133

ARTICLE
Effects of capillary number, Bond number, and gas solubility on water
saturation of sand specimens
Bruce L. Kutter
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH on 09/13/19

Abstract: To better understand how to prepare completely water-saturated specimens or centrifuge models from dry sand, the
mechanisms of the infiltration and filling of pores in sand are studied. Complete saturation has been shown by others to be
especially important in studies involving the triggering of liquefaction. This paper discusses how the degree of saturation
obtained during infiltration increases with the “Bond number”, Bo (ratio of body forces and capillary forces), and the “capillary
number”, Ca (ratio of viscous forces and capillary forces), as well as the solubility of gas bubbles in the pore fluid. Bo is varied by
changing the particle size, fluid density, and centrifugal acceleration. Ca is varied by changing the fluid viscosity and infiltration
rate. The dissolution of gas is encouraged by replacing pore air by CO2 (56 times more soluble in water than N2), by de-airing the
liquid prior to infiltration or by increasing the pore fluid pressure after infiltration. Infiltration experiments performed at 1g and in a
centrifuge are presented. A new technique for measuring the degree of saturation is also presented. Quantitative pressure–saturation
relations are presented for different gasses, illustrating the importance of replacement of air by CO2. Spinning a specimen in a
centrifuge during infiltration is also useful for speeding up the saturation process and for achieving higher degrees of saturation.

Key words: degree of saturation, soil mechanics, liquefaction, unsaturated soil, infiltration.

Résumé : Les mécanismes d'infiltration et de remplissage des pores dans du sable sont étudiés afin de mieux comprendre
la façon de préparer des échantillons complètement saturés en eau ou des modèles pour centrifugeuse à partir de sable sec.
For personal use only.

D'autres travaux ont démontré l'importance de la saturation complète lors d'études impliquant le déclenchement de la
liquéfaction. Cet article discute de comment le degré de saturation obtenu durant l'infiltration augmente avec le « nombre
de Bond », Bo (ratio des forces du corps et des forces capillaires), et le « nombre capillaire », Ca (ratio des forces visqueuses
et des forces capillaires), ainsi qu'avec la solubilité des bulles de gaz dans le fluide interstitiel. Bo est varié en changeant la
granulométrie, la densité du fluide et l'accélération centrifuge. Ca est varié en changeant la viscosité du fluide et le taux
d'infiltration. La dissolution des gaz est encouragée par le remplacement de l'air interstitiel par du CO2 (56 fois plus soluble
dans l'eau que N2), par la dé-aération du liquide avant l'infiltration ou en augmentant la pression interstitielle après
l'infiltration. Des essais d'infiltration réalisés à 1g et sur une centrifuge sont présentés. Une nouvelle technique pour
mesurer le degré de saturation est aussi présentée. Des relations quantitatives de pression–saturation sont aussi présentées
pour différents gaz, ce qui illustre l'importance du remplacement de l'air par le CO2. L'utilisation d'une centrifugeuse pour
tourner un échantillon durant l'infiltration permet d'accélérer le processus de saturation et d'atteindre des plus hauts
degrés de saturation. [Traduit par la Rédaction]

Mots-clés : degré de saturation, mécanique des sols, liquéfaction, sol non saturé, infiltration.

Introduction and literature review
The presence of gas bubbles in sand is important in geotechni-
cal earthquake engineering because the degree of saturation af-
fects compressibility of the pore fluids, which in turn affects
important soil properties such as permeability and the cyclic
stress ratio required to trigger liquefaction. Chaney (1978), Yoshimi
et al. (1989), and Xia and Hu (1991) have shown that the cyclic stress
required to trigger liquefaction generally increases as the degree
of saturation decreases.
In laboratory and centrifuge liquefaction experiments, it is
therefore important to test completely saturated specimens to
ensure that the cyclic strength is not overestimated. Techniques
such as infiltration under vacuum and back-pressure saturation
(Lowe and Johnson 1960; Black and Lee 1973) and flushing with
CO2 prior to saturation (Mulilus et al. 1975) have been used to
facilitate complete saturation in the laboratory.
On the other hand, the introduction of air has also been sug-
gested as a method for reducing the liquefaction potential of sat-
urated soil. Okamura et al. (2006) observed that undissolved air
bubbles persisted in a sand deposit 26 years after being intro-
duced during installation of sand compaction piles. Eseller-Bayat
(2009) performed experiments to investigate the persistence of air
bubbles by seeping water through columns of unsaturated sand in
the laboratory. While Okamura et al. (2006) and Eseller-Bayat
(2009) have demonstrated that air bubbles might be persistent,
they did not consider all possible seepage conditions and (or)
other factors that may lead to dissolution, compression or re-
moval of gas bubbles.
Although the present paper is focused on factors controlling
the degree of saturation of centrifuge models, the principles dis-
cussed in this paper may be of interest to others working with
unsaturated soils. The mechanisms of bubble formation and dis-
solution are of interest in air sparging (injection of gas) to facili-
tate removal of volatile organic fluids from ground water (e.g.,
Marulanda et al. 2000). Although it is often implied that the soil-
water characteristic curve, i.e., the water retention curve, relating

Received 6 July 2011. Accepted 16 October 2012.

B.L. Kutter. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Davis, CA, 95616, USA.
E-mail for correspondence: blkutter@ucdavis.edu.

Can. Geotech. J. 50: 133–144 (2013) dx.doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2011-0250 Published at www.nrcresearchpress.com/cgj on 13 December 2012.
 134
Fig. 1. Suggested setup for saturation of centrifuge models CGM (2011) and Ueno (1998).
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH on 09/13/19
degree of saturation to water suction is a soil property, many have
shown that the curve also depends on gravity, infiltration rate,
For personal use only.
pore gas solubility, and time (Fredlund and Rahardjo 1993; Blunt
and Scher 1995; Ratnam et al. 1996; Friedman 1999; Lu and Likos
2004; Garnier et al. 2007). However none of these references con-
siders the combined effects of all of these factors with specific
focus on the residual air content of sand after water infiltration.
Background and literature
The quality of saturation may be characterized or measured by
various methods
• Measuring weights and volumes of solids, water, and gas.
• Measuring the Skempton B-value (e.g., Black and Lee 1973).
• Measuring the p-wave velocity (e.g., Ueno 1998 or Kokusho
2000).
• A new method presented in this paper whereby the change in
volume of the pore fluids is measured as the pore pressure is
varied.
Ueno (1998) describes the procedure for saturation of centrifuge
models of dry sand developed at the University of California (UC)
Davis (CGM 2011) and other centrifuge centers (Fig. 1). The proce-
dure has many similarities to the approach developed for triaxial
specimens by Mulilus et al. (1975). Briefly, the procedure is as
follows:
1. Create a supply of de-aired water. This may be accomplished by
spraying the water into an evacuated tank or by boiling the
water and preventing access to the atmosphere.
2. Remove most of the air from the model container by applying
a vacuum to the soil to be saturated. An absolute pressure of
10 kPa is recommended. As 10 kPa corresponds to a vacuum of
about 90% of atmospheric pressure, 90% of the air mass is
removed.
3. Flood the model container with CO2 gas at atmospheric pres-
sure. This displaces air by CO2, which is about 56 times more
soluble in water than is N2.
4. Re-apply the vacuum (10 kPa absolute pressure). Assuming
uniform mixing of the gasses in the specimen, 90% of the
remaining air (99% of the original) is removed after the second
phase of re-evacuation and re-flooding with CO2.
Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 50, 2013
5. Allow the de-aired pore fluid to seep into the model container
from the bottom up while the specimen is sitting at 1g.
Takahashi et al. (2006), using relationships between saturation
and p-wave velocity presented by Ishihara et al. (1998) and
Kokusho (2000), have demonstrated that measured p-wave veloc-
ities in specimens saturated by this procedure indicate that the
saturation was successful. During the infiltration from the bot-
tom up, caution must be exercised to avoid disturbing the speci-
men due to excessive pressure gradients and erosion. Stringer and
Madabhushi (2009) describe equipment for slowly saturating sand
by carefully controlling the rate of infiltration to ensure that the
hydraulic gradients are not excessive.
Naesgaard et al. (2007) attempted to emulate the procedure
described by Ueno (1998) in a triaxial specimen by introducing
water while the specimen is subjected to vacuum. Naesgaard et al.
(2007) measured the p-wave velocity and the B-value to character-
ize the degree of saturation. They measured high p-wave velocities
and low B-values (approximately 0.5) that were inconsistent with
the relationships relating B-value and p-wave velocity presented
by Ishihara et al. (1998). Naesgaard et al. (2007) showed that p-wave
velocity is a good indicator of saturation if the bubbles are small
and sufficiently distributed amongst all the pores, but it is a poor
indicator of saturation if the air bubbles are large and scattered
because the p-waves may travel between the bubbles, largely un-
affected by the large bubbles or air pockets. Thus, not only did
Naesgaard et al. (2007) raise doubts about the effectiveness of the
procedure described by Ueno (1998), but they also raised doubts
about the accuracy of one of the procedures often used by centri-
fuge modelers to verify satisfactory saturation.
It must be pointed out that the procedure described by Naesgaard
et al. (2007) does not accurately follow that described by Ueno
(1998) in two important ways. First, they only used 50 kPa vacuum
when flushing the specimen with CO2 (potentially replacing 50%
of the air by CO2), while Ueno (1998) recommend flushing twice
with 90 kPa vacuum (potentially replacing 99% of the air). Second,
Naesgaard et al. (2007) do not mention the process for de-airing
the water used to infiltrate the specimen.
Okamura and Inoue (2012) performed centrifuge tests to illus-
trate that liquefaction behavior is sensitive to the degree of satu-
ration and that degree of saturation obtained during infiltration
Published by NRC Research Press
 Kutter
depends on centrifugal acceleration and the vacuum pressure ap-
plied during infiltration.
Goals
The main purposes of this paper are to (i) provide a better un-
derstanding of the physical and chemical processes that affect the
degree of saturation of laboratory specimens of sandy soil and
especially large-scale centrifuge models; (ii) provide tools for
quantitative assessment of the importance of de-gassing, back
pressure, gas solubility, g-level, infiltration rate, and time on the
degree of saturation that can be expected for centrifuge models
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH on 09/13/19
and laboratory sand specimens; (iii) present experiments to test
our hypothesis that the degree of saturation depends on “Bond
number” (Bo), “capillary number” (Ca), and gas solubility; (iv) show
that the procedure described by Ueno (1998) for saturation of
centrifuge models can reliably achieve saturation; and (v) show
that the saturation process is enhanced by spinning the specimen
in a centrifuge during infiltration.
The physics of saturation by infiltration
The infiltration and saturation process is affected by many fac-
tors, such as surface tension of the liquid(s), size and size distri-
bution of the pores, buoyant force on the bubbles, density of fluid,
gravitational acceleration, rate of infiltration, hydraulic gradient
and permeability, viscosity of the pore fluid, gas and liquid pres-
sures, and solubility of the gasses in the liquids.
One of the important dimensionless groups that affects the
mechanism of pore filling during infiltration is the Ca (e.g., Blunt
and Scher 1995; Ratnam et al. 1996; de Gennes et al. 2004). The Ca
For personal use only.
is proportional to the pressure drop associated with viscous flow
in a pore tube to the pressure drop across a meniscus in a pore tube
[1] Ca ⫽ ␩v/Ts
where ␩ is the viscosity, v is the fluid velocity, and Ts is the surface
tension in the fluid. Blunt and Scher (1995) suggest that for a
typical soil, the viscous pressure drop in a single pore throat con-
necting two larger pores is approximately equal to the pressure
drop across a meniscus in that the pore throat for Ca ⬃ 103 or 104.
At larger values of Ca, the viscous drag forces are larger, hence
preferential flow is in the large pores as depicted in Fig. 2b. At
small values of Ca, surface tension effects dominate the flow, and
wetting tends to advance more rapidly in the crevices than in the
large pores (Fig. 2a). For high Ca values, infiltration could theoret-
ically be faster through regions of high permeability (larger void
spaces) and this might lead to trapping air in regions of low per-
meability. The critical capillary number depends on the size dis-
tribution and connectedness of the pores. If water is introduced
very slowly, the capillary tension will tend to be the driving force
for the first phase of infiltration. Crevices will fill first and then
larger pores will tend to fill in a sequence from smallest to largest.
If a large pore filled with gas is surrounded by smaller pores filled
with water, the isolated air in the large pore may be trapped.
Another important dimensionless group that determines the
mechanism of pore filling is the Bo
[2] Bo ⫽ (␳f ⫺ ␳g) gr2 /Ts
where ␳ represents density (subscripts f and g denote the fluid and
gas, respectively), g represents gravity, and r the representative
pore radius. This number can be thought to represent the ratio of
body forces and surface tension forces for a trapped air bubble or
for a small volume of water held at the particle contacts by capil-
lary tension. If the Bo value is large (i.e., large pores, high gravity
field or small surface tension), the body forces that push bubbles
up through the voids and pull down the water trapped in crevices
135
Fig. 2. Infiltration at small and large Ca. (a) At low Ca, the small
crevices attract water first. (b) If viscous forces dominate, water
preferentially flows faster through the larger pores.
are relatively large compared to the surface tension forces.
Ratnam et al. (1996) and Ratnam (1996), for example, observed
that above a critical Bo value, capillary trapping of a nonwet-
ting fluid (e.g., air) is less than about 3%. Thus the degree of
saturation obtained during infiltration is expected to increase
as Bo increases.
In geotechnical engineering water is the most common liquid,
which has a surface tension of about 0.072 N/m and a viscosity of
approximately 1 cP (1 cP = 0.001 kg/m·s) at standard temperature
and pressure. In dynamic centrifuge model tests, the viscosity of
the fluid is often altered to improve similarity (Kutter 1995; Muir
Wood 2004).
The “Weber number” (We) relates inertial forces to capillary
forces and controls mechanisms such as entrapment of air due to
entrainment, but this mechanism is not considered to be impor-
tant for the present work. The “Reynolds number” (Re) relates
viscous forces and inertial forces and determines the transition
between laminar and turbulent flow.
During preparation of an unconfined specimen for a centrifuge
or triaxial test, piping or boiling due to large fluid pressure gradi-
ents should be avoided. If the fluid pressure (air or water) ap-
proaches the total stress, then the effective stress will approach
zero and the soil skeleton may boil and erupt due to piping. For
level ground, boiling and piping instability may be avoided if the
“pore pressure ratio” (Ru) is less than 1.
[3] Ru ⫽ ue / ␴
vo
where ue is the excess pore water pressure and ␴
vo is the initial
effective stress. For sloping ground, instability may occur at
smaller pore pressure ratios. The pore pressure ratio, Ru, may be
considered to be an additional dimensionless group controlling
the saturation infiltration process.
Dissolution of gas bubbles
Besides displacement of one fluid by another during infiltra-
tion, the degree of saturation may be affected by dissolving one
fluid in the other or by changing the pressure. LeBihan and
Leroueil (2002) also discuss the pressure–dissolution–saturation
relations using Henry's Law and Boyle's Law, but in the context of
developing a model for transport of dissolved gasses by advection
and diffusion in the context of calculating the evolution of satu-
ration in the core of an earth dam.
The volume of gas in the gas phase may be estimated by the
ideal gas law
[4] pV ⫽ nRT
where p is the absolute pressure, V is the volume of the gas, n is the
number of moles of gas, R is the gas constant, and T is the absolute
temperature. The number of moles in the gas phase, n, may
change as the gas molecules dissolve in or come out of solution in
Published by NRC Research Press
 136
the liquid. The equilibrium solubility for a gas in water is de-
scribed by Henry's Law.
[5a] caq ⫽ Hcp p
[5b] caq ⫽ Hcccgas
where Hcp represents the Henry's constant that relates concentra-
tion in solution to pressure in the gas phase, Hcc represents the
Henry's constant that relates concentration in the solution to con-
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH on 09/13/19
centration in the gas phase, p represents the partial pressure of a
molecular species in the gas phase, caq represents the equilibrium
concentration of the same molecular species dissolved in the wa-
ter, and cgas represents the molar concentration of the species in
the gas phase. Henry's constants along with diffusion coefficients
for the most plentiful atmospheric gasses are given in Table 1.
Henry's Law states that if there is a gas–liquid interface, the
equilibrium concentration of a gas species dissolved in the liquid
is proportional to the concentration of that gas species present in
the gas phase. The interface may be at the surface of a gas bubble
or at the free surface above a pool of water. Equilibrium is quickly
obtained at the interface, but significant time may be required for
concentrations to diffuse throughout the liquid phase.
From Table 1, it may be seen that at equilibrium, 0.832 L of CO2
gas could be dissolved in 1 L of water if it is the only gas species
present in the system. Similarly, only 0.0149 L of N2 gas would be
dissolved in 1 L of water if N2 was the only gas species. It is appar-
ent that O2 and Ar gas are about twice as soluble in water as N2.
For personal use only.
But CO2 is 56 times more soluble in water than is N2. For this
reason, Ueno (1998) recommends replacement of air with CO2
before attempting to saturate centrifuge specimens. Much earlier,
Mulilus et al. (1975) described the replacement of air by CO2 to
enhance the saturation of triaxial test specimens.
For a soil sample with a total volume of voids, Vv, the volume of
water in the voids is SVv (where S is the degree of saturation) and
the volume of gas is (1 − S)Vv. The degree of saturation is the ratio
of the volume of water to the volume of voids: S = Vw/Vv. Assuming
that the concentration of dissolved gas in the liquid is given by
Henry's Law, that there is only one gas species present, and that
the number of moles of gas molecules in the system is the sum
of the moles in the gas phase, ngas, and the moles of gas dissolved
in the liquid phase, naq
p (
[6] n ⫽ ngas ⫹ naq ⫽ [ 1 ⫺ S)Vv ⫹ HccSVv]
RT
Pressure– dissolution–saturation relations
Equation [6] is useful for calculating the change in the equilib-
rium degree of saturation due to a change in pressure. Let the
initial absolute pressure and degree of saturation be denoted by p1
and S1, respectively, and final values by p2 and S2. If the pressure is
increased slowly while maintaining a constant effective stress on
the particles, water would flow into the pores, compressing and
dissolving the bubbles as the pore pressure is increased. Some
mass of dissolved gas may also enter the system with the influx of
water. If we assume, however, that the concentration of dissolved
gas in the influent water is zero, we obtain
p2 1 ⫺ S1 ⫹ HccS1
[7a] ⫽ ically assume that the equilibrium concentration according to
p1 1 ⫺ S2 ⫹ HccS2
Lowe and Johnson (1960) derived eq. [7a], but presented it in a
different form. If the concentration of dissolved gas in the influ-
ent water is equal to (p1/RT)Hcc (i.e., if it is equal to the initial
dissolved concentration)
Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 50, 2013
p2 1 ⫺ S1 ⫹ HccS2
[7b] ⫽
p1 1 ⫺ S2 ⫹ HccS2
If the concentration of dissolved gas in the influent water is equal to
(p2/RT)Hcc (i.e., if it is equal to the final dissolved concentration)
p2 1 ⫺ S1 ⫹ HccS1
[7c] ⫽
p1 1 ⫺ S2 ⫹ HccS1
Table 2 presents results showing the absolute pressure ratio
(p2/p1) required to dissolve all of the gas in the system for the three
alternative assumptions embodied by eqs. [7a]–[7c]. Two different
Henry's constants (for N2 and CO2) are considered and the initial
saturation is assumed to be 90%. For small Henry's constants,
there is little difference between eqs. [7a] and [7b]. But for CO2,
which has a much larger Henry's constant, the difference is sig-
nificant. For CO2, an absolute pressure increase between 2% and
13% is sufficient to saturate the specimen, depending on the as-
sumed quantity of dissolved gas in the influent water. For N2 gas,
a pressure increase between 756% and 841% is required. The ben-
efit of using CO2 gas is evident from these calculations.
Nonequilibrium solution
Other useful relationships between saturation and pressure can
be obtained from other idealized assumptions. Suppose the pore
gas pressure is initially p1 and completely de-aired water is rapidly
infiltrated into the pores so that no gas dissolves in the water
during infiltration and the degree of saturation is S1. According to
this idealized scenario, immediately after infiltration, all the gas
molecules are in the gas phase, and none in the liquid phase. Then
the gas dissolves gradually in the water so that the saturation is 1
and all the gas molecules are in the liquid phase. The pressure
required to keep the bubbles dissolved is given by
p2 1 ⫺ Hcc
[8] ⫽
p1 S1
As seen in Table 2, if the initial degree of saturation is 90%, the
pressure required to dissolve the 10% CO2 gas is only 12% of the
pressure in the pores during infiltration. The pressure required to
dissolve N2 gas is 667% of the pressure during infiltration; if infil-
tration is performed at p1 = patm/6.67, then the N2 could eventually
dissolve when the vacuum is released and the pressure increases
to p2 = patm (atmospheric pressure).
Again using eq. [8], if p2 = p1 (pressure is not changed following
infiltration), and if completely de-aired water is introduced to the
specimen, then the system would eventually become saturated if
S1 > (1 − Hcc). For pure N2 gas bubbles to dissolve, the degree of
saturation must be greater than Scrit,N2 = (1 − 1.49 × 10−2) = 98.5%.
For pure CO2 gas bubbles to eventually dissolve, the initial degree
of saturation must be greater than Scrit,CO2 = (1 − 0.832) = 16.8%.
Nonequilibrium solution kinetics
Although eventual saturation may be quantified using eqs. [7]
and [8], the time required to dissolve gas bubbles must be consid-
ered. The rate of dissolution of bubbles in free water has been
studied extensively (e.g., Wise and Houghton 1966; Weinberg
1981; Holocher et al. 2003). Kinetic bubble dissolution models typ-
Henry's Law occurs at the gas bubble–liquid interface and that the
dissolved gas then diffuses into the fluid according to the diffu-
sion equation. The diffusion process is enhanced if the mixing is
aided by dispersion due to flow of water in tortuous pores. Diffu-
sion is slower in stagnant water and even slower in stagnant
pores. As seen in Table 1, the diffusion coefficient of N2 and CO2 in
Published by NRC Research Press
 Kutter 137

Table 1. Air composition and component solubility in water at T = 25 °C. (1 atm = 101.325 kPa.)
Air Proportion of Hcp = caq/p Diffusion coefficient
constituent atmosphere (%)a (mol/L·atm)b Hcc = caq/cgasb in water (m2/s)a
N2 78 6.1 × 10−4 1.49 × 10−2 1.64 × 10−9
O2 21 1.3 × 10−3 3.18 × 10−2 1.80 × 10−9
Ar 0.93 1.4 × 10−3 3.43 × 10−2 —
CO2 0.031c 3.4 × 10−2 0.832 1.77 × 10−9
aTuve and Bolz (1973).
bSander (1999).
cMore recent measurements show that atmospheric CO has increased to about 0.04%.
2
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH on 09/13/19

Table 2. Example calculation results for pressure–saturation relationships.

Eq. [7a] Eq. [7b] Eq. [7c] Eq. [8] Eq. [7a] Eq. [7b] Eq. [7c] Eq. [8]
S1 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9
S2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Hcc 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.832 0.832 0.832 0.832
p2/p1 7.56 7.66 8.407 6.67 1.02 1.12 1.13 0.120

water are quite similar, but because the solubility of CO2 is 56
times greater, the gradients will be about 56 times greater and
therefore CO2 bubbles should theoretically disappear 56 times
faster than N2 bubbles.
The difference between the bubble pressure and the liquid pres-
sure, given by the Young–Laplace equation (see, for example, Lu
and Likos 2004) is, for a spherical bubble
2Ts
For personal use only.
be achieved by applying a vacuum during infiltration and by
flushing de-aired water through the specimen.
Black and Lee (1973) assumed the pore gas consisted of air, not
CO2. As can be seen from Table 1, at a given pressure CO2 is 56
times more soluble than N2; therefore, if identical RBL ratios were
used for CO2, times for saturation should be reduced by a factor of
56. Furthermore, as is apparent in Table 2, pressures required to
provide a given RBL ratio are much smaller, so rates of dissolution
may be even greater. This highlights the importance of replace-

[9] pgas ⫺ pliq ⫽
r
where pgas is the pressure inside the gas bubble, pliq is the pressure
in the liquid, Ts is the surface tension, and r is the bubble radius.
Weinberg (1981) derived a set of nonlinear equations for bubble
dissolution that accounted for the effect of surface tension on the
bubble pressure and the consequent effect of the bubble pressure
on the solubility according to Henry's Law. Assuming a surface
tension for the gas–water interface of 0.075 N/m, the excess pres-
sure in a bubble of radius 0.2 mm is 1.5 kPa, which is small com-
pared to atmospheric pressure and will result in a small increase
in dissolution rates.
Holocher et al. (2003) describe a kinetic bubble dissolution
(KBD) model for seeping groundwater. Their model assumes the
ideal gas law, where the dissolved gas in the liquid obeys Henry's
Law at the bubble interface, and uses the diffusion equation to
compute the transport of dissolved gas away from the bubble
through a boundary layer. Beyond the boundary layer, the fluid
dissolved gas is assumed to be uniformly mixed, but the thickness
of the boundary layer was shown to depend on the groundwater
flow regime. Holocher et al. (2003) explain that the dispersion
associated with water flow in tortuous pores results in a smaller
effective boundary layer thickness. For stagnant water the bound-
ary layer is thicker and therefore dissolution rate is much slower
than for flowing water.
Black and Lee (1973) performed an experimental investigation
to quantify the time required for saturation of trapped gas bub-
bles. In their experiments, they attempted to create a uniformly
unsaturated sample of a coarse Ottawa sand. Then they measured
the initial degree of saturation and calculated the theoretical back
pressure, p2, required to saturate the specimen using an equation
similar to eq. [7a]. They defined a ratio RBL = (p − p1)/(p2 − p1) to
quantify the back pressure during saturation compared with the
minimum back pressure required to saturate the specimens. For
RBL values between about 2 and 4 and initial degrees of saturation
greater than 88%, they found the time required for saturation
was between 1 week and 1 month. Black and Lee (1973) also
suggested that further speed-up of the saturation process could
ment of air by CO2, prior to infiltration and saturation.
LeBihan and Leroueil (2002) present an interesting theoretical
model for transport of dissolved gasses by advection and diffusion
that could eventually be useful for predicting the evolution of
saturation in centrifuge models due to flushing of pore water
through the specimen, but they did not consider the effects of size
and spatial distribution of air bubbles on the dissolution rate.
Infiltration experiments
Experimental techniques
A series of experiments was performed to explore the effects of
rate of infiltration, viscosity of infiltrating pore fluid, g-level, and
particle size on degree of saturation that may be achieve by infil-
tration of water into dry sand. The test set up included a 100 mm
diameter clear acrylic plastic cylinder for the sand specimen, a
water supply reservoir connected by a needle valve, and solenoid
valve as shown in Fig. 3. The syringe was attached after infiltration
to measure saturation using a procedure described later. Several
experiments were conducted in the laboratory at 1g, but experi-
ments were also performed at 8g and 64g in the mini-drum cen-
trifuge at the Schofield Center at Cambridge University. The sand
was dry-pluviated into the cylinder and carefully shaped using
vacuum and a template to fit tightly against the conically ma-
chined sealed acrylic cap. The purpose of the conical top cap was
to minimize trapping of air bubbles in the corners of the cylinder.
Achieved densities were very consistent as shown in Table 3. The
water supply cylinder was filled with water. As noted in Table 3,
sometimes the water was de-aired and sometimes it was initially
at equilibrium with atmospheric pressure. In some tests, the wa-
ter was mixed with hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (Stewart et al.
1998) to produce viscous pore fluid. For most tests the gas in the
specimen prior to infiltration was air at atmospheric pressure, but
in two of the experiments, the air was replaced by CO2 gas at
atmospheric pressure.
Three different sands were used for the experiments. Fraction A
sand (D10 = 0.9 to 1.2 mm, where D10 is the grain diameter that
corresponds to 10% finer by weight) and Fraction E sand (D10 =
0.11 mm) were obtained from David Ball Specialist Sands, Cam-

Published by NRC Research Press

 138 Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 50, 2013

Fig. 3. Apparatus for infiltration experiments. Hr, height of water in the rigid tube. (All dimensions in centimetres.)
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH on 09/13/19
For personal use only.

Table 3. Test matrix and test results for infiltration experiments.

Saturation
Dry density Pore fluid De-airing CO2 Mass and Syringe Time for
Test ID (Mg/m3) viscosity (N·s/m2) vacuum (kPa) flooding? volume method method g/ge out-flow (min) 103Bo 108Ca
A1 — 0.001 0 No 0.985 0.983 1 3 34 930
A2 1.64 0.1 −85 No — 0.982 1 132 34 2150
A2a 1.64 0.1 −85 No 1.002 0.999 — — — —
E1 1.582 0.001 0 No 0.859 0.859 1 11 0.41 250
E2 1.590 0.001 0 No 0.810 0.837 1 105 0.41 26
E3 1.587 0.001 0 No 0.946 0.953 64 7 26 400
E3b 1.587 0.001 0 No 0.955 0.956 — — — —
E4 1.591 0.001 −85 Yes 0.986 1.000 64 12 26 230
E5 1.591 0.05 −85 Yes 0.988 1.000 64 105 26 1300
E6 1.590 0.001 0 No 0.781 0.823 8 250 3.3 11
H1 1.594 0.1 0 No 0.970 0.965 1 787 2.4 350
H2 1.621 0.001 0 No 0.962 0.984 8 20 20 140
H3 1.623 0.001 0 No 0.958 0.979 1 5.5 2.4 510
H4 1.623 0.001 0 No 0.922 0.940 1 420 2.4 6.6
Note: First initial of test ID identifies the sand used: A, Fraction A; E, Fraction E; H, Hostun sand. The surface tension, Ts, is taken to be 0.072 N/m. ge, acceleration
due to earth's gravity, 9.81 m/s2.
aAfter letting sample sit.

bAfter letting sample sit 6 days at 1g.

bridge, UK. Hostun sand (D10 = 0.27 mm), was obtained from Si-
belco Hostun, Paris, France. Particle-size distributions for these
sands are shown in Fig. 4. Several curves are shown for Fraction E
sand indicating the variability of several samples. Hostun sand
data was much less variable. It should be noted that the particle-
size distribution for the two finer sands was determined using a
“single particle optical sizing” (SPOS) system described by White
(2003), who stated that relative to conventional sieving, the SPOS
system oversized the particles by 20% to 40%. The Fraction A sand
was too coarse for the SPOS, so it was sized using the available
conventional sieves. An estimated gradation curve sketched
through three meaningful data points for the Fraction A sand is
believed to provide an accurate-enough characterization.
The needle valve in Fig. 3 was adjusted to restrict the flow rate
into the specimen and then the solenoid valve was opened and
water began to flow into the bottom of the cylinder. As water
flowed into the specimen, the water level in the supply dropped
and the water level in the soil cylinder increased; no attempt was
made to maintain a constant gradient or flow rate. The infiltration
was terminated after water began to fill the rigid clear plastic tube

Published by NRC Research Press

 Kutter
Fig. 4. Grain-size distribution for the sands used in infiltration experiments.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH on 09/13/19
above the sand. It should be noted that for the finer sands (Hostun
and Fraction E), and especially in 1g tests, gradients due to capil-
lary tension had a major effect on the infiltration. In fact, for the
finest sand at 1g, the head loss in the capillary fringe due to cap-
illary tension exceeded the head loss due to the elevation differ-
ence. For all of these experiments, the gas pressure was held at
atmospheric pressure during injection. (Note that Ueno (1998) rec-
ommended that the pore gas pressure should ideally be under
vacuum during infiltration.)
For personal use only.
Techniques for assessing saturation
Two techniques were used to measure the degree of saturation.
One of these (the conventional mass and volume method) was
based on careful determination of the volume of the specimen
(VT), the mass of the solids (Ms), the total mass of the specimen (Mt)
and water (Mw = Mt − Ms), the density of the solids (␳s), and the
density of the water (␳w = 0.998 Mg/m3) using eq. [10]. It may be
seen that in one case (E5) the computed degree of saturation was
1.002, proving that the error in the mass and volume method was
at least 0.2% for that specimen. It should be noted that small
errors in the densities of water, solids, and total volume each
contribute to this error. The measured density of solids was
2.670 Mg/m3 for the Fraction A sand and 2.650 Mg/m3 for the
fraction E sand. For results presented in Table 3, the density of
solids for the Hostun sand was assumed to be 2.650 Mg/m3.
Vw Mw / ␳w
[10] S⫽ ⫽
Vv Vt ⫺ (Mw / ␳w) ⫺ (Ms / ␳s)
A new technique called the “syringe method” was developed to
more quickly and reliably measure small concentrations of air
bubbles in a rigid container. This method has many similarities to
the new method presented by Okamura and Inoue (2012). This test
was performed by closing the valve at the bottom of the soil
cylinder and attaching a syringe to the top of the rigid tube with a
flexible tube running through a rubber stopper. The volume of gas
between the water level and the syringe is denoted by Vtop1. Then,
using the syringe, a known volume of gas (typically 5 cm3) was
pulled out of the top of the rigid tube (⌬Vsyringe). This reduces the
air pressure by an amount that can be calculated by the ideal gas
law. The change in pressure causes the air bubbles in the speci-
men to expand and this increases the height of water in the rigid
tube (Hr in Fig. 3). The change in height of the water in the rigid
tube along with the known area of the rigid tube was used to
determine the change in volume of the water within the rigid
tube (⌬Vrt). As the specimen was contained in an approximately
rigid container, the change in water height is primarily due to the
expansion of gas bubbles in the sand. Nevertheless, a small cor-
139
rection to the volume change was made to account for the com-
pliance of the soil cylinder (⌬Vcor). The gas pressure, p2, after
pulling (⌬Vsyringe) was calculated assuming isothermal expansion,
p1V1 = p2V2, where p1 is atmospheric pressure, V1 = Vtop1, and V2 =
Vtop1 − ⌬Vrt + ⌬Vsyringe is obtained from eq. [12]. Then the degree of
saturation is obtained from eq. [11]. The volume of gas in the
specimen (Va1) under the initial absolute pressure (p1) and degree
of saturation (S1), was computed based on the known change in
pressure and volume change of the specimen as follows:
p2(⌬Vrt ⫺ ⌬Vcor)
Va1 p1 ⫺ p2
[11] S1 ⫽ 1 ⫺ ⫽1⫺
Vv Ms
Vt ⫺
␳s
where p2 is given by the gas law assuming isothermal conditions
Vtop1
[12] p2 ⫽ p1
Vtop1 ⫺ ⌬Vrt ⫹ ⌬Vsyringe
The syringe method, as implemented, assumes the following:
1. The ideal gas law and isothermal expansion of the gas (pV =
constant) for the air above the water in the rigid tube.
2. The ideal gas law and isothermal expansion of gas bubbles in
the soil specimen.
3. The initial air pressure in the air bubbles is equal to p1, and
furthermore, that p1 = atmospheric pressure = 101.3 kPa. It is
understood that, due to surface tension around the bubble,
the pressure inside the air bubbles is ua = uw + 2 Ts/r ⬃ 3 kPa
(where uw is the pressure in the water surrounding the air
bubble) for a 0.1 mm diameter bubble, but the bubble radii
were not measured and this was considered to be negligible.
4. The volume of gas going into or out of solution while the
syringe test is conducted is negligible (the reasonability of this
assumption was confirmed by checking that the computed
saturation was not sensitive to the magnitude or sign of
⌬Vsyringe).
Table 4 compares accuracy of the new “syringe method” to the
accuracy of the conventional method by investigating the theoret-
ical sensitivity of the computed volume of air to potential errors
in the measured input parameters for an example specimen with
S = 0.99 (1% air voids). For the conventional method, a 1% error in
density or mass of water leads to an error factor (computed air
volume / actual air volume) of 1.98 (98% error). If the density of
solids, volume of specimen or mass was in error by 1%, the error
Published by NRC Research Press
 140
Table 4. Results of sensitivity study to compare errors of the conventional and syringe methods.
Conventional method
Va/Vv actual Source of error Va/Vv calculated Error factor
0.01 1% error in ␳w 0.0198 1.98
0.01 1% error in ␳s 0.0295 2.45
0.01 1% error in Vt 0.0341 3.41
0.01 1% error in Ms 0.0342 3.42
0.01 1% error in Mw 0.0199 1.99
Note: The magnitude of the sources of error were qualitatively selected to be consistent with the accuracy of the equipment and techniques used for this research.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH on 09/13/19
factor would be about 2.4 to 3.4. For the syringe method, the
largest error factor (computed air volume / actual air volume) is
1.15 (15% error) corresponding to a 10% error in the measured
change in volume, Vrt. A 3% anticipated error in input parameters
Vtop1 and dVsyringe would lead to a similar 3.5% to 4.5% error in the
measured volume of air in the specimen. The uncertainty in the
correction factor for compliance of the container would be ex-
pected to produce an error factor of about 1.10 (10% error) in air
volume. This sensitivity study shows that the syringe method is
likely to be more accurate than the conventional method for ac-
curate determination of small volumes of gas trapped in the spec-
imen. Furthermore, the syringe method is nondestructive and
much less tedious than the conventional method of measuring
masses and densities to determine total, solid, and liquid volumes
and then subtracting to determine the volume of air. The conven-
tional method requires meticulous attention to careful measure-
ments and still yields greater error. The conventional method
requires disassembly and re-assembly of the specimen to repeat
For personal use only.
the measurements required to calculate air volume. The syringe
method is nondestructive and can be conducted repeatedly in
case there is some reason to suspect an error. The results of the
syringe method presented in Table 3 are, in fact, the result of
several repetitions of the syringe method procedure on each
specimen.
Infiltration results
Some of the important information in Table 3 is highlighted
below.
• The pore fluid was water except in specimens A2, E5, and H1 for
which the viscosity of the water was increased by addition of
hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose as described by Stewart et al.
(1998).
• The time for outflow (the time between initial wetting at the
base and water egress into the rigid tube at the top) varied
between 3 and 787 min.
• The capillary number, Ca = ␩v/Ts, varied by a factor of 300.
The largest Ca value was obtained in specimen A2 with a
viscous fluid injected rapidly in the coarse sand and the
smallest Ca value was obtained in specimen H4 with low
viscosity fluid injected slowly. Note that Ca is not explicitly
dependent on particle size. It is, however, much easier to
obtain high infiltration velocities for coarse sands because
they are more permeable.
• The Bond number, Bo = (␳f − ␳g)gr2/Ts, increases with g and
decreases with particle size. The surface tension, Ts, has not
been observed to be very sensitive to addition of methyl cellu-
lose so for the present work, Ts is assumed constant at
0.072 N/m. Similar Bo values were obtained for the coarse sand
at 1ge, the medium sand at 8ge, and the fine sand at 64ge.
• In most cases, the infiltrating water was at equilibrium with the
atmosphere prior to infiltration and hence gas dissolution did
not play a significant role. But for three cases (A2, E4, and E5),
the water was de-aired prior to infiltration. The quality of the
de-airing is indicated in Table 3 as 85 kPa (the vacuum pressure
at which bubbles were observed to transition between growing
and shrinking in the de-aired water chamber). For A2, with air
Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 50, 2013
Proposed syringe method
Va/Vv actual Source of error Va/Vv calculated Error factor
0.01 1% error in p1 0.0100 1.002
0.01 3% error in Vtop1 0.0104 1.035
0.01 −3% error in DVsyringe 0.0104 1.045
0.01 10% error in ⌬Vrt 0.0115 1.149
0.01 −50% error in DVcor 0.0110 1.102
as the pore gas, 99.9% saturation was obtained. For cases E4 and
E5, prior to infiltration, the air in the sand pores was replaced
by flushing with CO2 several times. 100% saturation was
achieved for the finest sand when infiltration was by de-aired
water into a system with pores initially saturated with CO2 pore
gas.
Snapshots taken during infiltration are shown in Fig. 5. When
viewing these photographs, keep in mind that pore sizes are in-
fluenced by the rigid wall — the mean pore size would be larger
on the boundary and therefore, capillary rise on the boundary is
less than it is in the interior. As such, images of the boundary are
not necessarily representative of infiltration patterns in the inte-
rior. In specimen H4, for example, it appears that there are many
bubbles on the boundary, yet the measured average degree of
saturation of this specimen was about 94%. For the fine sand at 1g
(Fraction E), the capillary rise is greater than the specimen height.
At 8g, the apparent capillary fringe for Fraction E sand (the eleva-
tion difference between the top-most wet sand and the elevation
of the wetted container) is about 40 mm; at 64g, the apparent
capillary fringe is about 5 mm. As expected, the height of the
apparent capillary fringe is approximately inversely proportional
to the g-level (Garnier et al. 2007).
Analysis and discussion
Figure 6 plots the degree of saturation obtained (from the sy-
ringe method) after infiltration for all the tests. Data (shown in
Table 3) obtained after letting the sample sit for an extended
period of time are not plotted.
Ratnam (1996) and Ratnam et al. (1996) studied displacement of
oil from soil pores by water infiltration by plotting the water
saturation as a function of Ca and Bo. These results, also shown in
Fig. 6, are in remarkable agreement with the results of the present
study in Fig. 6a. For these tests, Ca was varied over only a small
range, whereas it was varied by several orders of magnitude in the
present study. It should be mentioned that Ratnam (1996) used the
mean particle size for his computation of Bo. For Fig. 6, Bo values
were computed using r = D10/2 from eq. [2].
Recently, Okamura and Inoue (2012) reported saturation ob-
tained by infiltration of water into air on the centrifuge for Toy-
oura sand (D10 = 0.11 mm) and Keisha sand (D10 = 0.068 mm).
Okamura and Inoue (2012) did not specify how or if the water they
introduced was de-aired, and did not consider the effect of disso-
lution of gasses in their analysis or description of the test proce-
dure. They did some infiltration tests at atmospheric pressure and
some at vacuum. Dissolution effects are expected to be small for
displacement of air by water under atmospheric pressure; there-
fore, only their tests at atmospheric pressure have been added to
Fig. 6.
For all cases in Fig. 6, if Bo > 0.01, the achieved saturation is
between 95% and 98% when gas dissolution and pressure changes
do not play a significant role. The Bond number, Bo, can be
thought of as being proportional to particle size divided by the
height of capillary rise. Trapping of gas bubbles is more likely at
small Bo when capillary rise is much greater than the particle size,
consistent with Fig. 6.
Published by NRC Research Press
 Kutter
Fig. 5. Observations of saturation front during infiltration experiments.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH on 09/13/19
(a) E1 (1 g, 11 min)
(c) E3 (64 g, 12 min)
For personal use only.
(e) E6 (8 g, 250 min)
(g) H3 (1 g, 5.5 min)
(i) A2 (1 g, 134 min)
141
Note: more fingering
in E2 than E1 and
evidence of horizontal
stratification in E2 and
E1. The bottom of the
apparent capillary
fringe is not visible.
(b) E2 (1 g, 105 min)
Two images from test
E3. At 64 g, the
apparent capillary
fringe is about 0.5 cm
thick. (d) is an
enlarged detail of the
image shown in (c).
(d) E3 (64 g, 12 min)
Two images from test
E6. At 8 g, the
apparent capillary
fringe (distance from
arrow to arrow is
about 4 cm) The
thickness of the black
stripes is 5 mm.
(f) E6 (8 g, 250 min)
For Hostun sand
infiltrated at 1 g,
pockets of trapped air
collected at the
boundary of the
specimen, especially
obvious for very slow
infiltration. The
apparent capillary
fringe is about 4 cm.
(h) H4 (1 g, 420 min)
Capillary rise and air
trapping are not
apparent with Fraction
A with D10 = 1 mm. (j)
shows a close up view
of the interface in (i).
(j) A2 (1 g, 134 min)
Published by NRC Research Press
 142
Fig. 6. Saturation obtained after infiltration at varying (a) Bond number, Bo, and (b) capillary number, Ca. O & U, Okamura and Inoue (2012);
Ratnam, Ratnam (1996) and Ratnam et al. (1996).
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH on 09/13/19
For personal use only.
For Bo < 0.01, better saturation is achieved at high infiltration
rates (high Ca values). The three points in Fig. 6b for Fraction E
sand (solid triangles) with saturation between 0.82 and 0.86 had
Bo < 0.01, showing an increasing trend with Ca. The three points
for Hostun sand (solid squares) at Bo = 2.4 × 10−3 show a similar
increase with Ca. The capillary number, Ca, compares viscous and
capillary forces. For low Ca and low Bo values, water is pulled by
capillary tension into tiny pores high above the water table, rais-
ing the potential for gas to be trapped in the large voids below the
wetting front. At high Ca, when viscous forces are large, the flow
in the large pores is increased, less trapping of air occurs, and
higher degrees of saturation are obtained.
Fraction E sand and Keisha sand consistently produced smaller
degrees of water saturation than Hostun and Toyoura sands even
though they were tested over overlapping ranges of Bo and Ca,
suggesting that there are other factors affecting the process. It is
suspected that this difference may be related to the presence of a
small percentage of fines in Fraction E sand and 13.8% fines for
Keisha sand. It was noticed that during pluviation of Fraction E
sand through air, dust production was much more obvious than
for the other sands. Due to air resistance, the finer particles spread
into a wider pluviation stream than coarse particles. This pro-
duced noticeably heterogeneous layering (variable darkness of
wet sand) in Figs. 5a and 5b, with a layer spacing on the order of
about 5 mm. This introduces another characteristic length (be-
sides particle size and specimen size) to the problem, which is not
accounted for in Fig. 6. Trapping of air under the dust-rich layers
might explain the lower saturation of Fraction E sand when com-
pared with Hostun sand.
For the two cases where the air was replaced by CO2 and de-
aired water was used to displace the CO2, 100% saturation was
achieved. The rate of dissolution can be enhanced by flushing or
flowing water through the specimen, as this speeds up the diffu-
sion of dissolved gas away from bubbles in the soil and reduces
dissolution times (Holocher et al. 2003).
Capillary barrier problems
During the course of this work it became apparent that the
infiltration process can by severely hampered by the trapping of
Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 50, 2013
air that forms a vapor or gas bubble barrier. Such barriers may
form when a material with larger capillary suction overlies a ma-
terial with low capillary suction, for example,
1. In layered soil profiles — Gas barriers may develop where a fine
soil overlies a coarse soil; air may be trapped under a fine layer
that is saturated by capillary tension. Heterogeneities on the
order of a couple millimetres in thickness were exposed dur-
ing infiltration of the finer sand (see Figs. 5a and 5b).
2. Where the supply tube hits the sand — For the test set up shown in
Fig. 3, it was discovered that if the water supply flow rate was
less than the rate where capillary tension could pull the water
out of the supply tube (as illustrated in Fig. 7), the sand would
pull water up from the edges of the tube and release air back
into the supply tube, creating an air bubble in the inlet below
the screen. This air bubble has no place to go once the pores
above are blocked by water, and the bubble can block the
supply tube and radically slow down the infiltration process.
Benefits of saturating in a centrifuge
The saturation process can be sped up and difficulties with
vapor barriers can be minimized by performing the infiltration
while the specimen is spinning in a centrifuge. The centrifugal
acceleration helps by increasing Bo and effective stresses so that
larger pore pressure gradients can be applied without causing a
boiling condition as the pore pressure ratio, Ru, approaches 1. The
efficacy of infiltration during application of increased gravity was
demonstrated experimentally for the very fine sand spun at 64g.
Okamura and Inoue (2012) also clearly demonstrated the benefits
of saturation on a centrifuge. Additional work is also required to
determine how to ensure that pore pressure transducers embed-
ded in sand specimens can be reliably saturated during this alter-
nate procedure.
Conclusions
Achieving complete water saturation is known to be important
for centrifuge models, especially with respect to centrifuge mod-
eling of liquefaction problems. A new method of measuring the
Published by NRC Research Press
 Kutter
Fig. 7. Illustration showing how an air bubble may form at the
water inlet.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH on 09/13/19
degree of saturation (the syringe method) of specimens in a rigid
container is presented. The method is better able to accurately
measure small air contents; for S > 99%, the method has a resolu-
tion of about 0.1%.
This paper sheds light on the effects of Bo, Ca, and gas disso-
lution on the “soil-water characteristic curve” (the relation be-
tween water pressure and degree of saturation). For Bo > 10−2,
the height of capillary rise was small enough that the volume of
bubbles trapped during infiltration was less than about 5% of
the pore volume. Bo can be increased by increasing particle size
or by increasing the g-level by spinning in a centrifuge. Espe-
For personal use only.
cially for Bo < 10−2, the degree of saturation depends on Ca. At
low Bo values, and small infiltration flow rates, capillary action
sucks water far above the water table, increasing the potential
for bubble entrapment.
In water, the solubility of carbon dioxide gas is 56 times greater
than N2 gas; therefore to obtain high degrees of saturation, it is
very advantageous to replace a large fraction of the N2 gas by CO2
prior to infiltration. As indicated in Table 1, de-gassed water can
dissolve about 83% if its volume of CO2, but only 1.5% of its volume
of N2.
Lowering the fluid pressure prior to infiltration (by application
of a vacuum) decreases the density of the gas and reduces the mass
of air trapped during infiltration. Increasing the fluid pressure
after bubbles are trapped (either by releasing the vacuum or ap-
plying back pressure) decreases the volume of the bubbles and
increases the solubility, leading to improved saturation. Equa-
tions are provided for quantitative calculation of relationships
between degree of saturation and pressure for different gasses.
The time required to dissolve trapped bubbles depends on the
size of the bubbles, the solubility of the bubbles, and their total
volume. For air bubbles, Black and Lee (1973) found that the time
required to dissolve bubbles could be days or weeks. As CO2 is 56
times more soluble, the time required for CO2 to dissolve would
be expected to be much faster.
Vapor barriers can develop at the interface between soils with
different particle sizes or where a water supply tube touches a soil
with significant capillary action; these vapor barriers can practi-
cally block the saturation process. Some of these mechanisms are
described, but more detailed study is warranted.
Naesgaard et al. (2007) questioned the quality of saturation pro-
duced using the procedure described by CGM (2011) and Ueno
(1998). By consideration of the effects of Ca, Bo, and the high
solubility of CO2, it is concluded that if carefully followed, the
procedure described by Ueno (1998) is able to reliably produce
100% saturation of uniform specimens for laboratory or centrifuge
model tests.
As an alternative to the proposed procedure, complete satura-
tion can be theoretically obtained without application of a vac-
uum during infiltration if air is replaced by CO2 and the water is
143
de-gassed prior to infiltration. Although saturation of pore pres-
sure transducers is still a concern, the saturation process could be
sped up and difficulties with vapor barriers could be minimized
by performing the infiltration while the specimen is spinning in a
centrifuge.
Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank his hosts and colleagues Gopal
Madabhushi and Malcolm Bolton, at the Schofield Center of Cam-
bridge University, for enabling his sabbatical visit from June to
December 2010. Students and staff at the Schofield Center (espe-
cially Richard Adams, John Chandler, Ulas Cilingir, Stuart Haigh,
Charles Heron, Jennifer Haskell, Chris McGinnie, Brenden McMa-
hon, Kristian Pether, Mark Stringer, Paul Shepley, Philip Wall-
bridge, Tony Wang, and Michael Williamson) all provided
important assistance at various stages of this work. The sabbatical
visit was facilitated by an Overseas Fellowship at Churchill Col-
lege, Cambridge, and a Distinguished Visiting Fellowship award
from the Royal Academy of Engineering in London. Dan Wilson at
the UC Davis Center for Geotechnical Modeling authored CGM
(2011) that was later adapted by Ueno (1998) and helped develop
the concepts presented in this paper.
References
Black, D.K., and Lee, K.L. 1973. Saturating laboratory samples by back pressure.
Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, 99(SM1): 75–93.
Blunt, M.J., and Scher, H. 1995. Pore-level modeling of wetting. Physical Review
E, 52(6): 6387–6403. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.52.6387.
CGM. 2011. Saturation procedures. Wiki article posted by the UC Davis Center for
Geotechnical Modeling. [Accessed July 2011 at http://wiki.cgm.ucdavis.edu/
wiki/pages/W4D0A1u4/Saturation_Procedure.html.]
Chaney, R., 1978. Saturation effects on the cyclic strength of sands. Earthquake
Engineering and Soil Dynamics, 1: 342–358.
de Gennes, P.-G., Brochard-Wyart, F., and Quere, D. 2004. Capillarity and wetting
phenomena: drops, bubbles, pearls, waves. Springer Science+Business Media
Inc.
Eseller-Bayat, E.E. 2009. Seismic response and prevention of liquefaction failure
of sands partially saturated through introduction of gas bubbles. Ph.D. dis-
sertation, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Northeastern Uni-
versity, Boston, Mass.
Fredlund, D.G., and Rahardjo, H. 1993. Soil mechanics for unsaturated soils.
Wiley, New York.
Friedman, S.P. 1999. Dynamic contact angle explanation of flow rate-dependent
saturation-pressure relationships during transient liquid flow in unsaturated
porous media. Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology, 13(12): 1495–
1518. doi:10.1163/156856199X00613.
Garnier, J., Gaudin, C., Springman, S.M., Culligan, P.J., Goodings, D., Konig, D.,
Kutter, B., et al. 2007. Catalogue of scaling laws and similitude questions in
geotechnical centrifuge modeling. International Journal of Physical Model-
ling in Geotechnics, 7(3): 1–24.
Holocher, J., Peeters, F., Aeschbach-Hertig, W., Kinzelbach, W., and Kipfer, R.
2003. Kinetic model of gas bubble dissolution in groundwater and its impli-
cations for the dissolved gas composition. Environmental Science & Technol-
ogy, 37(7): 1337–1343. doi:10.1021/es025712z. PMID:18930245.
Ishihara, K., Huang, Y., and Tsuchiya, H. 1998. Liquefaction resistance of nearly
saturated sand as correlated with longitudinal wave velocity. In
Poromechanics: a tribute to Maurice A. Biot. Balkema, Rotterdam, the Neth-
erlands. pp. 583–586.
Kokusho, T. 2000. Correlation of pore-pressure B-value with P-wave velocity and
Poisson's ratio for imperfectly saturated sand or gravel. Soils and Founda-
tions, 40(4): 95–102. doi:10.3208/sandf.40.4_95.
Kutter, B. L. 1995. Recent advances in centrifuge modeling of seismic shaking.
State-of-the-Art Paper In Proceedings, Third International Conference on Re-
cent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics,
St. Louis, Mo. Vol. 2, pp. 927–942.
LeBihan, J.-P., and Leroueil, S. 2002. A model for gas and water flow through the
core of earth dams. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 39(1): 90–102. doi:10.1139/
t01-081.
Lowe, J., and Johnson, T.C. 1960. Use of back pressure to increase degree of
saturation of triaxial test specimens. Presented at the ASCE Research Confer-
ence on Shear Strength of Cohesive Soils, Boulder, Colo., June. pp. 819-836.
Lu, N., and Likos, W.J. 2004. Unsaturated soil mechanics. Wiley, Hoboken, New
Jersey.
Marulanda, C., Culligan, P.J., and Germaine, J.T. 2000. Centrifuge modeling of air
sparging — a study of air flow through saturated porous media. Journal of
Hazardous Materials, 72(2-3): 179–215.
Muir Wood, D.M. 2004. Geotechnical modelling. Spon Press, New York.
Published by NRC Research Press
 144
Mulilus, J.P., Chan, C.K., and Seed, H.B. 1975. The effects of method of sample
preparation on the cyclic stress-strain behavior of sands. University of Cali-
fornia, Berkeley, Calif. EERC Report No. 75-18.
Naesgaard, E., Byrne, P.M., and Wijewickreme, D. 2007. Is P-wave velocity an
indicator of saturation in sand with viscous pore fluid? International Journal
of Geomechanics, ASCE, 7(6): 437–443. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1532-3641(2007)7:
6(437).
Okamura, M., and Inoue, T. 2012. Preparation of fully saturated models for
liquefaction study. International Journal of Physical Modeling in Geotech-
nics, 12(1): 39–46. doi:10.1680/ijpmg.2012.12.1.39.
Okamura, M., Ishihara, M., and Tamura, K. 2006. Degree of saturation and liq-
uefaction resistances of sand improved with sand compaction pile. Journal of
Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, 132(2): 258–264.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH on 09/13/19
doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2006)132:2(258).
Ratnam, S. 1996. Geotechnical centrifuge modeling of the behavior of Light
Nonaqueous Phase Liquids (LNAPLs) in sand samples under hydraulic flush-
ing. S.M. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass.
Ratnam, S., Culligan-Hensley, P.J., and Germaine, J.T. 1996. Modeling the behav-
ior of LNAPLs under hydraulic flushing, Non-Aqueous Phase Liquids (NAPLs)
in subsurface environment: assessment and remediation. In Proceedings of
the Specialty Conference in conjunction with the ASCE National Convention,
Washington, D.C., 10-14 November 1996. ASCE. pp. 595-606. 978-0-7844-
0203-0 or 0-7844-0203-5.
Sander, R. 1999. Compilation of Henry's law constants for inorganic and organic
species of potential importance in environmental chemistry. Version 3.
Available at http://www.henrys-law.org [accessed 26 January 2011.
Stewart, D.P., Chen, Y.R., and Kutter, B.L. 1998. Experience with the use of
For personal use only.
Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 50, 2013
methylcellulose as a viscous pore fluid in centrifuge models. Geotechnical
Testing Journal, 21(4): 365–369. doi:10.1520/GTJ11376J.
Stringer, M.E., and Madabhushi, S.P.G. 2009. Novel computer-controlled satura-
tion of dynamic centrifuge models using high viscosity fluids. Geotechnical
Testing Journal, 32(6). doi:10.1520/GTJ102435.
Takahashi, H., Kitazume, M., Ishibasi, S., and Yamawaki, S. 2006. Evaluating the
saturation of model ground by P-wave velocity and modeling of models for a
liquefaction study. International Journal of Physical Modelling in Geotech-
nics, 6(1): 13–25.
Tuve, G.L., and Bolz, R.E. 1973. CRC handbook of tables for applied engineering
science. 2nd ed. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla. ISBN 0-8493-0252-8.
Ueno, K. 1998. Methods of preparation of sand samples. In Proceedings of the
International Conference Centrifuge 98, Tokyo. Edited by Kimura, Kusakabe,
and Takemura. Balkema, Rotterdam. Vol. 2, pp. 1047–1056.
Weinberg, M.C. 1981. Surface tension effects in gas bubble dissolution and
growth, Chemical Engineering Science, 36(1): 137–141.
White, D.J. 2003. PSD measurement using the single particle optical sizing
(SPOS) method. Géotechnique, 53(3): 317–326. doi:10.1680/geot.2003.53.3.317.
Wise, D.L., and Houghton, G. 1966. The diffusion coefficients of ten slightly
soluble gases in water at 10–60°Cs. Chemical Engineering Science, 21(11):
999–1010. doi:10.1016/0009-2509(66)85096-0.
Xia, H., and Hu, T. 1991. Effects of saturation and back pressure on sand lique-
faction. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 117(9): 1347–1362. doi:10.1061/
(ASCE)0733-9410(1991)117:9(1347).
Yoshimi, Y., Yanaka, K., and Tokimatsu, K. 1989. Liquefaction resistance of a
partially saturated sand. Soils and Foundations, 29(3): 157–162. doi:10.3208/
sandf1972.29.3_157.
Published by NRC Research Press