkage or accumulated swelling in
the macropores, depending on the initial density and water content.
If the initial state is dense, the soil will experience accumulated
swelling, and if the initial state is loose, the soil will experience
accumulated shrinkage (Nowamooz and Masrouri 2010). However,
equilibrium is reached after several cycles, beyond which the volu-
metric strain is fully reversible (Popescu 1980; Osipov et al. 1987;
Subba Rao and Satyadas 1987; Dif and Bluemel 1991; Day 1994;
Al-Homoud et al. 1995; Basma et al. 1996; Tripathy et al. 2002;
Alonso et al. 2005; Rao and Revanasiddappa 2006; Guney et al.
2007; Nowamooz and Masrouri 2008; Tripathy and Rao 2009;
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.
 2

Zero Residual Normal

shrinkage shrinkage shrinkage
Void ratio 1.5

Void ratio
1

SL AEV
0.5

Moisture ratio, wGs

0
Fig. 1. Typical soil shrinkage curve for initially slurry soil. AEV = air 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Iowa State University on 01/23/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

entry value; and SL = shrinkage limit. (a) Moisture ratio, wGs

1.2

Zemenu et al. 2009; Airò Farulla et al. 2010; Nowamooz and 1

Masrouri 2010; Kalkan 2011; Wang and Wei 2014; Estabragh

Degree of Saturation
et al. 2015; Rosenbalm and Zapata 2016). This means that the 0.8
macropores become stable and the volumetric strain is thoroughly
Air entry stage
led by the micropores. In this case, the soil deformation is fully 0.6
elastic.
0.4

Soil Shrinkage Curve 0.2

The soil shrinkage curve represents the relationship between the 0

void ratio and the gravimetric water content or the moisture ratio 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
(Cornelis et al. 2006). The moisture ratio is equal to the gravimetric (b) Moisture ratio, wGs
water content multiplied by the specific gravity of solids (i.e., wGs ).
For initially slurry soils, the SSC can be divided into three zones: Fig. 2. (a) Soil shrinkage curve; and (b) moisture ratio versus the de-
normal shrinkage, residual shrinkage, and zero shrinkage (Fig. 1). gree of saturation derived for the SSC. SSC regenerated from the fitting
The soil experiences linear shrinkage within the normal shrinkage parameters of Fredlund et al.’s (2002) model for experimental data of
zone wherein the loss of water is totally compensated by a reduc- Kasaoka clay soil from Umezaki and Kawamura (2013).
tion in the void volume to keep the degree of saturation close to
100% until it reaches the air entry value (AEV), at which point
the shrinkage becomes nonlinear (i.e., the loss of water is greater
End of structural
than the reduction in the volume of voids) (Fig. 1). Then the shrink-
shrinkage
age almost ceases at the shrinkage limit (SL), at which point the soil
reaches its minimum void ratio and the loss of water is substituted Normal
with air only. The normal shrinkage curve in Fig. 1 follows the shrinkage
Void ratio

saturation line and its slope is equal to 1.

The normal shrinkage of initially slurry soils can reflect some
of the features of volume change in the micropores of expansive
soil. In swelling, the micropores can accommodate several layers
of water (Likos 2004) because of the large cation exchange capac-
ity of the clay particles (e.g., montmorillonite) in addition to their
high specific surface area (Mitchell and Soga 2005). Such water
Moisture ratio, wGs
layers constitute the diffuse double layer. In shrinkage, as the soil
is drying and decreasing its water content, the numbers of water Fig. 3. Soil shrinkage curve of compacted or undisturbed soils which
layers are reduced. Nevertheless, the reduction in the water show a structural shrinkage prior to the normal shrinkage (e.g., Cornelis
content is not accompanied by a reduction in the degree of satu- et al. 2006).
ration [Figs. 2(a and b)]. The degree of saturation stays close to
unity, which results in a substantial delay in the air entry stage
(Fredlund and Houston 2013; Wijaya et al. 2015; Bani Hashem
and Houston 2015). In other words, expansive soils in the saturated Volume Change in Initially Compacted or Natural
and slurry states can achieve very high suctions over the full sat- (Undisturbed) Soils
uration condition.
A literature review conducted by Fityus and Buzzi (2009) high- Slurried soils can be considered as a base case to show the zones of
lighted that the concept that water loss is thoroughly compensated soil shrinkage curve. For well-aggregated soils such as initially
by a reduction in volume is not new, and was reported by soil sci- compacted or undisturbed soils, the SSC can exhibit a structural
entists and geotechnical researchers several decades ago, including shrinkage prior to the normal shrinkage (Cornelis et al. 2006)
Johnston and Hill (1945) and Croney and Coleman (1953). (Fig. 3). Structural shrinkage takes place due to the loss of water

© ASCE 04019005-3 J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2019, 145(4): 04019005


S = 10% S = 30%
Fig. 4. Saturating and swelling of soil aggregate (micropores) before water starts filling the interaggregate pores (macropores). (Reprinted with
permission from Alonso et al. 2013, © ICE Publishing.)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Iowa State University on 01/23/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
from the interaggregate pores (macropores) (Chertkov 2008; Li
et al. 2014). The structural shrinkage ceases when all the water
in the macropores is removed. Soils that are compacted dry of op-
timum have more of a dual-porosity structure (or more macro-
pores), and therefore more structural shrinkage, than those that
are compacted wet of optimum (Alonso et al. 2013; Sheng et al.
2013). During shrinkage, although the overall degree of saturation
of the soil mass decreases due to the loss of water from macropores
during the structural shrinkage, the micropores remain saturated
until the end of normal shrinkage (Azam et al. 2013). In contrast,
during swelling when a dry dual-porosity expansive soil is wetted,
due to the high suction of the micropores, the micropores swell
and saturate first and then the excess water fills the macropores
(Fig. 4) (Alonso et al. 2013).
Braudeau et al. (2004) highlighted that two kinds of water pools
exist in soil pores: the nonswelling water pool found in the macro-
pores, and the swelling water pool found in the micropores. The
loss of water from micropores (i.e., swelling pool) is accompanied
by shrinkage, whereas the loss of water from macropores (i.e., non-
swelling pool) causes little or no shrinkage (Cornelis et al. 2006).
The existence of macropores may contribute to the soil deformation
resulting in accumulated swelling or shrinkage, as explained
previously. In this case, the slope of the normal shrinkage curve
is either greater than 1 [Fig. 5(a)], leading to accumulated shrinkage
or a decrease in the volume of the macropores, or less than 1
[Fig. 5(b)], leading to accumulated swelling or an increase in
the volume of the macropores. The increase and decrease in the
volume of the macropores result from the structural rearrangement
of the active clay mineral aggregates during wetting–drying proc-
esses. However, as previously mentioned, after several wetting–
drying cycles, expansive soil reaches an equilibrium stage in the
macropores [Fig. 5(c)]. At equilibrium, the macropores become
stable and no further volume change takes place in the macropores.
Experimental results by Sitharam et al. (1995), Tripathy et al.
(2002), and Estabragh et al. (2015) showed that the slope of the
normal shrinkage at equilibrium is essentially parallel to the satu-
ration line. This finding is rational because the volumetric strain at
equilibrium is fully controlled by the micropores. The removal of
the water from the micropores leads to a reduction in the aggregate
volume or the soil volume, whereas the macropore volume stays
constant.
Furthermore, the experimental results by Tripathy et al. (2002)
and Estabragh et al. (2015) stressed that the swelling and shrinkage
of the soil on the void ratio versus water content curve at equilib-
rium follow the same path. In other words, the swelling curve fully
reverses to the shrinkage curve (Fig. 6).
For initially unsaturated soils, Fredlund et al. (2012) suggested
that the soil shrinkage curve exhibits two possible behaviors
© ASCE 04019005-4
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2019, 145(4): 04019005
Inter-aggregate pores
Aggregate
S = 70% S = 100%
(Fig. 7): the soil maintains a constant initial degree of saturation
(moving from Point A to Point B in Fig. 7), and the soil shrinkage
curve is parallel to the saturation line (moving from Point A to
Point C in Fig. 7). A close observation of the first situation reveals
that this situation is a special case which occurs when the initial
state of soil is loose and the macropores close in such a way as
to keep the saturation ratio constant. This situation takes place if
equilibrium has not been reached, similar to the case in Fig. 5(a).
In contrast, the second situation occurs if equilibrium is met after
several wetting–drying cycles [Fig. 5(c)].
Although the preceding discussion concentrated more on the
volume change due to the change of water content or suction, it
is still possible to incorporate the effect of mechanical stress on
soil volume change. Results by Tripathy et al. (2002) demonstrated
that the increase of mechanical load shifts the volume change curve
closer to the saturation line (Fig. 8). This finding by Tripathy et al.
(2002) can also be interpreted from the point of view the dual-
porosity concept. This is because the mechanical stress decreases
the volume of the macropores but has little or no effect on the ag-
gregates (i.e., micropores) (e.g., Gallipoli 2012). However, when
considering long-term loading effects, the mechanical stress can
likely cause deformation in the micropores as well, in which the
reduction in volume of the micropores results from the dissipation
of water pressure.
Virgin Line of SWCC
The initial density has been reported to affect the shape of the
SWCC (Zhou et al. 2012; Wijaya and Leong 2017; Jiang et al.
2017). The initial density is controlled by the compaction energy
and the compaction water content. However, as previously men-
tioned, the compaction mainly affects the macropores and has a
slight or no effect on the micropores. For different initial water
contents (or initial densities), the initial drying line of the SWCC
merges to the virgin drying line (VDL) (Fig. 9) (Toll 1995;
Gallipoli 2012; Al-Dakheeli 2016; Gallipoli and Bruno 2017;
Wijaya and Leong 2017). In other words, the effect of the initial
water content appears to be limited to the initial stage of the SWCC
and does not change the slope of the virgin SWCC.
The effect of the initial water content on the SWCC can be ex-
plained using the hysteresis process. Before the soil starts drying, it
is wetted to the initial water content for the drying test. Therefore,
the drying SWCC first reveals a scanning cycle from the wetting
curve to the drying curve, which is the virgin drying line. The in-
tersection point on the VDL is referred to as the preshrinkage suc-
tion (Baumgartl and Köck 2004). The preshrinkage suction is the
point that separates the initial drying line from the virgin drying line
(Fig. 9). Due to the effect of the volume change, this intersection
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.
 2
End of 4th
swelling cycle

1.6
Void ratio

1.2

Void ratio
Swelling and
shrinkage curve
0.8

(a) Moisture ratio, wG s

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Iowa State University on 01/23/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

End of 3rd and 4th

0.4 shrinkage cycle
Void ratio

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Moisture ratio, wGs

Fig. 6. Shrinkage curve fully reversible to the swelling curve at equili-

brium (compacted soil collected from Northern Karnataka State of
India). S = degree of saturation. [Republished with permission of
Canadian Science Publishing, from “Water Content – Void Ratio
(b) Moisture ratio, wG s Swell – Shrink Paths of Compacted Expansive Soils,” S. Tripathy,
K. S. Subba Roa, and D. G. Fredlund, Vol. 39 (4), © 2002, permission
conveyed through Copyright Clearance Center, Inc.]
Void ratio

A
Void ratio

(c) Moisture ratio, wG s D

C

Fig. 5. Possible behavior of the soil shrinkage curve before and after
the equilibrium state: (a) before equilibrium is reached when the initial
state is loose and the slope of the normal shrinkage curve is greater
than 1; (b) before equilibrium is reached when the initial state is dense
and the slope of the normal shrinkage curve is less than 1; and (c) after
equilibrium is reached after several wetting–drying cycles when the
slope of the normal shrinkage curve becomes almost parallel to the
saturation line. S = degree of saturation.
point (Fig. 9) is not the air entry value as referenced widely in the
literature. More discussion is provided on this point in the remain-
ing sections of the paper.
The soil suction mostly arises from the physicochemical inter-
actions of the water and soil particles in the micropores. Therefore,
the virgin line of the water content–suction curve is governed by the
retention properties of micropores (Gallipoli 2012). Similar to the
situation in the compaction process, the mechanical stress mainly
affects the macropores and has a slight or no effect on the micro-
pores in terms of volume changes (Gallipoli 2012).
Constant degree
of saturation, S
Gravimetric water content (%)
Fig. 7. Possible soil shrinkage behavior for initially unsaturated soils.
(Reprinted from D. G. Fredlund, H. Rahardjo, and M. D. Fredlund,
“Nature and Phase Properties of Unsaturated Soil,” Unsaturated Soil
Mechanics in Engineering Practice, Copyright © 2012 John Wiley &
Sons, Inc., with permission from John Wiley and Sons.)
The mechanical stress or compaction does not alter the
micropore-size distribution (Li et al. 2014). Experimental results
from the SWCC obtained for Regina clay preconsolidated to differ-
ent pressures (Fig. 10) reported by Fredlund and Houston (2013)
revealed independency of the virgin drying line of SWCC from the
applied mechanical stress.

© ASCE 04019005-5 J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2019, 145(4): 04019005

 Relationship between Micropores Deformation and
Slope of SWCC
The previous sections explained that the micropores are responsible
for swelling and shrinkage, and experience fully elastic and revers-
ible volume change behavior. The fully recoverable elastic behavior
can be described from the viewpoint of the soil shrinkage curve.
In the case of initially slurry soils, the normal shrinkage follows
the saturation line. In other words, the loss of water is thoroughly
compensated by a reduction in the soil volume. Similarly, in the
case of compacted or undisturbed soils, when equilibrium is at-
tained after several wetting–drying cycles, the normal shrinkage
curve follows a parallel path to the saturation line, as shown by
the experimental results of Sitharam et al. (1995), Tripathy et al.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Iowa State University on 01/23/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Because the slope of the normal shrinkage curve for initially
slurry soils or initially unsaturated soils at equilibrium is equal
to 1, the volumetric strain, εv , which is equal to Δe=ð1 þ eo Þ,
can also be written as follows:
Gs
εv ¼ Δw ð3Þ
ð1 þ eo Þ
This equation represents the volumetric strain in the normal
shrinkage range. Therefore, for aggregated soils, eo corresponds
to the void ratio at the intersection between the structural shrinkage
and the normal shrinkage (Fig. 3).
Because the suction compression index (SCI) is equal to
εv =Δ × log s (Lytton et al. 2005), using Eq. (3), the SCI can be

(2002), and Estabragh et al. (2015). written as follows:

Thus, the volume change of the saturated slurry soils or unsatu- Gs
rated compacted and undisturbed soils at the equilibrium condition SCI ¼ ðslope of SWCC-wÞ ð4Þ
is totally led by the micropores. In this case, the slope of the normal ð1 þ eo Þ
shrinkage (void ratio versus moisture ratio) is equal to 1. Based on
Again, Eqs. (3) and (4) are applicable if the slope of the normal
these observations, this paper proposes a simple relationship be-
shrinkage curve is equal to 1. In this paper, the extensive data
tween the slope of the soil-water characteristic curve in terms of
search and analysis of the published literature on the postulation
the gravimetric water content and the suction compression index
of various models of pore systems and structures for expansive
using the following relationships:
soils along with the evaluation of experimental results of the soil
Δw
Slope of SWCC-w ¼ ð1Þ
Δ log s
Pre-shrinkage
Initial drying line suction
Δe
Slope of e- log s curve ¼ ð2Þ Gravimetric water content (%)
Δ log s

2
Surcharge pressure = 6.25 kPa
Surcharge pressure = 50 kPa
Surcharge pressure = 100 kPa

1.5
Suction (log kPa)

Fig. 9. Virgin drying line of the soil-water characteristic curve.

Void ratio

1
Equilibrium 100
shrinkage Equilibrium swelling Pre-consolidation = 6.125 kPa
Pre-consolidation = 392 kPa
Gravimetric water content (%)

80
Pre-consolidation = 49 kPa

0.5
60

40

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 20
Moisture ratio, wGs
0
Fig. 8. Soil shrinkage curve at equilibrium for different applied me- 1.0E+00 1.0E+02 1.0E+04 1.0E+06
chanical stress (compacted soil collected from Northern Karnataka Suction (kPa)
State of India). [Republished with permission of Canadian Science
Publishing, from “Water Content – Void Ratio Swell – Shrink Paths Fig. 10. SWCC of different applied pressures for Regina soil merging
of Compacted Expansive Soils,” S. Tripathy, K. S. Subba Roa, and to the virgin drying line regenerated from the curve fitting parameters
D. G. Fredlund, Vol. 39 (4), © 2002, permission conveyed through of Fredlund and Xing’s (1994) model reported by Fredlund and
Copyright Clearance Center, Inc.] Houston (2013).

© ASCE 04019005-6 J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2019, 145(4): 04019005

 Table 1. Geotechnical properties for soils in this study
Maximum
Clay content PL LL OMC dry density Figure number
Soil Initial state Reference (%) (%) (%) (%) (g=cm3 ) in this paper
Ardmore Slurry This study 40 24 55 26.5 1.45 14
Lake Hefner Slurry This study 30 15 29 15 1.82 11, 12, 13
Regina Slurry Fredlund and Houston (2013) 50 25 75 N/A N/A 14
Oil sands tailings Slurry Fredlund and Houston (2013) 60 22 55 N/A N/A 14
Mixture of bentonite and kaolin Compacted Estabragh et al. (2015) 49 31 88 20.5 1.61 15
Karnataka (A3) Compacted Tripathy et al. (2002) 62 42 100 35 1.26 15
Karnataka (B3) Compacted Tripathy et al. (2002) 52 32 74 30 1.41 15
Note: PL = plastic limit; LL = liquid limit; and OMC = optimum moisture content.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Iowa State University on 01/23/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

shrinkage curves led to theoretically building the relationship
between the SWCC and the reversible volume change of micro-
pores as presented in Eqs. 3 and 4. The applicability of this relation-
ship is demonstrated by utilizing experimental data of slurry and
compacted soils in the next subsections.
Experimental Data
Experimental data for initially saturated slurry soils and compacted
soils were used in this study (Table 1). Experimental data of slurry
soils consisted of suction and shrinkage measurements of reconsti-
tuted saturated soil. The experimental data of four slurry soils were
used in this study. Two soils were used specifically for this study.
They were obtained from the Lake Hefner and Ardmore sites in
Oklahoma. The basic geotechnical properties of these two soils
were obtained following the relevant ASTM standards. The opti-
mum water content and maximum dry density were determined fol-
lowing the standard Proctor test in ASTM D698 (ASTM 2012) and
the results are given in Table 1. The results of the other two soils
were extracted from Fredlund and Houston (2013). The basic geo-
technical properties of the latter two soils are also given in Table 1.
Experimental data of compacted soils consisted of soil shrink-
age curves at the equilibrium state. The results of the SSC at the
equilibrium state were extracted from Tripathy et al. (2002) and
Estabragh et al. (2015). The basic geotechnical properties of these
soils are given in Table 1.
Demonstrating Relationship between Reversible
Deformation and Slope of SWCC Using Experimental
Data of Slurry Soils
Experimental data for initially saturated slurry specimens of Lake
Hefner soil were used to graphically demonstrate the range of the
normal shrinkage on the e- log s curve and SWCC. The experimen-
tal data consisted of suction and shrinkage measurements of recon-
stituted saturated specimens under desiccation testing. The soil was
obtained from the Lake Hefner site in Oklahoma (Table 1).
The volume change was measured by conducting free shrinkage
 c ð1=cÞ
w
eðwÞ ¼ a þ 1 ð5Þ
bc
Because the soil was in a slurry condition, the normal shrinkage
part of the SSC followed the saturation line for wide ranges of water
contents and void ratios.
Suction measurements of the desiccating soil specimen in the
free shrinkage tests were carried out using a WP4 (METER Group,
Pullman, Washington) chilled-mirror device for high suction ranges
(i.e., greater than 500 kPa) and a UMS-T5 (METER Group, Pull-
man, Washington) tensiometer for low suction ranges (i.e., less than
100 kPa). In the study, it was assumed that the osmotic suction
component was negligible. The obtained results were fitted by
the Fredlund and Xing (1994) model to obtain the whole soil-water
characteristic curve in terms of the gravimetric water content
(Fig. 12).
Additionally, the soil-water characteristic curve in terms of the
degree of saturation was obtained by combining the SWCC-w and
the SSC. In this way, the SWCC-S takes into account the volume
change such that the AEV can be correctly located (Fredlund and
Houston 2013; Wijaya et al. 2015; Bani Hashem and Houston
2015). The suction versus the void ratio curve (e- log s curve) is
derived from the suction obtained from the SWCC-w and the
corresponding void ratio obtained from the SSC. The SWCC-w,
SWCC-S, and the e- log s curve are illustrated in Fig. 13 and can
be interpreted under a unified framework.
From Fig. 13, the range from the preshrinkage suction to the air
entry value falls on the virgin drying line of the SWCC-w and the
virgin shrinkage line of the e- log s curve. This range is also within
0.6
Fitting curve using Fredlund et al. (2002) model
Experimental data
0.5
Saturation line
0.4
Void ratio

tests on cylindrical soil specimens 6.4 cm in diameter and 1.9 cm 0.3

thick in the laboratory under air-drying conditions. The volume
change was estimated by incorporating the results of the radial
0.2
shrinkage with the shrinkage along the thickness of the specimen
using a digital image analysis technique. The free shrinkage tests
were conducted on an electronic balance to determine the gravimet- 0.1
ric water content of the specimen on a continuous basis using a
simple back-calculation scheme. The void ratio was estimated from 0
the volume change and the basic volume–mass relationships. The 0 5 10 15 20 25
obtained experimental results were fitted by the Fredlund et al. Gravimetric water content (%)
(2002) model to produce the whole soil shrinkage curve (Fig. 11).
Fig. 11. Soil shrinkage curve of Lake Hefner soil.
Fredlund et al.’s (2002) model is as follows:

© ASCE 04019005-7 J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2019, 145(4): 04019005

 25 3.00
Oil Sands tailings fit
Ardmore soil fit
2.50
Regina soil fit
20 Air entry point
Gravimetric water content (%)

2.00 Oil Sands tailings

Ardmore

Void ratio
1.50 Regina
15

1.00

10
0.50
Fitting curve using Fredlund &
Xing (1994) model
0.00
5 Measured by WP4 1E-1 1E+0 1E+1 1E+2 1E+3 1E+4 1E+5 1E+6
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Iowa State University on 01/23/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Suction (kPa)
Measured by Tensiometer
0 Fig. 14. Suction versus void ratio curve showing the location of the air
1.0E-02 1.0E+00 1.0E+02 1.0E+04 1.0E+06 entry point in three soils: Ardmore, Regina, and oil sands tailings.
Suction (kPa)

Fig. 12. SWCC-w of Lake Hefner soil.

All three soils in Fig. 14, namely Ardmore, Regina, and Oil Sands
tailings, undergo substantial shrinkage before the suction reaches
1.1 Air entry 22 the AEV. However, as the suction increases beyond the AEV in the
1.0 suction 20
unsaturation state, the soils undergo insignificant shrinkage.

0.9 18
Demonstrating Relationship between Reversible
Gravimetric water content (%)

0.8 16 Deformation and Slope of SWCC Using Experimental

Data of Compacted Soils
Degree of saturation

0.7 14
Pre-shrinkage
0.6 suction 12 Tests on slurry soils can be considered as a base condition for
explaining the soil deformation mechanism and its relation to the
0.5 10
water retention. It is possible to extend the applicability of the
0.4 8 presented model to the compacted soils in the equilibrium state
0.3 6 for stable deformation of macropores and elastic deformation of mi-
SWCC-S cropores. This extension is valid if the normal shrinkage line is
0.2 Experimental data for SWCC-S 4
parallel to the saturation line, which occurs at the equilibrium state.
0.1 SWCC-w Residual 2 This indicates that the volume change is led by the saturated micro-
Experimental data for SWCC-w suction pores, which experience reversible deformation, and also indicates
0.0 0
1.0E+00 1.0E+02 1.0E+04 1.0E+06 that the macropores are stable, i.e., no accumulated swelling-
(a) Suction (kPa) shrinkage takes place.
For initially unsaturated compacted soils, Eqs. (3) and (4) are
valid for the normal shrinkage zone and when the slope of the
0.55
Experimental data
SSC is equal to 1 at the equilibrium condition. Although only lim-
0.50 e-log s curve ited experimental results are available in the literature for the SSC at
equilibrium (replotted in Fig. 15), all showed a normal shrinkage-
0.45 swelling line almost parallel to the saturation line, which verifies the
extension of the current model to compacted soils at the equilibrium
Void ratio

0.40
Pre-shrinkage state. The void ratio versus moisture ratio curves at the equilibrium
0.35 suction state for three initially compacted soils, regenerated from experi-
mental data obtained by Tripathy et al. (2002) and Estabragh et al.
0.30
(2015), are plotted in Fig. 15. The basic geotechnical properties of
0.25 Shrinkage these soils are summarized in Table 1. Tripathy et al. (2002) stated
ceases that the equilibrium condition was attained at the fourth cycle,
0.20
whereas Estabragh et al. (2015) monitored the equilibrium state
1.0E+00 1.0E+02 1.0E+04 1.0E+06
(b) Suction (kPa)
at the fifth cycle. At the equilibrium state, the swelling curve
and shrinkage curve are the same. The normal shrinkage-swelling
Fig. 13. Graphical interpretation of SWCC-w, SWCC-S, and e- log s line of the three soils in Fig. 15 is almost parallel to the saturation
curve in a single framework for Lake Hefner soil: (a) SWCC-w and line. Table 2 summarizes the test results from Tripathy et al. (2002)
SWCC-S; and (b) e- log s curve. and Estabragh et al. (2015) for all three soils. A comparison study
between the predicted volumetric strain using Eq. (3) and the mea-
sured volumetric strain from the linear normal volume change zone
the normal shrinkage zone of the SSC. Fig. 13 clearly shows that was also undertaken, and the results are summarized in Table 2.
most of the shrinkage takes place in the full saturation state before Because the slope of the normal shrinkage-swelling curve was close
the soil commences to desaturate. More experimental evidence to 1, the predicted volumetric strains using Eq. (3) were in good
for the latter observation is shown for the e- log s curve in Fig. 14. agreement with the predicted volumetric strains in Table 2.

© ASCE 04019005-8 J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2019, 145(4): 04019005

 More experimental data are needed for the volume change
measurements at the equilibrium condition to supplement the com-
parison study in Table 2. It is also recommended that suction mea-
surements be involved with the volume change measurements of
2 change behavior and water retention similar to that in Fig. 13
1.5
Void ratio
the compacted and undisturbed soils at equilibrium for further
validation of the presented approach. Additional data would further
verify the relationship between the water characteristic curve and
the volume change of the micropores. If the SWCC and SSC are
obtained for initially compacted soils at the equilibrium state, a
graphical interpretation for the interaction between the volume
can be undertaken. Therefore, better understanding of the location
of the preshrinkage point, the intersection point of structural
shrinkage and normal shrinkage (Fig. 3), and the range of normal
shrinkage on the e- log s curve and SWCC-S can be achieved.

1
Conclusions
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Iowa State University on 01/23/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

0.5 The pore structure of expansive soils consists of two levels, namely
micropores and macropores. Based on the properties of the micro-
and macropores and the soil shrinkage curve, this paper presents a
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 simple relationship between the slope of the soil-water character-
(a) Moisture ratio, wGs istic curve and the volume change of the micropores. Micropores
are saturated over wide ranges of water contents. The deformation
1.5 of the micropores is reversible and elastic, resulting from the ac-
tivity of clay minerals during swelling and shrinkage. In contrast,
the deformation of the macropores is mostly irreversible and
plastic, resulting from the structural rearrangement of the clay ag-
1 gregates. For slurry soils, the shrinkage curve follows the saturation
Void ratio

line because the micropores are predominant for the volume

change. For compacted and undisturbed soils, the void ratio–
moisture ratio curve of wetting and drying cycles indicated accu-
0.5 mulated swelling or shrinkage, depending on the initial density.
This is because the volume change takes place both in the micro-
and macropores. However, experimental results from various soil
types and sources indicated that an equilibrium stage is reached
0 after several cycles of wetting and drying. As a result, the volume
0 0.5 1 1.5
(b) Moisture ratio, wGs
change becomes thoroughly reversible and the shrinkage curve be-
comes essentially parallel to the saturation line. Under these con-
ditions, the volume change is fully controlled by the micropores.
1.8
Based on these observations, this paper presents a simple theoreti-
1.5
cal relationship between the slope of the SWCC and elastic volume
changes of soil micropores. To demonstrate the validity of this
1.2 relationship using experimental data, the SWCC in terms of the
degree of saturation, the SWCC in terms of the gravimetric water
Void ratio

0.9 content, and the void ratio–suction curve were interpreted in a uni-
fied framework for initially slurry soils. The analysis results re-
0.6 vealed that a unique relationship between the virgin drying line
and the virgin shrinkage line exists for a range of suction from
0.3 the preshrinkage point to the air entry point. For compacted and
undisturbed soils, a comparison study was undertaken of the pre-
0 dicted volumetric strains using the proposed approach and mea-
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8
sured volumetric strains derived from soil shrinkage curves for
(c) Moisture ratio, wGs
three different soil types at the equilibrium condition. Very good
agreement was found. It is recommended that more experimental
Fig. 15. Soil shrinkage-swelling curve at the equilibrium state for
data, particularly for compacted soils, should be evaluated for the
(a) Karnataka soil A3; (b) Karnataka soil B3; and (c) mixture of
shrinkage curve at the equilibrium condition to further validate the
bentonite and kaolin.
relation between the SWCC and the soil volume change behavior.

Table 2. Summary of results of soil shrinkage at equilibrium state after several wetting–drying cycles
Soil References Number of cycles Applied pressure (kPa) SNSC MVS (%) PVS (%)
Mixture of bentonite and kaolin Estabragh et al. (2015) 5 1 0.9 18.4 20.3
Karnataka soil (A3) Tripathy et al. (2002) 4 6.25 0.97 33.7 34.6
Karnataka soil (B3) Tripathy et al. (2002) 4 6.25 1.02 24.8 24.1
Note: SNSC = slope of normal shrinkage curve; MVS = measured volumetric strain; and PVS = predicted volumetric strain.

© ASCE 04019005-9 J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2019, 145(4): 04019005

 Acknowledgments
The authors thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable
comments and suggestions that improved the quality of this
manuscript.
Notation
The following symbols are used in this paper:
a, b, c = fitting parameters in the model of Fredlund et al. (2002);
e = void ratio;
e- log s = relationship between void ratio and suction in
logarithm scale;
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Iowa State University on 01/23/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
eo = initial void ratio;
Gs = specific gravity;
s = soil suction (metric units);
w = gravimetric water content; and
εv = volumetric strain.
References
Airò Farulla, C., A. Ferrari, and E. Romero. 2010. “Volume change behav-
iour of a compacted scaly clay during cyclic suction changes.”
Can. Geotech. J. 47 (6): 688–703. https://doi.org/10.1139/T09-138.
Al-Dakheeli, H. A. 2016. “Hydro-mechanical analysis of shrinkage and
shrinkage cracking due to environmental loads on saturated to unsatu-
rated expansive soils.” M.S. thesis, School of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Oklahoma State Univ.
Al-Homoud, A. S., A. A. Basma, A. I. Husein Malkawi, and M. A.
Al Bashabsheh. 1995. “Cyclic swelling behavior of clays.” J. Geotech.
Eng. 121 (7): 562–565. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410
(1995)121:7(562).
Alonso, E. E., A. Gens, and A. Josa. 1990. “A constitutive model for par-
tially saturated soils.” Géotechnique 40 (3): 405–430. https://doi.org/10
.1680/geot.1990.40.3.405.
Alonso, E. E., N. M. Pinyol, and A. Gens. 2013. “Compacted soil behav-
iour: Initial state, structure and constitutive modelling” Géotechnique
63 (6): 463. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.11.P.134.
Alonso, E. E., E. Romero, C. Hoffmann, and E. García-Escudero. 2005.
“Expansive bentonite–sand mixtures in cyclic controlled-suction drying
and wetting.” Eng. Geol. 81 (3): 213–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j
.enggeo.2005.06.009.
Alonso, E. E., J. Vaunat, and A. Gens. 1999. “Modelling the mechanical
behaviour of expansive clays.” Eng. Geol. 54 (1): 173–183. https://doi
.org/10.1016/S0013-7952(99)00079-4.
ASTM. 2012. Standard test methods for laboratory compaction character-
istics of soil using standard effort (12400 ft-lbf=ft3 (600 kN-m=m3 )).
ASTM D698. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
Azam, S., M. Ito, and R. Chowdhury. 2013. “Engineering properties of
an expansive soil.” In Proc., 18th Int. Conf. on Soil Mechanics and
Geotechnical Engineering. Paris: Presses des Ponts.
Baker, R., and S. Frydman. 2009. “Unsaturated soil mechanics: Critical
review of physical foundations.” Eng. Geol. 106 (1): 26–39. https://doi
.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2009.02.010.
Bani Hashem, E., and S. L. Houston. 2015. “Volume change consideration
in determining unsaturated soil properties for geotechnical applica-
tions.” Int. J. Geomech. 16 (6): D4015003. https://doi.org/10.1061
/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000586.
Basma, A. A., A. S. Al-Homoud, A. I. H. Malkawi, and M. A.
Al-Bashabsheh. 1996. “Swelling-shrinkage behavior of natural expan-
sive clays.” Appl. Clay Sci. 11 (2–4): 211–227. https://doi.org/10.1016
/S0169-1317(96)00009-9.
Baumgartl, T., and B. Köck. 2004. “Modeling volume change and
mechanical properties with hydraulic models.” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J.
68 (1): 57–65. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2004.5700.
© ASCE 04019005-10
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2019, 145(4): 04019005
Braudeau, E., R. H. Mohtar, and N. Chahinian. 2004. “Estimating soil
shrinkage parameters.” In Vol. 30 of Development of pedotransfer func-
tions in soil hydrology: Developments in soil science, edited by
Y. Pachepsky and W. Rawls, 1st ed., 225–240. Amsterdam, Netherlands:
Elsevier Science.
Bulut, R., and E. C. Leong. 2008. “Indirect measurement of suction.”
Geotech. Geol. Eng. 26 (6): 633–644. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706
-008-9197-0.
Chen, F. H. 2012. Vol. 12 of Foundations on expansive soils. New York:
Elsevier.
Chertkov, V. Y. 2008. “The physical effects of an intra-aggregate structure
on soil shrinkage.” Geoderma 146 (1): 147–156. https://doi.org/10
.1016/j.geoderma.2008.05.011.
Cornelis, W. M., J. Corluy, H. Medina, J. Diaz, R. Hartmann, M.
Van Meirvenne, and M. E. Ruiz. 2006. “Measuring and modelling
the soil shrinkage characteristic curve.” Geoderma 137 (1): 179–191.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2006.08.022.
Croney, D., and J. D. Coleman. 1953. “Soil moisture suction properties and
their bearing on the moisture distribution on soils.” In Proc., 3rd Int.
Conf. of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, 13–18. Zurich,
Switzerland: Organizing Committee ICOSOMEF.
Day, R. W. 1994. “Swell-shrink behavior of compacted clay.” J. Geotech.
Eng. 120 (3): 618–623. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410
(1994)120:3(618).
Delage, P., and J. Graham. 1996. “Mechanical behaviour of unsaturated
soils: Understanding the behaviour of unsaturated soils requires reliable
conceptual models.” In Vol. 3 of Proc., 1st Int. Conf. on Unsaturated
Soils, 1223–1256. Paris: Presses de l'Ecole Nationale des Ponts et
Chaussées.
Della Vecchia, G., A. C. Dieudonné, C. Jommi, and R. Charlier. 2015.
“Accounting for evolving pore size distribution in water retention
models for compacted clays.” Int. J. Numer. Anal. Methods Geomech.
39 (7): 702–723. https://doi.org/10.1002/nag.2326.
Dieudonné, A. C., G. Della Vecchia, and R. Charlier. 2017. “Water reten-
tion model for compacted bentonites.” Can. Geotech. J. 54 (7): 915–
925. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2016-0297.
Dif, A., and W. Bluemel. 1991. “Expansive soils under cyclic drying and
drying.” Geotech. Test. J. 14 (1): 96–102. https://doi.org/10.1520
/GTJ10196J.
Estabragh, A. R., B. Parsaei, and A. A. Javadi. 2015. “Laboratory inves-
tigation of the effect of cyclic wetting and drying on the behaviour of an
expansive soil.” Soils Found. 55 (2): 304–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j
.sandf.2015.02.007.
Fityus, S., and O. Buzzi. 2009. “The place of expansive clays in the frame-
work of unsaturated soil mechanics.” Appl. Clay Sci. 43 (2): 150–155.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2008.08.005.
Fredlund, D. G., and S. L. Houston. 2013. “Interpretation of soil-water
characteristic curves when volume change occurs as soil suction is
changed.” In Proc., 1st Pan-American Conf. on Advances in Unsatu-
rated Soils, 15–31. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Fredlund, D. G., and N. R. Morgenstern. 1977. “Stress state variables for
unsaturated soils.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. Div. 103 (5): 447–466.
Fredlund, D. G., H. Rahardjo, and M. D. Fredlund. 2012. Unsaturated soil
mechanics in engineering practice. New York: Wiley.
Fredlund, D. G., and A. Xing. 1994. “Equations for the soil-water charac-
teristic curve.” Can. Geotech. J. 31 (4): 521–532. https://doi.org/10
.1139/t94-061.
Fredlund, D. G., A. Xing, and S. Huang. 1994. “Predicting the permeability
function for unsaturated soils using the soil-water characteristic curve.”
Can. Geotech. J. 31 (4): 533–546. https://doi.org/10.1139/t94-062.
Fredlund, D. G., and F. Zhang. 2013. “Combination of shrinkage curve and
soil-water characteristic curves for soils that undergo volume change as
soil suction is increased.” In Proc., 18th Int. Conf. on Soil Mechanics
and Geotechnical Engineering. Paris: Presses des Ponts.
Fredlund, M. D., G. W. Wilson, and D. G. Fredlund. 2002. “Representation
and estimation of the shrinkage curve.” In Proc., 3rd Int. Conf. on
Unsaturated Soils (UNSAT 2002), 145–149. Leiden, Netherlands:
A.A. Balkema.
Frydman, S., and R. Baker. 2009. “Theoretical soil-water characteristic
curves based on adsorption, cavitation, and a double porosity model.”
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.
 Int. J. Geomech. 9 (6): 250–257. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1532
-3641(2009)9:6(250).
Gallipoli, D. B. 2012. “A hysteretic soil-water retention model accounting
for cyclic variations of suction and void ratio.” Geotechnique 62 (7):
605–616. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.11.P.007.
Gallipoli, D. B., and A. W. Bruno. 2017. “A bounding surface compression
model with a unified virgin line for saturated and unsaturated soils.”
Géotechnique 67 (8): 703–712. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgeot.16.P.145.
Gens, A., and E. E. Alonso. 1992. “A framework for the behaviour of
unsaturated expansive clays.” Can. Geotech. J. 29 (6): 1013–1032.
https://doi.org/10.1139/t92-120.
Gerke, H. H. 2006. “Preferential flow descriptions for structured soils.”
J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 169 (3): 382–400. https://doi.org/10.1002/jpln
.200521955.
Gerke, H. H., and M. T. van Genuchten. 1996. “Macroscopic representation
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Iowa State University on 01/23/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
of structural geometry for simulating water and solute movement in
dual-porosity media.” Adv. Water Resour. 19 (6): 343–357. https://doi
.org/10.1016/0309-1708(96)00012-7.
Guney, Y., D. Sari, M. Cetin, and M. Tuncan. 2007. “Impact of cyclic
wetting–drying on swelling behavior of lime-stabilized soil.” Build.
Environ. 42 (2): 681–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2005
.10.035.
Jiang, Y., W. Chen, G. Wang, G. Sun, and F. Zhang. 2017. “Influence of
initial dry density and water content on the soil–water characteristic
curve and suction stress of a reconstituted loess soil.” Bull. Eng.
Geol. Environ. 76 (3): 1085–1095. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-016
-0899-x.
Johnston, J. R., and H. O. Hill. 1945. “A study of the shrinking and swelling
properties of Rendzina soils.” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 9: 24–29. https://doi
.org/10.2136/sssaj1945.036159950009000C0004x.
Kalkan, E. 2011. “Impact of wetting–drying cycles on swelling behavior of
clayey soils modified by silica fume.” Appl. Clay Sci. 52 (4): 345–352.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2011.03.014.
Koliji, A., L. Vulliet, and L. Laloui. 2010. “Structural characterization of
unsaturated aggregated soil.” Can. Geotech. J. 47 (3): 297–311. https://
doi.org/10.1139/T09-089.
Larsbo, M., S. Roulier, F. Stenemo, R. Kasteel, and N. Jarvis. 2005. “An
improved dual-permeability model of water flow and solute transport in
the vadose zone.” Vadose Zone J. 4 (2): 398–406. https://doi.org/10
.2136/vzj2004.0137.
Larsson, M. H., and N. J. Jarvis. 1999. “Evaluation of a dual-porosity
model to predict field-scale solute transport in a macroporous soil.”
J. Hydrol. 215 (1): 153–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(98)
00267-4.
Li, X., and L. M. Zhang. 2009. “Characterization of dual-structure pore-
size distribution of soil.” Can. Geotech. J. 46 (2): 129–141. https://doi
.org/10.1139/T08-110.
Li, X., L. M. Zhang, and L. Z. Wu. 2014. “A framework for unifying soil
fabric, suction, void ratio, and water content during the dehydration pro-
cess.” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 78 (2): 387–399. https://doi.org/10.2136
/sssaj2013.08.0362.
Likos, W. J. 2004. “Measurement of crystalline swelling in expansive clay.”
Geotech. Test. J. 27 (6): 540–546. https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ11857.
Lloret Morancho, A., M. V. Villar, M. Sanchez, A. Gens Solé, X. Pintado
Llurba, and E Alonso Pérez de Agreda. 2003. “Mechanical behaviour of
heavily compacted bentonite under high suction changes.” Géotechni-
que 53 (1): 27–40. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2003.53.1.27.
Lu, N., J. W. Godt, and D. T. Wu. 2010. “A closed-form equation for
effective stress in unsaturated soil.” Water Resour. Res. 46 (5): 1–14.
https://doi.org/10.1029/2009WR008646.
Lytton, R. L. 1977. “Foundations in expansive soils.” In Numerical meth-
ods in geotechnical engineering, edited by C. S. Desai and J. T.
Christian, 427–457. New York: McGraw Hill.
Lytton, R. L. 1994. “Prediction of movement in expansive clays.” In Vol. 2
of Proc., Vertical and Horizontal Deformations of Foundations and
Embankments, Geotechnical Special Publication No. 40, edited by
A. T. Yeung and G. Y. Felio, 1827–1845. New York: ASCE.
Lytton, R. L., C. Aubeny, and R. Bulut. 2005. Vol. 1 of Design procedure
for pavements on expansive soils. San Antonio: Texas Transportation
Institute.
© ASCE 04019005-11
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2019, 145(4): 04019005
Mašín, D. 2010. “Predicting the dependency of a degree of saturation on
void ratio and suction using effective stress principle for unsaturated
soils.” Int. J. Numer. Anal. Methods Geomech. 34 (1): 73–90. https://
doi.org/10.1002/nag.808.
Mašín, D. 2013. “Double structure hydromechanical coupling formalism
and a model for unsaturated expansive clays.” Eng. Geol. 165 (Oct):
73–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2013.05.026.
McKeen, R. G. 1992. “A model for predicting expansive soil behavior.”
In Proc., 7th Int. Conf. on Expansive Soils, 1–6. Lubbock, TX: Texas
Tech University Press.
Mitchell, J. K., and K. Soga. 2005. Fundamentals of soil behavior.
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Musso, G., E. Romero, and G. Della Vecchia. 2013. “Double-structure
effects on the chemo-hydro-mechanical behaviour of a compacted ac-
tive clay.” Geotechnique 63 (3): 206–220. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot
.SIP13.P.011.
Nowamooz, H., and F. Masrouri. 2008. “Hydromechanical behaviour of
an expansive bentonite/silt mixture in cyclic suction-controlled drying
and wetting tests.” Eng. Geol. 101 (3): 154–164. https://doi.org/10.1016
/j.enggeo.2008.04.011.
Nowamooz, H., and F. Masrouri. 2010. “Mechanical behaviour of expan-
sive soils after several drying and wetting cycles.” Geomech. Geoeng.:
Int. J. 5 (4): 213–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/17486025.2010.521588.
Osipov, V. I., N. N. Bik, and N. A. Rumjantseva. 1987. “Cyclic swelling
of clays.” Appl. Clay Sci. 2 (4): 363–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169
-1317(87)90042-1.
Pedrotti, M., and A. Tarantino. 2014. “Microstructural interpretation of
compression behaviour of compacted kaolin clay.” In Unsaturated soils,
739–745. Leiden, Netherlands: CRC Press.
Popescu, M. 1980. “Behaviour of expansive soils with a crumb structure.”
In Vol. 1 of Proc., 4th Int. Conf. on Expansive Soils, 158–171. Reston,
VA: ASCE.
Rao, P. S. C., D. E. Rolston, R. E. Jessup, and J. M. Davidson. 1980.
“Solute transport in aggregated porous media: Theoretical and exper-
imental evaluation.” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 44 (6): 1139–1146. https://doi
.org/10.2136/sssaj1980.03615995004400060003x.
Rao, S. M., and K. Revanasiddappa. 2006. “Influence of cyclic wetting
drying on collapse behaviour of compacted residual soil.” Geotech.
Geol. Eng. 24 (3): 725–734. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-004
-5077-4.
Romero, E., A. Gens, and A. Lloret. 1999. “Water permeability, water
retention and microstructure of unsaturated compacted Boom clay.”
Eng. Geol. 54 (1–2): 117–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-7952
(99)00067-8.
Rosenbalm, D., and C. E. Zapata. 2016. “Effect of wetting and drying
cycles on the behavior of compacted expansive soils.” J. Mater. Civ.
Eng. 29 (1): 04016191. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533
.0001689.
Salager, S., M. S. El Youssoufi, and C. Saix. 2010. “Definition and exper-
imental determination of a soil-water retention surface.” Can. Geotech.
J. 47 (6): 609–622. https://doi.org/10.1139/T09-123.
Salager, S., M. Nuth, A. Ferrari, and L. Laloui. 2013. “Investigation into
water retention behaviour of deformable soils” Can. Geotech. J. 50 (2):
200–208. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2011-0409.
Sánchez, M., A. Gens, L. do Nascimento Guimarães, and S. Olivella. 2005.
“A double structure generalized plasticity model for expansive materi-
als.” Int. J. Numer. Anal. Methods Geomech. 29 (8): 751–787. https://
doi.org/10.1002/nag.434.
Seiphoori, A., A. Ferrari, and L. Laloui. 2014. “Water retention behaviour
and microstructural evolution of MX-80 bentonite during wetting and
drying cycles.” Géotechnique 64 (9): 721–734. https://doi.org/10.1680
/geot.14.P.017.
Sheng, D., S. Zhang, and Z. Yu. 2013. “Unanswered questions in unsatu-
rated soil mechanics.” Sci. China Technol. Sci. 56 (5): 1257–1272.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-013-5202-9.
Sitharam, T. G., P. V. Sivapulloiah, and K. S. Subba Rao. 1995. “Shrinkage
behaviour of compacted unsaturated soil.” In Proc., 1st Int. Conf. on
Unsaturated Soil, 195–200. Paris: Presses de l'Ecole Nationale des
Ponts et Chaussées.
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.
 Snethen, D. R., and G. Huang. 1992. “Evaluation of soil suction-heave pre-
diction methods.” In Proc., 7th Int. Conf. on Expansive Soils, 12–17.
Lubbock, TX: Texas Tech University Press.
Subba Rao, K. S., and G. G. Satyadas. 1987. “Swelling potential with
cycles of swelling and partial shrinkage.” In Vol. 1 of Proc., 6th Int.
Conf. on Expansive Soils, 137–142. New Delhi, India: Central Board
of Irrigation and Power.
Sun, D. A., D. Sheng, L. Xiang, and S. W. Sloan. 2008. “Elastoplastic
prediction of hydro-mechanical behaviour of unsaturated soils under
undrained conditions” Comput. Geotech. 35 (6): 845–852. https://doi
.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2008.08.002.
Tarantino, A., and E. De Col. 2008. “Compaction behaviour of clay.”
Géotechnique 58 (3): 199–213. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2008.58
.3.199.
Thom, R., R. Sivakumar, V. Sivakumar, E. Murray, and P. A. MacKinnon.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Iowa State University on 01/23/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
2007. “Pore size distribution of unsaturated compacted kaolin: The ini-
tial states and final states following saturation.” Geotechnique 57 (5):
469–474. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2007.57.5.469.
Thyagaraj, T., S. R. Thomas, and A. P. Das. 2016. “Physico-chemical
effects on shrinkage behavior of compacted expansive clay.” Int. J.
Geomech. 17 (2): 06016013. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943
-5622.0000698.
Toll, D. G. 1995. “A conceptual model for the drying and wetting of soil.”
In Vol. 2 of Proc., 1st Int. Conf. on Unsaturated Soils. Paris: Presses
de l'Ecole Nationale des Ponts et Chaussées.
Tripathy, S., and K. S. S. Rao. 2009. “Cyclic swell–shrink behaviour of a
compacted expansive soil.” Geotech. Geol. Eng. 27 (1): 89–103. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10706-008-9214-3.
Tripathy, S., K. S. S. Rao, and D. G. Fredlund. 2002. “Water content - void
ratio swell-shrink paths of compacted expansive soils.” Can. Geotech. J.
39 (4): 938–959. https://doi.org/10.1139/t02-022.
Umezaki, T., and T. Kawamura. 2013. “Shrinkage and desaturation proper-
ties during desiccation of reconstituted cohesive soil.” Soils Found.
53 (1): 47–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2012.12.003.
© ASCE 04019005-12
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 2019, 145(4): 04019005
Vanapalli, S. K., D. G. Fredlund, and D. E. Pufahl. 1996. “The relationship
between the soil water characteristic curve and the unsaturated shear
strength of a compacted glacial till.” Geotech. Test. J. 19 (3): 259–268.
https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ10351J.
Van Genuchten, M. T. 1980. “A closed-form equation for predicting
the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils.” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J.
44 (5): 892–898. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1980.036159950044000
50002x.
Van Genuchten, M. T., and P. J. Wierenga. 1976. “Mass transfer studies in
sorbing porous media I. Analytical solutions.” Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J.
40 (4): 473–480. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1976.036159950040000
40011x.
Wang, G., and X. Wei. 2014. “Modeling swelling–shrinkage behavior
of compacted expansive soils during wetting–drying cycles.” Can.
Geotech. J. 52 (6): 783–794. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2014-0059.
Wheeler, S. J., R. S. Sharma, and M. S. R. Buisson. 2003. “Coupling
of hydraulic hysteresis and stress–strain behaviour in unsaturated
soils.” Géotechnique 53 (1): 41–54. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2003
.53.1.41.
Wijaya, M., and E. C. Leong. 2017. “Modelling the effect of density on
the unimodal soil-water characteristic curve.” Géotechnique 67 (7):
637–645. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgeot.15.P.270.
Wijaya, M., E. C. Leong, and H. Rahardjo. 2015. “Effect of shrinkage on
air-entry value of soils.” Soils Found. 55 (1): 166–180. https://doi.org
/10.1016/j.sandf.2014.12.013.
Zapata, C. E., W. N. Houston, S. L. Houston, and K. D. Walsh. 2000.
“Soil-water characteristic curve variability.” In Proc., Geo-Denver
2000, Advances in Unsaturated Geotechnics, 84–124. Reston, VA:
ASCE.
Zemenu, G., A. Martine, and C. Roger. 2009. “Analysis of the behaviour of
a natural expansive soil under cyclic drying and wetting.” Bull. Eng.
Geol. Environ. 68 (3): 421–436.
Zhou, A. N., D. Sheng, and J. P. Carter. 2012. “Modelling the effect of
initial density on soil-water characteristic curves.” Géotechnique 62 (8):
669–680. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.10.P.120.
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.