783

ARTICLE
Modeling swelling–shrinkage behavior of compacted expansive
soils during wetting–drying cycles
Gang Wang and Xing Wei
Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 47.8.225.124 on 03/28/19. For personal use only.

Abstract: This paper presents a straightforward approach for modelling volume change behavior of expansive soils during
wetting–drying cycles. The swelling–shrinkage strain of expansive soils induced by cyclic wetting and drying was decomposed
with distinctive physical background into a reversible component, which shows a synchronous change with the cyclic change of
suction, and an irreversible component, which is generated mainly in the early stage of the wetting–drying process. The
mechanisms of the two swelling–shrinkage strain components can be well explained through the double-level structure of
expansive soils and its evolution with mechanical and hydraulic loading. The reversible component originates from the revers-
ible deformation behavior of aggregates, and primarily depends on current suction or water content. The irreversible compo-
nent is associated with the irreversible change of macrostructure, reflecting the difference in soil structures at current state and
the equilibrium state. A practical constitutive model was proposed for compacted expansive clays from a global and phenom-
enological perspective. The model parameters can be calibrated with observed macroscopic deformation behavior without
measuring microstructural parameters. The performance of the presented model was validated by simulating cyclic suction-
controlled tests as well as an alternately soaked and dried test with irregular amplitudes of suctions.
Can. Geotech. J. 2015.52:783-794.

Key words: expansive soils, volumetric behavior, swelling, shrinkage, model.

Résumé : Cet article présente une approche directe pour modéliser les variations de volume de sols expansifs durant des cycles
de mouillage–séchage. La déformation causée par le gonflement–retrait des sols expansifs induite par les cycles de mouillage–
séchage a été décomposée, selon des notions physiques, en une composante réversible qui démontre une variation synchrone
avec les variations cycliques de succion, et une composante irréversible qui est générée principalement dans les premières étapes
du processus de mouillage–séchage. Les mécanismes des deux composantes de la déformation en gonflement–retrait peuvent
être bien expliqués grâce à la structure à deux niveaux des sols expansifs et par l’évolution de cette structure avec les charges
mécaniques et hydrauliques. La composante réversible provient de la déformation réversible des agrégats, et dépend principale-
ment de la succion présente et de la teneur en eau. La composante irréversible est associée avec les variations irréversibles
de la macrostructure, reflétant les différences dans les structures du sol à l’état présent et à l’état d’équilibre. Un modèle
constitutif pratique est proposé pour les argiles expansives compactées basé sur une perspective globale et phénomé-
nologique. Les paramètres du modèle peuvent être calibrés avec les déformations macroscopiques observées sans mesurer
les paramètres microstructuraux. La performance du modèle présenté a été validée en simulant des essais de succion
cyclique contrôlés de même d’avec un essai alternant le mouillage et le séchage avec des amplitudes irrégulières de succion.
[Traduit par la Rédaction]

Mots-clés : sols expansifs, comportement volumétrique, gonflement, retrait, modèle.

Introduction
Expansive soils can exhibit large volume change from change in
soil moisture. Under seasonal changes in climatic and environ-
mental conditions, expansive soils in situ inevitably experience
cyclic wetting–drying processes and generate swelling–shrinkage
deformation, which results in heave- and subsidence-related cracks
or deflections in building foundations, buried utilities, highways,
and airfield pavements, and so on (Chen 1988). Consequently, the
swelling–shrinkage behavior of expansive soils during wetting–
drying cycles has been an extensively investigated subject. Fur-
thermore, in recent years, the possibility of using compacted
expansive mixtures as engineered barriers or buffers for radioac-
tive waste disposal (Alonso et al. 2005, 2011) has attracted growing
interest in this subject.
A number of laboratory cyclic wetting–drying tests have been
conducted to estimate the swelling–shrinkage behavior of ex-
pansive soils. These tests can be grouped into two categories:
alternately soaked and dried tests (Dif and Bluemel 1991; Day
1994; Basma et al. 1996; Fleureau et al. 2002; Tripathy et al. 2002;
Tripathy and Subba Rao 2009; Lin and Cerato 2013), and cyclic
suction-controlled tests (Alonso et al. 2005; Nowamooz and
Masrouri 2008; Nowamooz et al. 2009; Airò Farulla et al. 2010). In
alternately soaked and dried tests, only water contents of soil
specimens are measured directly, therefore the wetting–drying
path is usually quantified in terms of volumetric strain versus
water content; while in cyclic suction-controlled tests, soil speci-
mens are allowed to swell or shrink in equilibrium with a prede-
termined applied suction, therefore the wetting–drying path is
usually characterized by the relationship between volumetric
strain and suction. Regardless of the difference in cyclic wetting–
drying paths, the following consensuses have been reached from
both categories of tests:

Received 17 February 2014. Accepted 22 October 2014.

G. Wang. School of Civil Engineering, Chongqing University, No. 174 Shazhengjie, Shapingba, Chongqing 400044, China.
X. Wei. School of Civil Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, North Section 1 of 2nd Ring Road, Jinniu district, Chengdu 610031, China.
Corresponding author: Xing Wei (e-mail: weixinghl@163.com).

Can. Geotech. J. 52: 783–794 (2015) dx.doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2014-0059 Published at www.nrcresearchpress.com/cgj on 24 October 2014.
 784
1. The swelling or shrinkage potential after several wetting–
drying cycles may reduce or increase significantly compared
with that in the first cycle. Therefore, the assessment of the vol-
ume change behavior of expansive soils in situ without consid-
ering cyclic seasonal fluctuations leads to unreasonable results.
2. Soils reach an equilibrium state after several wetting–drying cy-
cles. Once the equilibrium state is reached, the wetting–drying
path becomes fully reversible whether it is in terms of volumetric
strain versus water content or in terms of volumetric strain ver-
sus suction.
3. Before the equilibrium state is reached, there exists an irrevers-
ible swelling or shrinkage accumulation as the wetting–drying
cycles go on. Whether the accumulated deformation is expan-
Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 47.8.225.124 on 03/28/19. For personal use only.
sion or shrinkage depends on soil properties, initial placement
conditions (initial structure), surcharge or confining pressure,
swelling–shrinkage pattern, etc. The magnitude of accumulated
shrinkage increases with the increase of applied surcharge or
confining pressure; conversely, the magnitude of accumulated
expansion decreases with the increase of applied surcharge or
confining pressure.
An extra and essential feature of constitutive models for expan-
sive soils, which distinguishes them from the constitutive models
for low-plasticity unsaturated soils, is the ability to describe the
swelling–shrinkage behavior during wetting–drying cycles. Gens
and Alonso (1992) and Alonso et al. (1999) presented one of earliest
elastoplastic models for expansive clays, termed Barcelona expan-
Can. Geotech. J. 2015.52:783-794.
sive model (BExM). The BExM is based on the consideration of two
structure levels of expansive clays: the microstructural level at
which swelling of active minerals takes place, and the macro-
structural level responsible for major structural rearrangement
(Alonso et al. 1999). The formulations of the BExM include defini-
tions of behavior of the macrostructural level, behavior of the
microstructural level, and mechanical coupling between the two
structural levels. Within the BExM framework, a complete model
for expansive soils can be established by combining existing
models for each structural level (Mašín 2013). Such models are
therefore called double-structure models. Recent advances of
double-structure models include the extension of model formu-
lations to more general stress space or more complex stress paths
(Sánchez et al. 2005), and consideration for the coupling effect
between thermal, mechanical, and hydraulic behavior (Alonso
et al. 2011; Gens et al. 2011; Della Vecchia et al. 2013; Mašín 2013).
Beyond the scope of double-structure models, some constitutive
models suitable for special practical cases were also developed
for the sake of simplicity, in which the independent behavior of
macrostructure and microstructure of expansive soils were not
considered. For example, Cui et al. (2002) assumed realistically
that the role of macroporosity in swelling of dense compacted
soils may be neglected, and developed a global mechanical model
based on the microstructural model. Similarly, Koliji et al. (2008) and
Najser et al. (2012) described the behavior of double porosity lumpy
soils using a model based on the microstructural behavior, with
phenomenological incorporation of the influence of macrostructure.
The BExM framework successfully explained some essential fea-
tures of expansive soils and received wide acceptance. However,
double-structure models are often burdened with complexity and
parameters that are difficult to obtain. Unconventional experi-
mental tests, which are usually difficult to conduct for many lab-
oratories, are required to quantify the microstructure parameters,
and a relative large number of parameters are proposed for mi-
crostructure deformation and coupling function between the two
structure levels. There remains a need for a simple and reliable
method to determine the values of these parameters. Although
Alonso et al. (2005) introduced some simplifications of the original
model (Alonso et al. 1999) to facilitate the determination of the mi-
crostructural parameters, the coupling function and corresponding
parameters are still difficult to determine. This has been one of the
Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 52, 2015
major obstacles to implement this constitutive model into current
geotechnical practice; hence, an alternative approach is necessary.
The primary objective of the present paper is to develop a
mathematical description with a relatively small number of easily
determined parameters for the swelling–shrinkage behavior of
compacted expansive soils during wetting–drying cycles. The
overall philosophy is that the mathematical description and
parameter-determining methodology are developed from a phe-
nomenological perspective, without partitioning global defor-
mation into microstructure deformation and macrostructure
deformation, although the concept of double-level structure has
been adopted to interpret the law and mechanism of the global
deformation phenomena. The presented paper is organized as
follows. First, a decomposition of the swelling–shrinkage strain
due to wetting–drying effects into a reversible component and an
irreversible component is introduced based on experimental facts.
The physical mechanisms of each swelling–shrinkage strain com-
ponent are revealed through the double-level structure of expan-
sive clays and its evolution along with mechanical and hydraulic
loading. Based on the physical mechanism, the mathematical de-
scriptions of the two components are presented, which can be
combined with the Barcelona basic model (BBM) or any other model
for unsaturated clays, leading to a complete constitutive model for
compacted expansive clays. The determination of the model pa-
rameters are discussed subsequently in details. Finally, the valid-
ity of the proposed model is confirmed through simulating two
sets of cyclic suction-controlled tests and an alternately wetting
and drying test.
Two swelling–shrinkage strain components
The swelling–shrinkage behavior of expansive clays can be well
understood in laboratory cyclic suction-controlled tests, in which
wetting–drying cycles are performed by cyclic varying applied
suction. Figure 1 shows two typical relationships between volu-
metric strain and suction cycle number separately published by
Alonso et al. (2005) and Nowamooz et al. (2009), where the com-
pressive strains are considered positive. In both tests, the surcharge
pressure remained constant and is less than the preconsolida-
tion pressure of the specimen at saturated state to ensure the
volumetric strain was induced only by the effect of wetting and
drying. To reduce the test duration, suction was changed in a
single step between the lower and higher values of each half cycle
in both studies. Airò Farulla et al. (2010) have shown that the size
of applied suction increments has little influence on eventual
volumetric strain. As can be seen clearly from Fig. 1, the samples
swell during wetting phase and shrink during drying phase alter-
nately in each cycle, but the volumetric strain generated in the
two phases of a cycle is not fully reversible. The samples exhibit
shrinkage (Fig. 1a) or swelling (Fig. 1b) accumulation during cyclic
wetting–drying processes. The rate of the volumetric strain accu-
mulation reduces, and the samples tend towards a nearly revers-
ible or elastic-like state as the numbers of wetting–drying cycles
increase. The majority of the accumulated volumetric strain oc-
curs during the first wetting–drying cycle. As summarized earlier
in the text, similar phenomena have been confirmed by many
other experimental studies performed by Dif and Bluemel (1991),
Day (1994), Al-Homoud et al. (1995), Basma et al. (1996), Alonso
et al. (2005), Nowamooz and Masrouri (2008), and Airò Farulla
et al. (2010).
The volumetric strain (swelling–shrinkage strain) due to the
effect of wetting and drying is denoted as ␧vs in this work, since
the magnitude of wetting–drying effect is in terms of suction s. As
demonstrated in Fig. 1, ␧vs can be decomposed into two different
components, “a reversible swelling–shrinkage strain component”,
denoted as ␧vs,re, and “an irreversible swelling–shrinkage strain
component”, denoted as ␧vs,ir, namely,
Published by NRC Research Press
 Wang and Wei
Fig. 1. Decomposition of volumetric strain induced by cyclic wetting and drying: (a) Alonso et al. (2005); (b) Nowamooz et al. (2009).
␧vs, volumetric strain induced by cyclic wetting and drying; ␧vs,re and ␧vs,ir, reversible and irreversible components of ␧vs, respectively;
␴v, vertical surcharge pressure.
Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 47.8.225.124 on 03/28/19. For personal use only.
Can. Geotech. J. 2015.52:783-794.
(1) ␧vs ⫽ ␧vs,re ⫹ ␧vs,ir
The reversible swelling–shrinkage strain component ␧vs,re always
leads to contraction during drying and expansion during wetting,
and shows a synchronous change with the cyclic change of suc-
tion. It is further worth noting that the same suction change in
each cycle induces nearly the same change of the reversible
swelling–shrinkage strain component. This implies that the re-
versible swelling–shrinkage strain component mainly depends on
the current suction. The irreversible swelling–shrinkage strain
component ␧vs,ir may be swelling or shrinkage, and is generated
mainly in the early stage of the wetting–drying process. The accu-
mulation rate of the irreversible swelling–shrinkage strain compo-
nent reduces sharply with increasing number of wetting–drying cycles.
Physics of two swelling–shrinkage strain
components
Theoretical background
The soil structure is an important aspect to be considered when
studying expansive soils. It is well accepted that expansive clays
have two distinct structure levels, i.e., microstructure level and
macrostructure level. As illustrated in Fig. 2, clay minerals form
individual elementary particle arrangements in a certain config-
uration (for example, parallel or flocculent configuration); further
elementary particle arrangements join together to make individ-
ual aggregates. The expansive clays are made up of aggregates and
other silt or sand grains (sometimes). The microstructure is asso-
ciated with the internal structure of aggregates, whereas the mac-
rostructure is associated with the macroscopic soil skeleton formed
by aggregates and other grains. The micropore corresponds to the
intra-aggregate pore, whereas the macropore corresponds to the
inter-aggregate (grain) pore.
Previous studies (Simms and Yanful 2001; Cuisinier and Laloui
2004; Sivakumar et al. 2006; Lloret and Villar 2007; Miao et al.
2007; Thom et al. 2007; Monroy et al. 2010; Romero et al. 2011) have
shown that loading under constant suction or constant water
785
content influence predominantly macroporosity, whereas hydraulic
loading (wetting or drying) influence mainly microporosity, and
also have an effect on macroporosity, depending on the stability
of macrostructure and the intensity of the wetting–drying effect.
Figure 3a gives a typical mercury intrusion porosimetry (MIP) test
result published by Monroy et al. (2010), which shows the evolu-
tion of microstructure with wetting. The microporosity increases
with decreasing suction due to swelling of aggregates. The mac-
roporosity, however, remains largely unchanged, except for the
last step of wetting from suction 40 to 0 kPa, in which the porosity
becomes monomodal, and the double porosity structure is not
clear any more. Note that although the porosity is monomodal
upon saturation, the bimodal porosity can be recovered by subse-
quent drying (Simms and Yanful 2001; Cuisinier and Laloui 2004;
Romero et al. 2011). Figure 3b gives a typical result of microstruc-
ture of compacted kaolin after static compaction to different
static pressures published by Sivakumar et al. (2006). The macro-
porosity decreases with increasing load, which implies that the
macropores closed up with increasing load. However, the micro-
porosity slightly increases with increasing compaction effort. A
rational interpretation of the latter phenomenon is that the size
of a proportion of macropores enters into the micropore-size range
as a result of the closure of macropores; therefore, the volume of
the intra-aggregate pores possibly remains unchanged. As noted
by Mašín (2013), the result given by Fig. 3b does not imply that the
aggregates are undeformable with load. Rather, it implies that the
aggregate deformation is reversible under mechanical loading be-
cause the porosity of the samples compacted to different stresses
was measured on samples removed from the testing apparatuses,
and thus on unloaded samples.
It is evident that the response of aggregates under mechanical
and hydraulic loading is crucial for the deformation behavior of
expansive soils and is the key feature distinguishing expansive
clays from nonactive clays. The deformation of aggregates is con-
trolled by physicochemical interactions at particle level and can
be assumed dependent mainly on hydraulic loading and indepen-
dent of macrostructural effects. Furthermore, the deformation of
Published by NRC Research Press
 786
Fig. 2. Illustration of double structure of expansive clays.
Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 47.8.225.124 on 03/28/19. For personal use only.
Fig. 3. (a) Development of pore-size distribution of compacted London clay with wetting (Monroy et al. 2010); (b) pore-size distribution of
Can. Geotech. J. 2015.52:783-794.
compacted kaolin after static compaction to different static pressures (Sivakumar et al. 2006). ␦enw, change in intruded void ration; ␦(logx),
change of logarithm of entrance pore diameter.
aggregates was usually assumed purely volumetric and reversible
under both mechanical and hydraulic loading (e.g., Gens and
Alonso 1992). The postulation that the aggregate deformation is
reversible can be confirmed directly by digital image analysis of
environmental scanning electronic microscope (ESEM) micro-
graphs, in which the volume change of aggregates can be ex-
tracted. Romero and Simms (2008) and Airò Farulla et al. (2010)
have reported that the aggregate deformation shows good revers-
ibility by this method. Besides the elastic-like behavior of aggre-
gates under loading, the aggregates with unstable structure may
break down. Katti and Shanmugasundaram (2001) observed that
the increase in swelling and reduction of swelling pressure due to
swelling in the clay samples result in appreciable reduction in
particle size. Thus, the swelling results in the breakdown of some
unstable aggregates into smaller sized ones. In this study, the
unstable aggregate was treated as an assemblage of smaller stable
aggregates; therefore, the postulation that the aggregate deforma-
tion is reversible is still effective.
If we ignore the internal complexity of aggregates and treat
each aggregate as a discrete body (like a sand or silt grain), the
Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 52, 2015
macrostructure of expansive soils could be envisaged as a granular-like
skeleton formed by individual aggregates. Furthermore, unlike
sand or silt grains, the aggregates would swell or shrink when
suction or water content changes. Thus, the deformation of ex-
pansive soils is due to two parts: (i) the rearrangement of the
granular-like skeleton formed by the aggregates; and (ii) the self-
deformation of the aggregates. To be consistent with the view that
an aggregate is treated as a discrete body, a “macrostructure void
ratio”, denoted as eM to distinguish from the macrovoid ratio eM
that is more conventional in expansive soil mechanics, was intro-
duced to quantify the inter-aggregate porosity for expansive soils.
Similar to the void ratio for granular materials, eM is defined as the
ratio of total inter-aggregate pore volume Vp,M to total apparent
volume of aggregates VA, namely,
(2) eM ⫽ Vp,M /VA
Note that VA includes both solid volume, Vs, and intra-aggregate
pore volume, Vp,m, in aggregates, i.e.,
Published by NRC Research Press
 Wang and Wei 787

(3) VA ⫽ Vs ⫹ Vp,m Fig. 4. Physical mechanism of reversible swelling–shrinkage

component.

The usually adopted macrovoid ratio, eM = Vp,M/Vs (e.g., Sánchez

et al. 2005; Gens et al. 2011), is different from the macrostructure
void ratio eM in this work. Mašín (2013) also adopted the same void
ratio definition as eq. (2) in his double structure hydromechanical
coupling model for unsaturated expansive clays. Based on the
definition of eM, the change of volumetric strain induced by hy-
draulic loading under constant net stress can be deduced:

d关VA共1 ⫹ eM兲兴 1 ⫹ eM deM

(4) d␧vs ⫽ ⫽ d␧vs,A ⫹
VA共1 ⫹ eM0兲 1 ⫹ eM0 1 ⫹ eM0
Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 47.8.225.124 on 03/28/19. For personal use only.

where ␧vs,A is the volumetric strain of aggregates; and eM and eM0
are the current and initial macrostructure void ratios, respec-
tively. The first term at the right-hand side of eq. (3) corresponds
to the apparent deformation due to microstructure change, and
the second term corresponds to the apparent deformation due to
macrostructure change.

Mechanism of reversible swelling–shrinkage strain

component
The mechanism of the reversible swelling–shrinkage strain
components can be well interpreted from the reversibility of the
Can. Geotech. J. 2015.52:783-794.

aggregate deformation. Figure 4 shows two idealized configura-

tions of soil skeleton in which circular grains represent aggre-
gates. It is clearly demonstrated from Fig. 4 that the inter-grain
pore (macropore) volume increases in the same fraction as the
volume of grains, and that the volume change of individual grains
results in no change of the macrostructure void ratio eM, provided
that the skeleton configuration remains unchanged. As ␧vs,A is
usually assumed reversible, the reversible swelling–shrinkage strain
component can be assumed to be the first term at the right-hand
side of eq. (4), namely,
1 ⫹ eM
(5) d␧vs,re ⫽ d␧vs,A
1 ⫹ eM0
Equation (5) explains why the deformation of expansive soils
exhibits a fully reversible behavior only when the soil reaches an
equilibrium state after several wetting–drying cycles. At the equi-
librium state, the macrostructure void ratio remains constant;
therefore, the apparent volume change of the skeleton remains
proportional to the volume change of the aggregates.
It should be noted that there still exists the breakage of some
unstable aggregate assemblages during wetting and drying (Katti
and Shanmugasundaram 2001). As pointed out in the previous
section, the unstable aggregate is regarded as a macrostruc-
tural element assembled by stable aggregates; therefore, the
breakage effect is reflected in the change of the macrostructure
void ratio eM.
Mechanism of irreversible swelling–shrinkage strain
component
Expansive soil needs to rearrange its macroconfiguration to reach
an equilibrium macrostructure during a cyclic wetting–drying pro-
cess. It can be realistically assumed that the rearrangement of
the macroconfiguration is irreversible; therefore, the irreversible
swelling–shrinkage strain component can be quantified by the
second term at the right–hand side of eq. (4), namely,
deM
(6) d␧vs,ir ⫽
1 ⫹ eM0
Basma et al. (1996) and Tripathy et al. (2002) have shown that the
void ratio remains at a consistent value after equilibrium is
reached, and is independent of initial compaction densities. Ac-
cording to this experimental fact, no matter how the irreversible
swelling–shrinkage strain component evolves in intermediate
wetting–drying processes, its eventual value depends on the dif-
ference in soil macrostructures at current state and the equi-
librium state. This is the reason why soil with an initial dense
structure is prone to swelling accumulation, whereas the soil
with an initial loose structure is prone to shrinkage accumula-
tion. Figure 5 schematically illustrates the generation mechanism
of the irreversible swelling–shrinkage strain component. Figure 5a
shows a loose macrostructure with unstable arrangement of
aggregates. The wetting–drying effect results in the collapse of
the macro-skeleton, and the soil with a macrostructure in Fig. 5a
would accumulate shrinkage deformation because of the diminu-
tion of relatively large inter-aggregate voids. Figure 5b is an envis-
aged arrangement of aggregates in equilibrium for the soil, and
Fig. 5c shows a soil with a macrostructure denser than equilib-
rium. The inter-aggregate porosity and macrostructure void ratio
of the soil in Fig. 5c would have to increase in a cyclic wetting–
drying process to reach the equilibrium state; therefore, the soil
would accumulate swelling deformation.
Simple model for expansive clays
The mathematical formulations will be presented for the two
swelling–shrinkage strain components based on the presented
mechanisms. A complete model can be developed combining the
presented formulations with an existing model for unsaturated
soils with low plasticity. Discussing the constitutive model for
unsaturated soils is beyond the scope of this paper; therefore, the
simple but fundamental BBM presented by Alonso et al. (1990) is
employed in this paper for illustrative purpose. Furthermore, for
the sake of simplicity only the formulation for isotropic stress
states (or oedometer compression stress states) is presented, which
can be extended to triaxial stress states or other stress states fol-
lowing the approach of Alonso et al. (1990).

Published by NRC Research Press

 788 Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 52, 2015

Fig. 5. Physical mechanism of irreversible swelling–shrinkage component: (a) open macrostructure; (b) envisaged macrostructure in
equilibrium; (c) closed macrostructure.
Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 47.8.225.124 on 03/28/19. For personal use only.

Model framework
Net volumetric stress p and suction s are adopted as the two Fig. 6. Loading–collapse yield locus and loading–collapse path.
basic stress variables for isotropic stress states. For oedometer
Can. Geotech. J. 2015.52:783-794.

compression stress states, net vertical stress ␴v is adopted to re-

place net volumetric stress p, and the format of the mathematical
formulations remains unchanged. The volumetric strain can be
induced due to two different and superposed mechanisms. The
first mechanism is associated with change in net stress p or stress
yielding, known as “mechanical loading mechanism”, and the
second is associated with change in suction s, known as “hydraulic
loading mechanism”. The strain can be decomposed into two parts,
respectively, corresponding to the two loading mechanisms, which
leads to the following additive strain decomposition:

(7) ␧v ⫽ ␧vp ⫹ ␧vs ⫽ ␧vp ⫹ ␧vs,ir ⫹ ␧vs,re

where ␧vp is the mechanical loading induced strain; and ␧vs is the
hydraulic loading induced strain (i.e., the swelling–shrinkage
strain). It should be pointed out that ␧vp can also be induced by a
change in suction s, which may result in stress yielding (wetting
induced collapse), because stress yield locus or yield stress de- where p0 and p∗0 are, respectively, preconsolidation pressures at
pends on suction. For this situation, the name “mechanical load- current and saturated states; pc is a reference stress; ␬ is the slope
ing induced strain” still holds valid, and the reason will be of the unloading–reloading line in an e–lnp space and supposedly
explained later. remains constant for both saturated and unsaturated states; ␭(s) is
The formulations of ␧vp, ␧vs,re, and ␧vs,ir will be specified in the the slope of the virgin consolidation line at a suction s; ␭(0) is the
following section to present a complete model for unsaturated slope of the virgin saturated consolidation line; r is the ratio of
expansive clays. The formulations of ␧vs,re and ␧vs,ir are critical for ␭(∞)/␭(0); and ␤ defines the increasing of stiffness against suction.
reasonable prediction of the swelling–shrinkage behavior. Once the preconsolidation pressure p0 is defined, which serves as
yielding stress, the formulation of ␧vp can be given within the
Model ingredients regime of the plasticity theory as follows:
The formulation of ␧vp can follow any common unsaturated soil
model. The loading–collapse (LC) yielding surface in the BBM is ␬ ␭(s) ⫺ ␬
e p
employed to combine the suction together with the external stress to (10) d␧vp ⫽ d␧vp ⫹ d␧vp ⫽ dp ⫹ 具d(p ⫺ p0)典
(1 ⫹ e0)p (1 ⫹ e0)p
describe mechanical behavior of unsaturated soils. Figure 6 shows
the LC yielding locus in p–s space, which is defined as follows ␬
e
(Alonso et al. 1990): (11) d␧vp ⫽ dp
(1 ⫹ e0)p

(8) p0 ⫽ pc 冉冊p∗0
pc
[␭(0)⫺␬]/[␭(s)⫺␬]
(12) p
d␧vp ⫽
␭(s) ⫺ ␬
(1 ⫹ e0)p
具d(p ⫺ p0)典

e p
with where d␧vp and d␧vp are, respectively, the elastic and plastic parts
of d␧vp; e0 is the initial void ratio, and its micro and macro parts
(9) ␭(s) ⫽ ␭(0)[(1 ⫺ r)exp(⫺ ␤s) ⫹ r] are not distinguished here for the sake of simplicity; 具 典 is the

Published by NRC Research Press

 Wang and Wei 789

Macauley symbol, i.e., 具x典 ⫽ x for x > 0 and 具x典 ⫽ 0 for x ≤ 0. It is Fig. 7. Illustration of cyclic drying–wetting paths and coupling of
clear from Fig. 6 and eq. (8) that both an increase in p and a wetting and LC yielding.
decrease in s may result in a decrease in p0, which leads to plastic
yielding. That is why ␧vp can also be induced by a change in suction.
The following relations are suggested for ␧vs,re, based on the
experimental facts and presented mechanism.

1 ⫹ eM ds
(13) d␧vs,re ⫽ d␧vs,A ⫽ cre (1 ⫺ ␧vp ⫺ ␧vs,ir)
1 ⫹ eM0 s ⫹ pat

cre,0
(14) cre ⫽ exp(⫺ ␣1p/pat)
1 ⫹ e0
Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 47.8.225.124 on 03/28/19. For personal use only.

where cre is the reversible swelling–shrinkage coefficient depen-

dent on p; cre,0 is the reversible swelling–shrinkage coefficient
when p = 0; ␣1 defines the decreasing rate of cre along with the
increasing of p; and pat is the atmosphere pressure. Because only
␧vp and ␧vs,ir can induce change in the macrovoid ratio as analyzed
in the preceding context, 共1 ⫹ eM兲/共1 ⫹ eM0兲 is replaced by (1 – Model parameters
␧vp – ␧vs,ir). There are 11 parameters in the presented model, as listed in
The change rate of ␧vs,ir is assumed to be decreasing gradually Table 1, including six LC yielding parameters and five wetting–
drying parameters. The determination of the LC yielding param-
with its accumulated magnitude as follows:
eters is the same as in the BBM and is no longer described here.
The wetting–drying parameters can be determined through a se-
|ds|
(15) d␧vs,ir ⫽ cir exp(⫺ ␣2 |␧vs,ir |) ries of suction-controlled tests under different net mean stress.
Can. Geotech. J. 2015.52:783-794.

s ⫹ pat
The determination method is discussed in detail as follows.
The value of ⌬␧vs,re induced by a single-step change in suction
cir,0 p
(16) cir ⫽ ln from an initial value, s1, to a final value, s2, at the constant applied
1 ⫹ e0 pr stress, p, can be obtained by integrating eq. (13):

ⱍ 冉 冊
s2
where cir is the irreversible swelling–shrinkage coefficient; cir,0 is cre s2 ⫹ pat
a material constant; ␣2 defines the decreasing rate of cir along with (18) ⌬␧vs,re ⫽ ln (1 ⫺ ␧vp ⫺ ␧vs,ir)
s1 1 ⫹ e0 s1 ⫹ pat
the increasing of ␧vs,ir; pr is the critical swelling stress. ␧vs,ir is
contractive when p > pr, whereas ␧vs,ir is expansive when p < pr.
Equations (15) and (16) can well reproduce the dependence of the Equation (18) shows a fully reversible behavior of the volumetric
irreversible swelling–shrinkage strain component on surcharge deformation with the change of suction providing that ␧vp and
pressure and wetting–drying history. In the BExM, this depen- ␧vs,ir remain constant. Given eq. (18) and a suction-change step, cre
dence is represented by involving a p/p0 term in the microstructure– could be determined by fitting the relationship between ⌬␧vs,re
macrostructure coupling functions fI and fD (Alonso et al. 1999). and the corresponding suction change (s1 to s2). A preliminarily
Figure 7 shows two wetting–drying paths under constant net estimated value of ␧vs,ir can be used in curve fitting. By fitting the
mean stress, indicated as p1 and p2, respectively. The p1 path is relationship between cre and p/pat under different net mean stresses,
located initially inside the LC surface, therefore only ␧vs is gener- cre,0 and ␣1 can be determined.
ated; whereas the p2 path intersects the initial LC surface, where Once the reversible swelling–shrinkage parameters cre,0 and ␣1
suction decrease in the first wetting step would activate the LC are calibrated, the time series of ␧vs,re can be calculated; conse-
quently, the accumulation curves of ␧vs,ir can be extracted from
surface, and thus both ␧vp and ␧vs would be generated. To avoid
the curves of ␧vs (see Fig. 1) for calibrating cir,0, ␣2, and pr. For the
this coupling deformation mechanism and provide convenience
case of shrinkage accumulation (cir > 0, ␧vs,ir > 0), integrating
of data interpretation, the surcharge pressures in most cyclic wet-
eq. (15) along the wetting–drying path from the initial state to the
ting–drying tests were selected with values less than the precon- current state leads to following relationship.
solidation stress values at saturated states.
The p∗0 term in eq. (8) defines the position of the LC surface, and 1
varies in value with the development of plastic strain (hardening (19) ␧vs,ir ⫽ ln(1 ⫹ ␣2cirS)
␣2
law). A coupling hardening law of p∗0 , which can reflect the change
of macrostructure due to wetting–drying effect, is suggested.
with
dp∗0 1 ⫹ e0
共d␧vp
ⱍ ⱍ
⫹ d␧vs,ir兲
兺 ln冉 s ⫹ p 冊
p
(17) ⫽ s2 ⫹ pat
p∗0 ␭(0) ⫺ ␬
(20) S⫽
1 at

Note that the hardening law here is not identical to that in the
BExM. The total value of ␧vs is employed as an internal variable in
the BExM, while only its irreversible component ␧vs,ir is employed
here. This is consistent with the mechanism of the two swelling–
shrinkage strain components because only ␧vs,ir quantifies the
rearrangement of macroconfiguration.
where 兺 is the sum of each suction change step during the previ-
ous wetting–drying process; S can be considered as a comprehen-
sive variable measuring the experienced wetting–drying effect in
history. The terms ␣2 and cir can be determined by fitting the path
of ␧vs,ir versus S. For the case of swelling accumulation (cir < 0,

Published by NRC Research Press

 790 Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 52, 2015

Table 1. List of presented model parameters. Table 2. Model parameters for two expansive clays.
Category Symbol Description Category Symbol Alonso et al. Nowamooz et al.
LC yielding ␴v∗ or p0∗ Initial saturated preconsolidation stress BBMⴱ ␴v∗ (kPa) 650 600
pc Reference stress pc (kPa) 0.008 200
␭(0) Saturated virgin compression index ␭(0) 0.25 0.19
␬ Elastic compression or rebound index ␬ 0.045 0.04
␤ Parameter that defines the curvature of ␤ (MPa−1) 0.0544 0.60
the LC yield curve r 0.85 0.70
r Parameter that defines the limiting value Presented cre,0/(1 + e0) 0.02 0.012
of the compression index for high model ␣1 0.001 0.002
suctions cir,0/(1 + e0) 0.007 0.041
Wetting and cre,0 Irreversible swelling–shrinkage coefficient pr (kPa) 90 65
drying when p = 0 ␣2 25 70
BExMⴱ ␬m
Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 47.8.225.124 on 03/28/19. For personal use only.

␣1 Parameter that defines the decreasing rate 0.028–0.038 0.021–0.025

of cre along with the increasing of p fI1 −0.12 0.519
cir,0 Irreversible swelling–shrinkage constant fI2 0.14 −0.460
pr Critical swelling pressure KI 100 10
␣2 Parameter that defines the decreasing rate XI 0.158 0.15
of cir along with the increasing of ␧vs,ir fD1 1 −1.161
fD2 −0.17 1.183
KD 400 10
XD 0.158 0.15
␧vs,ir < 0), ␣2 and cir can be determined by the same method using ⴱParameters for BExM model are adopted from Alonso et al. (2005) and

Nowamooz et al. (2009).

the absolute values of ␧vs,ir and cir. Once the value of cir at a
different net mean stress is obtained, cir,0 and pr could be obtained
by fitting the relationship between cir and p.
(25) fD ⫽
f D1 ⫺ f D2
冋冉 ␴v
tan⫺1 KD ∗ ⫺ XD 冊册 ⫹
f D1 ⫹ f D2
Can. Geotech. J. 2015.52:783-794.

Since an estimated value of ␧vs,ir is used in the step of calibrat- ␲ ␴v0 2

ing reversible swelling–shrinkage parameters, a repeated process
is suggested to be conducted using the corrected value of ␧vs,ir for
better accuracy.
Performance of presented model
It is necessary to show the model performance by simulating
selected test results. Cyclic wetting and drying test results of ex-
pansive clays reported by Alonso et al. (2005), Nowamooz et al.
(2009), and Tripathy and Subba Rao (2009) are adopted for the
verification of the presented model. To illustrate capabilities of
the presented model, both the predictions of the BExM and the
presented model are given for comparison. For clarity, an over-
view of the formulations of the BExM is described briefly at first,
and then simulations of these tests are conducted.
Overview of swelling–shrinkage strain calculation in BExM
The mechanical loading induced strain is calculated by the LC
yielding mechanism in the BExM, which is the same as in the BBM.
In the BExM, the swelling–shrinkage strain induced by wetting
and drying is calculated as
(21) d␧pvM ⫽ f I␧vm
e
if d(p ⫹ s) ≥ 0
(22) d␧pvM ⫽ f Dd␧vm
e
if d(p ⫹ s) ⬍ 0
fI1, fI2, KI, XI, fD1, fD2, KD and XD are the parameters of the functions;
and ␴∗v0 is the initial saturated preconsolidation stress. There are
nine parameters for computing the swelling–shrinkage strain in
the BExM as listed in Table 2.
Simulation of cyclic suction-controlled tests reported by
Alonso et al. (2005)
Alonso et al. (2005) reports three cyclic suction-controlled tests
on bentonite–sand mixtures (a dry mass ratio of 80% bentonite
and 20% sand). Bentonite powder has following physical charac-
teristics: liquid limit is 93%; plastic limit is 47%; density of solid
particles is 2.70 g/cm3. The uniform sand in the mixture has a
uniformity coefficient of Cu = 2 and an effective size of D10 =
0.21 mm.
The samples were statically compacted in oedometer cells, and
then vertical net stresses were applied. Vertical net stresses of 98,
196, and 396 kPa, lower than the saturated preconsolidation stress
of the samples (650 kPa), were selected to apply for three tests,
respectively. The initial suction of the three samples was 80 MPa.
Once the deformation of the samples under initial suction was
stable, cyclic-changed suction was applied. Suctions were changed
in a single step between a low value of 4–6 MPa and a high value
of 120–135 MPa.
Volumetric deformations for these tests are plotted in Fig. 8.
The cyclic wetting and drying paths of these tests were simulated

(23) e
␧vm ⫽ 冉 ␬m
1 ⫹ e0 冊冋 d共p ⫹ s兲
p⫹s
册 by the presented model and BExM, respectively. Material param-
eters of the two models are given in Table 2. Simulation results of
both models are also plotted in Fig. 8 for comparison. The pre-
sented model performs well in predicting the two tests at vertical
where ␧pvM is the plastic macrostructural volumetric strain; ␧vme
is net stresses of 196 and 396 kPa. However, the comparison is not so
the microstructural volumetric strain; ␬m is the elastic compress- good for the test at net vertical stress of 98 kPa because this test
ibility index of microstructure; and fI and fD are the micro–macro has an initial large swelling strain (about 9%), which has an
coupling functions. The formulations of fI and fD can be obtained opposite direction to the successive strain accumulation. For
by interpolating the experimental data points. The sigmoidal func- simplicity, the presented model postulates that the irreversible
tions as follows are commonly adopted (e.g., Alonso et al. 2005). swelling–shrinkage strain component is gradually monotoni-
cally accumulated; obviously, this is not in accordance with this

冋冉 冊册
f I1 ⫺ f I2 ␴v f I1 ⫹ f I2 special case. Although the presented model failed in reproducing
(24) fI ⫽ tan⫺1 KI ∗ ⫺ XI ⫹ the intermediate strain path, the predicted eventual strain mag-
␲ ␴v0 2
nitude was in accordance with the test result.

Published by NRC Research Press

 Wang and Wei 791

Fig. 8. Simulation of cyclic suction-controlled tests of Alonso et al. (2005): (a) ␴v = 396 kPa; (b) ␴v = 196 kPa; (c) ␴v = 98 kPa.
Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 47.8.225.124 on 03/28/19. For personal use only.
Can. Geotech. J. 2015.52:783-794.

Simulation of cyclic suction-controlled tests reported by the clayey soil has the following characteristics: liquid limit is
Nowamooz et al. (2009) 85.6%; plasticity index is 31.9%; specific gravity is 2.6; and clay
Nowamooz et al. (2009) performed experimental studies on a content (<2 mm) is 72%. The preconsolidation pressure of the soil
natural French expansive clayey soil. The experimental sample of at saturated state is about 600 kPa. Three cyclic wetting–drying

Published by NRC Research Press

 792
Fig. 9. Simulation of cyclic suction-controlled tests of Nowamooz et al. (2009): (a) ␴v = 20 kPa; (b) ␴v = 40 kPa; (c) ␴v = 60 kPa.
Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 47.8.225.124 on 03/28/19. For personal use only.
Can. Geotech. J. 2015.52:783-794.
tests were performed at vertical net stresses of 20, 40, and 60 kPa,
respectively, with suction change between a low value of 0 and a high
value of 2 MPa. The test procedure is in common with that of Alonso
et al. (2005). The volumetric strains of the three samples are shown in
Fig. 9 where the swelling strains are considered positive. The samples
showed a swelling accumulation as a result of successive cycles, and
Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 52, 2015
the volumetric strains converged towards an equilibrium stage. A
completely reversible behavior was reached for the test of ␴v = 60 kPa,
whereas one or two additional cycles would have been necessary for
tests of ␴v = 20 and 40 kPa to reach completely reversible stages.
The predictions of the proposed model and BExM are drawn in
Fig. 9 against test results. With one group of parameters, the pro-
Published by NRC Research Press
 Wang and Wei
Fig. 10. Simulation of wetting–drying test involving full shrinkage and partial shrinkage of Tripathy and Subba Rao (2009). s, suction;
w, water content; ␴v, vertical surcharge pressure.
Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 47.8.225.124 on 03/28/19. For personal use only.
posed model shows good prediction capability for all the three
Can. Geotech. J. 2015.52:783-794.
cyclic wetting–drying paths.
Simulation of alternately soaked and dried tests reported
by Tripathy and Subba Rao (2009)
Tripathy and Subba Rao (2009) investigated the effect of changes in
shrinkage pattern on the swelling–shrinkage behavior of com-
pacted expansive soils by alternately soaked and dried wetting–
drying tests. The study soil is a highly expansive soil from the
Northern Karnataka state of India. The samples were statically
compacted and had an initial suction of 370 kPa. The tests were
conducted in a fixed-ring oedometer cell. Samples were allowed to
swell after being inundated with distilled water. After the swell-
ing process was complete in about 3 days, water was removed
from the oedometer cell and the shrinkage process was started.
Figure 10 shows one of the test results for the sample subjected to
wetting–drying cycles involving full swelling – full shrinkage and
full swelling – partial shrinkage cycles. In their study, suction in
soil specimen is not controlled, only the water contents of soil
specimens at the reversal points of wetting–drying cycles were
measured. A pre-established suction–water content relationship
(SWCC) for the soil was used to obtain the information on soil
suction corresponding to the measured water contents at the rever-
sal points. These suction values were used in the model simulation.
The tests were simulated using the presented model, and the
results were depicted in Fig. 10. The swelling–shrinkage parame-
ters used in the simulation are cre = 0.022, cir = –1.2, and ␣2 = 500.
The model predictions agree with the test results whether for full
swelling – full shrinkage cycles or full swelling – partial shrinkage
cycles. Some unfavorable deviations between the test result and
the model prediction may be caused by the hysteresis character-
istics of SWCC, the variation of SWCC during wetting–drying pro-
cess due to macrostructure change, and the uncertainty in the
water content measurements, and so on. Generally speaking, the
model performance is acceptable for this complicated wetting–
drying path.
Summary and conclusions
A straightforward approach for modelling the cyclic volume
change behavior of expansive soils during wetting–drying cycles
is presented for practical application. It was achieved by decom-
posing the swelling–shrinkage strain of expansive soils into a
793
reversible component and an irreversible component with distinc-
tive physical background.
The reversible swelling–shrinkage strain component always
leads to contraction during drying and expansion during wetting,
shows a synchronous change with the cyclic change of suction,
and mainly depends on current suction. The irreversible swelling–
shrinkage strain component may be swelling or shrinkage, and is
generated mainly in the early stage of a wetting–drying process.
The accumulation rate of the irreversible swelling–shrinkage strain
component reduces sharply with increasing number of wetting–
drying cycles. The eventually accumulated magnitude of the irre-
versible swelling–shrinkage strain component depends on the
difference in soil macrostructures between the initial state and
the equilibrium state.
The mechanisms of the two swelling–shrinkage strain compo-
nents have been explained based on the double-level structure of
expansive soils and its evolution with mechanical loading and
hydraulic loading. The reversible component is originated from
the reversible deformation behavior of clay aggregates under stress
and suction change. The relationship between global volume
change of soil and the volume change of aggregates is deduced by
a simple envisaged macro-skeleton that consists of deformable
circular grains. The irreversible swelling–shrinkage strain compo-
nent is associated with the irreversible rearrangement of macro-
structure. There exists an equilibrium state for expansive soils,
independent of the initial compaction conditions. The macrocon-
figuration rearrangement for approaching the equilibrium state
during cyclic wetting and drying is the generation mechanism of
the irreversible swelling–shrinkage strain component. That can
also explain why soil with dense structure is prone to accumu-
lated irreversible expansion, whereas the soil with initially loose
structure is prone to accumulated irreversible contraction.
The mathematical formulations of the two swelling–shrinkage
strain components were presented based on their characteristics
and physical mechanism. A complete model was developed com-
bining the presented formulation with the simple but fundamen-
tal BBM for unsaturated soils with low plasticity. A step-by-step
procedure was presented for calibrating the model parameters
from lab-measured apparent deformations, for which microstruc-
ture measure is unnecessary. The performance of the presented
model is validated by simulating two sets of cyclic suction-controlled
Published by NRC Research Press
 794
tests as well as a soaked and dried wetting–drying test with irreg-
ular amplitudes of cyclic water content changes.
Acknowledgement
The present study is financially supported by the National Natural
Science Foundation of China (No. 51209179, No. 2010CB732103).
References
Airò Farulla, C., Ferrari, A., and Romero, E. 2010. Volume change behaviour of a
compacted scaly clay during cyclic suction changes. Canadian Geotechnical
Journal, 47(6): 688–703. doi:10.1139/T09-138.
Al-Homoud, A.S., Basma, A.A., Husein Malkawi, A.I., and Al Bashabsheh, M.A.
1995. Cyclic swelling behavior of clays. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering,
121(7): 562–565. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1995)121:7(562).
Alonso, E.E., Gens, A., and Josa, A. 1990. A constitutive model for partially satu-
Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 47.8.225.124 on 03/28/19. For personal use only.
rated soils. Géotechnique, 40(3): 405–430. doi:10.1680/geot.1990.40.3.405.
Alonso, E.E., Vaunat, J., and Gens, A. 1999. Modelling the mechanical behaviour
of expansive clays. Engineering Geology, 54: 173–183. doi:10.1016/S0013-7952
(99)00079-4.
Alonso, E.E., Romero, E., Hoffmann, C., and García-Escudero, E. 2005. Expansive
bentonite-sand mixtures in cyclic controlled-suction drying and wetting. En-
gineering Geology, 81: 213–226. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2005.06.009.
Alonso, E.E., Romero, E., and Hoffmann, C. 2011. Hydromechanical behaviour of
compacted granular expansive mixtures: experimental and constitutive
study. Géotechnique, 61(4): 329–344. doi:10.1680/geot.2011.61.4.329.
Basma, A.A., Al-Homoud, A.S., Husein Malkawi, A.I., and Al-Bashabsheh, M.A.
1996. Swelling-shrinkage behavior of natural expansive clays. Applied Clay
Science, 11(2–4): 211–227. doi:10.1016/S0169-1317(96)00009-9.
Chen, F.H. 1988. Foundations on expansive soils. Elsevier, New York.
Cui, Y.J., Yahia-Aissa, M., and Delage, P. 2002. A model for the volume change
behavior of heavily compacted swelling clays. Engineering Geology, 64: 233–
Can. Geotech. J. 2015.52:783-794.
250. doi:10.1016/S0013-7952(01)00113-2.
Cuisinier, O., and Laloui, L. 2004. Fabric evolution during hydromechanical
loading of a compacted silt. International Journal for Numerical and Analyt-
ical Methods in Geomechanics, 28(6): 483–499. doi:10.1002/nag.348.
Day, R.W. 1994. Swell-shrink behavior of compacted clay. Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering, 120(3): 618–623. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1994)120:3(618).
Della Vecchia, G., Jommi, C., and Romero, E. 2013. A fully coupled elastic-plastic
hydromechanical model for compacted soils accounting for clay activity.
International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechan-
ics, 37(5): 503–535. doi:10.1002/nag.1116.
Dif, A.E., and Bluemel, W.F. 1991. Expansive soils under cyclic drying and wet-
ting. Geotechnical Testing Journal, 14(1): 96–102. doi:10.1520/GTJ10196J.
Fleureau, J.-M., Verbrugge, J.-C., Huergo, P.J., Correia, A.G., and
Kheirbek-Saoud, S. 2002. Aspects of the behaviour of compacted clayey soils
on drying and wetting paths. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 39(6): 1341–
1357. doi:10.1139/t02-100.
Gens, A., and Alonso, E.E. 1992. A framework for the behaviour of unsaturated
expansive clays. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 29(6): 1013–1032. doi:10.1139/
t92-120.
Gens, A., Valleján, B., Sánchez, M., Imbert, C., Villar, M.V., and Van Geet, M. 2011.
Hydromechanical behaviour of a heterogeneous compacted soil: experimen-
tal observations and modelling. Géotechnique, 61(5): 367–386. doi:10.1680/
geot.SIP11.P.015.
Katti, D.R., and Shanmugasundaram, V. 2001. Influence of swelling on the mi-
crostructure of expansive clays. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 38(1): 175–
182. doi:10.1139/t00-079.
Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 52, 2015
Koliji, A., Vulliet, L., and Laloui, L. 2008. New basis for the constitutive modelling of
aggregated soils. Acta Geotechnica, 3(1): 61–69. doi:10.1007/s11440-007-
0052-x.
Lin, B., and Cerato, A.B. 2013. Hysteretic soil water characteristics and cyclic
swell-shrink paths of compacted expansive soils. Bulletin of Engineering
Geology and the Environment, 72: 61–70. doi:10.1007/s10064-012-0450-7.
Lloret, A., and Villar, M.V. 2007. Advances on the knowledge of the thermo-
hydro-mechanical behaviour of heavily compacted “FEBEX” bentonite. Physics
and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C, 32: 701–715. doi:10.1016/j.pce.2006.
03.002.
Mašín, D. 2013. Double structure hydromechanical coupling formalism and a
model for unsaturated expansive clays. Engineering Geology, 165: 73–88.
doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2013.05.026.
Miao, L., Houston, S.L., Cui, Y., and Yuan, J. 2007. Relationship between soil
structure and mechanical behavior for an expansive unsaturated clay. Cana-
dian Geotechnical Journal, 44(2): 126–137. doi:10.1139/t06-108.
Monroy, R., Zdravkovic, L., and Ridley, A. 2010. Evolution of microstructure in
compacted London clay during wetting and loading. Géotechnique, 60(2):
105–119. doi:10.1680/geot.8.P.125.
Najser, J., Mašín, D., and Boháč, J. 2012. Numerical modelling of lumpy clay
landfill. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geo-
mechanics, 36(1): 17–35. doi:10.1002/nag.990.
Nowamooz, H., and Masrouri, F. 2008. Hydromechanical behaviour of an expan-
sive bentonite/silt mixture in cyclic suction-controlled drying and wetting
tests. Engineering Geology, 101: 154–164. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2008.04.011.
Nowamooz, H., Mrad, M., Abdallah, A., and Masrouri, F. 2009. Experimental and
numerical studies of the hydromechanical behaviour of a natural unsatu-
rated swelling soil. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 46(4): 393–410. doi:10.
1139/T08-127.
Romero, E., and Simms, P.H. 2008. Microstructure investigation in unsaturated
soils: A review with special attention to contribution of mercury intrusion
porosimetry and environmental scanning electron microscopy. Geotechni-
cal and Geological Engineering, 26(6): 705–727. doi:10.1007/s10706-008-
9204-5.
Romero, E., Della Vecchia, G., and Jommi, C. 2011. An insight into the water
retention properties of compacted clayey soils. Géotechnique, 61(4): 313–328.
doi:10.1680/geot.2011.61.4.313.
Sánchez, M., Gens, A., Guimarães, L.N., and Olivella, S. 2005. A double structure
generalized plasticity model for expansive materials. International Journal
for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 29(8): 751–787. doi:
10.1002/nag.434.
Simms, P.H., and Yanful, E.K. 2001. Measurement and estimation of pore shrink-
age and pore distribution in a clayey till during soil-water-characteristic
curve tests. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 38(4): 741–754. doi:10.1139/t01-
014.
Sivakumar, V., Tan, W.C., Murray, E.J., and McKinley, J.D. 2006. Wetting, drying
and compression characteristics of compacted clay. Géotechnique, 56(1): 57–
62. doi:10.1680/geot.2006.56.1.57.
Thom, R., Sivakumar, R., Sivakumar, V., Murray, E., and MacKinnon, P.A. 2007.
Pore size distribution of unsaturated compacted kaolin: the initial states and
final states following saturation. Géotechnique, 57(5): 469–474. doi:10.1680/
geot.2007.57.5.469.
Tripathy, S., and Subba Rao, K.S. 2009. Cyclic swell-shrink behaviour of a com-
pacted expansive soil. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 27(1): 89–
103. doi:10.1007/s10706-008-9214-3.
Tripathy, S., Subba Rao, K.S., and Fredlund, D.G. 2002. Water content – void ratio
swell-shrink paths of compacted expansive soils. Canadian Geotechnical
Journal, 39(4): 938–959. doi:10.1139/t02-022.
Published by NRC Research Press