Arabian Journal of Geosciences (2021) 14:1317

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-021-07698-9

3RD CAJG 2020

Classification of soils’ contamination susceptibility with the use

of the permeameter apparatus
Nikolaos Depountis 1 & Panagiotis Pelekis 1 & Nikolaos Sabatakakis 1

Received: 29 March 2021 / Accepted: 21 June 2021

# Saudi Society for Geosciences 2021

Abstract
The current work describes a laboratory method for classifying soils according to their contamination susceptibility by using the
permeameter apparatus. This methodology is applied in a laboratory environment by performing several tests on saturated soil
samples derived from several sites located in the surrounding area of the city of Patras in Greece: hence, investigating the
mechanisms of advection flow and hydrodynamic dispersion. Solute migration through the saturated soil samples is monitored
with continuous recordings on solute’s conductivity in the exit of the permeameter apparatus. Test results are presented in the
form of contaminant concentration-time graphs and are cross-validated with the use of the CANAL-T software, which is used in
1-D calculations of the solute’s concentration in space and time, for both conservative and non-conservative tracers. The good
correlation of the breakthrough curves of solute’s concentration with time, among the constant and falling head laboratory tests
and the respective software results, suggests that the permeameter apparatus can be used for the investigation of contaminant
transport processes in different soil samples. At the end of this procedure, it becomes efficient to classify all soils according to
their contamination susceptibility as unsusceptible, moderately susceptible, and highly susceptible soils, which is a very impor-
tant aspect in the investigation of soil contamination for scientific purposes and contaminant prevention from human activities.

Keywords Contamination susceptibility . Permeameter apparatus . Advection flow . Hydrodynamic dispersion . Soil
classification

Introduction 2010; Parker and Van Genuchten 1984). Reviews of different

Mass transport of solutes through porous media has been in-
vestigated by several authors and researchers (Bear and
Bachmat 1991; Rowe et al. 1995; Fetter 1994; Luckner and
Schestakow 1991; Domenico and Schwartz 1998;
Vanderborght and Vereecken 2007; Zhuang et al. 2021), and
different techniques and experiments have been performed to
investigate solute breakthrough and transport mechanisms
(Cremer et al. 2016; Kumahor et al. 2015; Rolle and
Kitanidis 2014; Hunt and Skinner 2010; Chiogna et al.
Responsible Editor: Amjad Kallel
This paper was selected from the 3rd Conference of the Arabian Journal
of Geosciences (CAJG), Tunisia 2020
* Nikolaos Depountis
ndepountis@upatras.gr
1
University of Patras, Patras, Greece
model approaches to describe the transport of dissolved sol-
utes have also been given by Mayer et al. (2008), Feyen et al.
(1998), Jury and Flühler (1992), and Nielsen et al. (1986).
Based on the suggestions of the above approaches and
experiments, it is presented in the current study a classification
system for categorizing soil samples according to their con-
tamination susceptibility. For this purpose, the permeameter
apparatus is used along with a conductometer device for the
continuous recordings of the solute’s breakthrough at the out-
flow of the apparatus. There are two types of permeameters,
the constant head and the falling head. The falling head
permeameter is commonly used for testing remolded or un-
disturbed fine-grained soils having less than 10−2 cm/s coeffi-
cient of hydraulic conductivity, whereas the constant head
permeameter is used on coarse-grained cohesionless soils.
The tests are performed on saturated soil samples by initially
releasing a known volume of NaCl solute on their surface and
the solute’s conductivity is continuously recorded in the out-
flow the permeameter cells. Afterwards, all soil samples are
classified according to their contamination susceptibility (or
1317 Page 2 of 10 Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1317

suitability in retarding species) by interpreting their retardation dimensional conditions for non-reactive species in isotropic
capacity (Rd) upon the species of Na+ and Cl−. and homogeneous soils under steady-state ground water flow
It is well known that the basic hydraulic processes that can be expressed by the following equation (Domenico and
control solute transport in saturated soils are advection flow Schwartz 1998):
and hydrodynamic dispersion. Advection flow is the process
by which moving ground water carries dissolved solutes and ∂2 C ∂C ∂C
DL −uv ¼ ð5Þ
contaminant species are traveling at the same rate as the aver- ∂x2 ∂x ∂t
age linear velocity of the ground water (Bear 1979). According to Parker and Van Genuchten (1984), in the
Hydrodynamic dispersion combines the processes of molecu- case of soils that adsorb ions or molecules from the solute,
lar diffusion and mechanical dispersion existing in flowing the non-dimensional linear retardation factor Rd is taken into
ground water. In the current research, the lateral hydrodynam- consideration and the above equation modifies as:
ic dispersion was negligible compared with the longitudinal
hydrodynamic dispersion, after the suggestions made by ∂2 C ∂C ρd ∂S ∂C
DL −uv − ¼ ð6Þ
Freeze and Cherry (1979), Fetter (1994), and Vanderborght ∂x2 ∂x n ∂t ∂t
and Vereecken (2007) for similar cases. Therefore, for one-
dimensional flow, the hydrodynamic dispersion is represented where C is the solute concentration (g/cm3), ρd is the soil’s
by the following equation (Fetter 1994): dry density (g/cm3), and S is the adsorbed solute mass (μg/g).
Equation (6) is modified with the import of Rd as:
DL ¼ Dm þ Dd ¼ αL uv þ Dd ð1Þ
∂2 C ∂C ∂C
DL −uv ¼ Rd ð7Þ
where DL is the coefficient of longitudinal hydrodynamic ∂x 2 ∂x ∂t
dispersion (cm2/s), Dm is the coefficient of mechanical disper-
sion (cm2/s), Dd is the coefficient of effective diffusion (cm2/ In addition, Van Genuchten (1981) introduced the non-
s), αL is the dynamic dispersivity (cm), and uv is the average dimensional coefficients in mass transport of solutes and cre-
linear ground water velocity (cm/s). ated the following non-dimensional equations:
For laminar flow conditions in coarse soils, mechanical
∂C ∂S 1 ∂2 C ∂C
dispersion is dominant compared with effective diffusion þ ðRd −1Þ ¼ − ð8Þ
∂T ∂T Pe ∂X 2 ∂X
and, therefore, Eq. (1) modifies and is represented by the fol-
lowing equation (Fetter 1994): ∂S
ðRd −1Þ ¼ wðC−S Þ ð9Þ
∂T
DL ≈αL uv ð2Þ
where Τ is the non-dimensional time coefficient which cor-
In the event of low ground water velocities, prevalent in responds to the time that a volume of solute, equal to the
fine soils, effective diffusion is dominant compared with me- volume of the soil’s voids, needs to be washed out from the
chanical dispersion and therefore Eq. (1) modifies and is rep- soil sample; S is the non-dimensional adsorbed solute mass,
resented by the following equation (Fetter 1994): Pe is the Peclet number, C is the non-dimensional solute con-
centration, and w and β are the non-dimensional transport
DL ≈Dd ð3Þ coefficients of the solute’s mass.
Berner (1971) and Bear (1979) gave a non-empirical rela- Equations (8) and (9) constitute the base of the CANAL-T
tionship between the coefficient of effective diffusion Dd and software, which was used in the discussed research for the
the coefficient of diffusion D. This relationship modifies Eq. comparison of the results obtained by the experimental proce-
(3) as: dure. This software solves the equations mentioned before,
representing the injection of a solute pulse in saturated porous
n media.
DL ≈D ð4Þ
τ2
where D is the coefficient of diffusion (cm2/s), n is the
soil’s porosity, and τ is the tortuosity of the flow path of the Materials used in the experiments
diffused species.
For species that are not adsorbed or are lightly adsorbed Soil selection and classification
onto the mineral surface, the ratio of n/τ2 ranges from 0.5 to
0.01 (Freeze and Cherry 1979). For the purposes of the current research, several soil samples
Mass transport of non-reactive species in saturated porous with different physical properties were selected from several
media is well described by the equation of advection flow- sites located in the surrounding area of the city of Patras in
hydrodynamic dispersion and the Darcy’s Law. The one- Greece (Fig. 1). The selected samples were classified
Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1317
Fig. 1 Map of the sampling area located in the surrounding area of the city of Patras in Greece (use of the Hellenic Geodetic Reference System, 1987)
according to the ASTM D-2487 Classification of Soils for
Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System)
and their physical properties were determined with the use
of standard laboratory methods (Table 1).
Solute selection
Silliman et al. (1998) have presented in their research
intermediate scale experiments for the study of fluid flow
and the transport of conservative solutes in heteroge-
neous, saturated porous media. Similarly, to the aforemen-
tioned research, other researches too have used conserva-
tive solutes (Zhuang et al. 2021; Rolle and Kitanidis
2014) for detecting solute transport. As a result, it was
decided in the current research to use sodium chloride
(NaCl) with an initial concentration of 8.76g/l or 0.15M.
Even though the sodium chloride solute (NaCl) is a con-
servative solute, chloride ion (Cl−) is the conservative
tracer and sodium ion (Na+) is the reactive tracer, espe-
cially when it mitigates through clayey soils.
The surface of clays has an electrical charge, which is
imbalanced and may be satisfied by adsorbing a charged
ion. The adsorption may be relatively weak, or stronger
if chemical bonding occurs between the surface and the
ion. Clays tend to be strong absorbers, since they have
Page 3 of 10 1317
both a high surface area per unit volume and significant
electrical charges at the surface (Zheng and Bennett
1995), and this favors the cation exchange of ions, e.g.,
sodium ions (Na+).
A correction factor known as a retardation factor (Rd)
considers how much a contaminant ' s velocity is affected
by sorption on solid surfaces. The overall correction factor
is a measure of the bulk density of the media, the porosity,
and the distribution coefficient (Kd). The retardation factor
in ground water has been measured quite often by using
non-adsorbing tracers and highly adsorbing contaminants
(Rowe 1987).
The retardation factor figures into the advection-dispersion
equation by dividing average linear velocity and any disper-
sion coefficients through by this retardation factor.
Retardation factor, for a particular chemical species, is the
ratio of solution velocity and species velocity or in other
words the ratio between the rate of groundwater movement
and rate of contaminant movement (Bear and Verruijt 1987;
Domenico and Schwartz FW 1998).
In the next paragraphs, it is explained in detail how ion
exchange and adsorption processes manage to remove, in
some of the soil samples, the sodium ions (Na+) from the
selected NaCl solution, and, therefore, retard the solute’s
migration.
1317 Page 4 of 10 Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1317

Table 1 Physical properties and

classification of soil samples Sample Classification Gs d50 PI γd (kN/ n e k (cm/s) K (cm2)
(ASTM D-2487 n.d.) no. (mm) m3)

S1 SP 2.69 0.185 – 17.15 0.35 0.54 2.65×10−3 2.3×10−8

S2a SW 2.60 0.530 – 17.96 0.31 0.45 3.53×10−3 3.1×10−8
S2b ML 2.59 0.068 – 17.49 0.30 0.43 10−5 9.6×10−11
S3 SC 2.63 0.120 7.96 17.46 0.30 0.43 10−4 8.9×10−10
S4 SM 2.65 0.155 – 16.90 0.34 0.52 1.1×10−3 9.7×10−9
S5 SP 2.65 0.285 – 17.00 0.33 0.49 10−2 8.6×10−8
S6 SM 2.67 0.220 – 18.33 0.28 0.39 2.2×10−5 2×10−10
S7 ML 2.63 0.020 5.05 17.30 0.29 0.41 4×10−6 3.7×10−11
S8 ML-CL 2.68 0.024 6.89 17.34 0.28 0.39 2×10−6 1.9×10−11
S9 SM 2.62 0.455 – 17.21 0.36 0.56 2×10−3 1.8×10−8
S10 SM 2.61 0.145 – 17.06 0.32 0.47 7.5×10−3 6.6×10−9

The soil samples presented in Table 1 are the saturated porous media samples used in the current research. The
symbols in Table 1 correspond to Gs, specific gravity; d50, mean grain size diameter of soils; PI, plasticity index;
γd, dry unit weight; n, soil porosity; e, void ratio; k, hydraulic permeability; and K, intrinsic permeability

Experimental apparatus and description
of the research process
Arrangement of the apparatus
The apparatus used is the constant and falling head
permeameter apparatus, with appropriate modifications, and
the conductometer device (Fig. 2). The constant head appara-
tus was used in tests involving soils with high to medium
hydraulic conductivities, such as sandy soils. The falling head
apparatus was used in tests involving soils with low hydraulic
conductivities, such as silty and clayey soils. The solute’s
(NaCl) conductivity was measured in the outflow of the ap-
paratus, for each soil, with the conductometer device, and so
solute migration through the saturated samples was efficiently
monitored (Fig. 3).
Description of the research process
from a valve on the top of the cells, with the boundary condi-
tions remain the same as before (e.g., during the calculation of
hydraulic permeability). When the pulse has been fully
injected in the soil sample, distilled water is released on the
top of sample to force the solute pulse to migrate under the
actions of advection flow and hydrodynamic dispersion. As a
result, after some time, the solute pulse arrives at the outflow
of the cells (Figure 2), where it is collected in appropriate
vessels for continuous measurements in its temperature and
its electrical conductivity. The experimental procedure ends
when the solute’s electrical conductivity gets equal to the ini-
tial electrical conductivity of distilled water.
The following equation was used to modify the conductiv-
ity data (μS) measured with the conductometer device into
solute concentration data (Molarity). This equation is the re-
sult of calibration among electrical conductivity and solute
concentration data.
C ðMolarityÞ ¼ 10−5 E:C:ðμS Þ ð10Þ

Each soil sample is placed in one of the cells of Fig. 2 and air is
removed from the soil’s voids by using a vacuum pump.
Afterwards, each sample is saturated by inserting distilled wa-
ter from a valve on the base of the cells, while vacuum is still
applied. When saturation has been achieved, the valve is get-
ting closed and the known procedure for calculating the hy-
draulic and intrinsic permeability (see results in Table 1) is
applied for each soil separately.
After the calculation of hydraulic permeability and as the
soil sample is still saturated, the excessive water volume on
the top of the sample can drain until water level balances to the
sample’s surface. Then, a known volume of sodium chloride
solute (NaCl) is injected as a pulse on the sample’ s surface
Cross-relation of the experimental data with the
software data
CANAL-T software (Lobbo-Ferreira 1988; Leitao et al. 1996)
is used in calculations of the solute’s concentration in space
and in time, for both conservative and non-conservative
tracers, considering Eqs. (8) and (9). The use of this software
also permits the indirect calculation of the coefficient of hy-
drodynamic dispersion. In the discussed research, CANAL-T
software was used to cross-relate the software’s data with the
experimental. The following boundary conditions existed dur-
ing the experiments:
Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1317 Page 5 of 10 1317

Fig. 2 Arrangement of the

constant and falling head
permeameter apparatus

& Instant injection of a solute pulse in a saturated soil sample & The ratio Vtr/Vp which is the ratio among the pulse’s vol-
& Use of a finite soil sample ume to the soil’s voids volume.
& Steady flow conditions & The Peclet number Pe ¼ uvDdd50
& C(Χ=0, T)=C0, 0≤T≤Tp & The linear retardation factor Rd
& C(Χ=0, T)=0, T >Tp & The coefficients w and β, which for SP and SW soils were
w=0 and β=1, and for soils SM, SC, ML, and ML-CL
The correct use of the software demands the knowledge of were considered to be w>>0 and β=1/Rd.
the following parameters:
& The coefficient T ¼ tuLv ¼ VtQp that corresponds to how
& The non-dimensional time that the pulse needs to reach the many times a soil sample of length L is depleted by a pulse
t u of volume Q.
outflow of the soil sample: T p ¼ pL v

Fig. 3 Apparatus used from left to right, (a) constant head, (b) falling head, (c) conductometer device
1317 Page 6 of 10
Analysis and interpretation
of the experimental results
All breakthrough curves obtained with the experimental re-
sults are presented in the form of contaminant concentration-
time graphs and are cross-related with the relevant curves
obtained by using the CANAL-T software.
Sample S1 (SP: poorly graded sand) The boundary conditions
existed during the experiment were similar to those of steady-
state flow conditions, with a saturation degree Sr=100%, hy-
draulic gradient i=7.61, and length of the flow path L=18.2
cm. The injected solute had a volume Vtr=100cm3 with an
initial solute concentration C0=0.15M. The cross-relation be-
tween the experimental data and the derived software data is
satisfactory (Fig. 4). The normal Gauss distribution of the
breakthrough curve suggests that mechanical dispersion is
the dominant transport process of the solute pulse inside the
SP sample. Initial solute concentration C0 dilutes as it miti-
gates, with the peak solute concentration arriving at the out-
flow at a time that is similar to the time that advection flow
arrives; thus, it may be concluded that advection flow is
transporting the ions of the solute pulse.
Sample S2a (SW: well-graded sand with fines) The boundary
conditions were similar as before. The injected solute had a
volume V tr =25cm 3 with an initial solute concentration
C0=0.15M. The cross-relation between the experimental data
and the derived software data is satisfactory (Fig. 5). From the
breakthrough curve interpretation, it may be concluded that
mechanical dispersion is the dominant transport process of the
solute pulse inside the SW sample and that advection flow is
transporting the ions of the solute pulse.
Sample S4 (SM: non-plastic silty sand) The boundary condi-
tions existed during the experiment were similar to those of
Fig. 4 Breakthrough curves that
corresponds to SP (sample no. S1
of Table 1)
Concentration (M)
Breakthrough curves in soil sample S1 (SP). Boundary conditions: Sr=100%, i=7.61, L=18.2cm and
uv =5.75*10-2 cm/sec. Injection of a volume tracer Vtr=100ml with initial concentration C0 =0.15M
Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1317
steady-state flow conditions with a saturation degree
Sr=100%, hydraulic gradient i=9.51, and length of the flow
path L=18.2 cm. The injected solute had a volume Vtr=25cm3
with an initial solute concentration C0=0.15M. The cross-
relation between the experimental data and the derived soft-
ware data is satisfactory (Fig. 6). The normal Gauss distribu-
tion of the breakthrough curve suggests that mechanical dis-
persion is the dominant transport process of the solute pulse
inside the SM sample. However, at the end of the curve,
something changes, and solute concentration is higher than
expected. The Peclet number is lower compared with the pre-
vious experiments, but still mechanical dispersion dominates.
Due to the solute’s higher concentration at the outflow, a
continuous “tail” exists, which extinguishes progressively as
advection flow continues. This suggests that soil sample SM
responds relatively well to the solute’s pulse invasion and
adsorbs some of its ions, even though hydrodynamic cleaning
was imposed in the sample during the experiment. Initial sol-
ute concentration dilutes more now compared with the previ-
ous experiments as it mitigates inside the sample. The peak of
the solute’s concentration arrives at the outflow later, since the
time to reach the outflow is longer compared with the time that
advection flow arrives; thus, molecular diffusion starts to take
part in the pulse transportation in this soil sample.
Sample S5 (SP: poorly graded sand) The boundary conditions
existed during the experiment were similar to those of steady-
state flow conditions with a saturation degree Sr=100%, hy-
draulic gradient i=7.61, and length of the flow path L=18.2
cm. The injected solute had a volume Vtr=100cm3 with an
initial solute concentration C0=0.15M. The cross-relation be-
tween the experimental data and the derived software data is
satisfactory (Fig. 7). The high Peclet number Pe=374.26
existed during the experiment corresponds to a turbulent in-
stead of a laminar flow. The normal Gauss distribution of the
breakthrough curve suggests that mechanical dispersion is the
0,12
Pe = 66.30
Rd = 1.00
K = 2.65*10-3 cm/sec
0,1
C(L,t) = 0.11mol/lt@361sec
0,08
EXPERIMENT CANAL-T
0,06
0,04
0,02
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Time (sec)
Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1317 Page 7 of 10 1317

Fig. 5 Breakthrough curves that 0,1

corresponds to SW (sample no. Pe = 285.35
0,09 Rd = 1.00
S2a of Table 1) K = 3.53*10-3 cm/sec
0,08 C(L,t) = 0.09mol/lt@220sec

0,07

Concentration (M)
0,06
EXPERIMENT CANAL-T
0,05

0,04

0,03

0,02

0,01

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Breakthrough curves in soil sample S2a (SW). Boundary conditions: Sr=100%, i=7.61, L=18.2cm Time (sec)
and uv =8.67*10-2 cm/sec. Injection of a volume tracer Vtr=25ml with initial concentration C 0 =0.15M

dominant transport process of the solute pulse inside the SP
sample. Initial solute concentration C0 dilutes as it mitigates
inside the sample. The peak of the solute’s concentration ar-
rives at the outflow at a time that is similar to the time that
advection flow arrives; thus, advection flow is transporting the
ions of the solute pulse.
Sample S6 (SM: non-plastic silty sand) The boundary condi-
tions existed during the experiment were similar to those of
steady-state flow conditions with a saturation degree
Sr=100%, hydraulic gradient i=9.51, and length of the flow
path L=18.2 cm. The injected solute had a volume Vtr=10cm3
with an initial solute concentration C0=0.15M. The cross-
relation between the experimental data and the derived soft-
ware data is satisfactory (Fig. 8). Molecular diffusion plays an
important role in the transport process of the solute pulse
inside the SM sample, and at the end of the breakthrough
curve, solute concentration is higher as expected. The Peclet
number in this experiment is lower compared with the previ-
ous experiments. Due to the solute’s higher concentration at
the outflow, a continuous “tail” exists which extinguishes pro-
gressively as advection flow continues. This suggests that the
soil sample SM responds very efficiently to the solute’s pulse
invasion and adsorbs some of its ions, even though hydrody-
namic cleaning was imposed in the sample during the exper-
iment. Initial solute concentration dilutes more compared with
the previous experiments as it mitigates inside the sample. The
peak of the solute’s concentration arrives at the outflow later,
since the time to reach the outflow is now much longer com-
pared with the time that advection flow arrives.
In the tests conducted in soil sample no. S9 (SM) και no.
S10 (SM), with an expected retardation factor Rd=1.5 and
Peclet numbers >20 (Table 2), the experimental results were
like those of soil sample no. S4 (SM). In those tests, mechanical
dispersion was the dominant transport process and the peak of
the solute’s concentration arrived at the outflow later than ad-
vection flow arrived. In the test conducted in soil sample no. S3
(SC), with an expected retardation factor Rd=1.75 and Peclet
number 3.64 (Table 2), molecular diffusion dominated slightly
compared with mechanical dispersion. In the tests conducted in
soil sample no. S2b (ML), no. S7 (ML), and no. S8 (ML-CL),
with an expected retardation factor Rd=2.0 and Peclet numbers
<1 (Table 2), molecular diffusion dominated clearly compared
with mechanical dispersion.

Fig. 6 Breakthrough curves that 0,018

corresponds to SM (sample no. Pe = 33.03
0,016
S4 of Table 1) Rd = 1.50
0,014 K = 1.1*10-3cm/sec
C(L,t)=0.015mol/lt@831sec
Concentration (M)

0,012
0,01
0,008 EXPERIMENT CANAL-T
0,006
0,004
0,002
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000

Breakthrough curves in soil sample S4 (SM). Boundary conditions: Sr=100%, i=9.51, L=18.2cm Time (sec)
and uv = 3.1*10-2 cm/sec. Injection of a volume tracer Vtr=25ml with initial concentration C0 =0.15M
1317 Page 8 of 10 Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1317

Fig. 7 Breakthrough curves that 0,16

corresponds to SP (sample no. S5 Pe = 374.26
Rd = 1.00
of Table 1) 0,14
K = 10-2 cm/sec
C(L,t) = 0.15mol/lt@93sec
0,12

Concentration (M)
0,1
EXPERIMENT CANAL-T
0,08

0,06

0,04

0,02

0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Breakthrough curves in soil sample S5 (SP). Boundary conditions: Sr=100%, i=7.61, L=18.2cm Time (sec)
and uv =0.23 cm/sec. Injection of a volume tracer Vtr=100ml with initial concentration C 0 =0.15M

Generally speaking, fine soils such as ML, ML-CL, and SC
respond more effectively in the solute’ s invasion and trans-
portation by adsorbing ions and/or species form the solute and
diluting the solute’s concentration; therefore, the solute’s
pulse arrives much later at the outflow compared with the time
that advection flow arrives.
Discussion
All experimental results suggest that for the soils used in the
experiments, the main transport process of the solute’s pulse is
controlled mainly by the grain size distribution, the porosity,
and the intrinsic permeability. The reduction of d50, which is
the mean grain size diameter of the soil, results to a decelera-
tion in the solute’s transportation. Reduction of soil’s porosity
results to a deceleration in solute transportation and to a higher
contaminant adsorption. Reduction of intrinsic permeability
results to an increase of molecular diffusion and to a deceler-
ation of solute transportation. Additionally, small Peclet num-
bers (Pe <5) result to an increase of molecular diffusion and to
a deceleration of solute transportation.
Solute transportation as explained before is controlled by
the main transport processes, and its arrival time at the outflow
depends on the adsorption capacity of each soil. Soils with
significant percentage of fines, especially clays, push away
the negatively charged ions of Cl− toward the center of the
soil’s voids, where water velocity is higher. As a result, the
negatively charged ions mitigate faster than advection flow.
On the contrary, the positively charged ions of Na+ are
adsorbed by the clayey soils. This happens because clays have
a net negative charge. Thus, these negatively charged soil
particles will attract and hold positively charged ions or parti-
cles, much like the opposite poles of a magnet attract each
other (Brandes 2005).
Furthermore, from the breakthrough curve analysis, it is
concluded that the width and height of maximum pulse con-
centration characterize the dispersion of the porous medium
and as the pulse mitigates initial solute concentration
decreases.
The good correlation among the conducted laboratory tests
with the respective software results suggests that the modified
permeameter apparatus can be used for the investigation of
contaminant transport processes and retardation. As a result,

Fig. 8 Breakthrough curves that 0,007

corresponds to SM (sample no. Pe = 1.12
0,006 Rd = 1.50
S6 of Table 1) K = 2.2*10-5 cm/sec
C(L,t)=0.006mol/lt@7006sec
0,005
Concentration (M)

0,004

0,003 EXPERIMENT CANAL-T

0,002

0,001

0
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000

Breakthrough curves in soil sample S6 (SM). Boundary conditions: Sr=100%, i=9.51, L=18.2cm Time (sec)
and uv= 7.4*10-4 cm/sec. Injection of a volume tracer Vtr=10ml with initial concentration C0 =0.15M
Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1317 Page 9 of 10 1317

Table 2 Experimental results of

the test procedure Sample no. Classif. d50 (mm) n K (cm2) Dd (cm2/s) Pe Rd

S1 SP 0.185 0.35 2.3×10−8 1.6×10−5 66.30 1.00

S2a SW 0.530 0.31 3.1×10−8 1.6×10−5 285.35 1.00
S2b ML 0.068 0.30 9.6×10−11 6×10−6 0.34 2.00
S3 SC 0.120 0.30 8.9×10−10 10−5 3.64 1.75
S4 SM 0.155 0.34 9.7×10−9 1.4×10−5 33.03 1.50
S5 SP 0.285 0.33 8.6×10−8 1.6×10−5 374.26 1.00
S6 SM 0.220 0.28 2×10−10 1.4×10−5 1.12 1.50
S7 ML 0.020 0.29 3.7×10−11 6×10−6 0.04 2.00
S8 ML-CL 0.024 0.28 1.9×10−11 6×10−6 0.02 2.00
S9 SM 0.455 0.36 1.8×10−8 1.4×10−5 165.90 1.50
S10 SM 0.145 0.32 6.6×10−9 1.4×10−5 22.30 1.50

Dd coefficient of effective diffusion, Pe Peclet number, Rd retardation factor

this leads to a soil classification system related to the contam- terms of their reaction in delaying and/or adsorbing contami-
ination susceptibility of soils. nant species.

a) Unsusceptible soils: Well-graded sands with fines (SW),

and poorly graded sands (SP). These soils do not react
sufficient in solute invasion due to the presence of high
Peclet numbers and high intrinsic permeabilities. The ini-
tial solute concentration is not diluted as in the other soil
samples and advection flow dominates.
b) Moderately susceptible soils: Non-plastic silty sands
(SM). These soils react rather sufficient in solute inva-
sion, depending how big or small is the Peclet number.
It must be mentioned that the soil sample no. S6 with
Pe=1.12 responds similarly to suitable soils in the solute’s
invasion.
c) Highly susceptible soils: Non-plastic sandy silts (ML),
sandy silts of low plasticity (ML), clayey silts of low
plasticity (CL and ML-CL), and clayey sands of medium
plasticity (SC). These soils react sufficient in solute inva-
sion by significantly diluting the solute’s concentration,
decelerating the pulse to arrive in the outflow, and
adsorbing ion/species of the contaminant NaCl.
Conclusions
In the current research, it is described a laboratory method for
classifying soils according to their contamination susceptibil-
ity by using the permeameter apparatus. From the results pre-
sented, it seems that the permeameter apparatus with the ap-
propriate modifications can be an efficient tool for analyzing
soil behavior during solute invasion and therefore can be used
for the classification of soils according to their contamination
susceptibility. The proposed classification includes unsuscep-
tible, moderately susceptible, and highly susceptible soils in
Availability of data and material (data transparency) Not applicable
Code availability (software application or custom code) Not applicable
Funding Not applicable
Declarations The current experimental work conducetd entirely in
the laboratory of Engineering Geology, University of Patras, Greece.
Competing interests Not applicable
References
ASTM D-2487 (n.d.) Standard classification of soils for engineering
purposes.
Bear J (1979) Hydraulics of groundwater. McGraw-Hill series in water
resources and environmental engineering. McGraw-Hill, New York
Bear J, Bachmat Y (1991) Introduction to modelling of transport phe-
nomena in porous media. Kluwer Academic Publishers, USA ISBN
978-94-009-1926-6
Bear J, Verruijt A (1987) Modelling groundwater flow and pollution. D
Reidel Publishing Company. ISBN 978-94-009-3379-8.
Berner RA (1971) Principles of chemical sedimentology. McGraw-Hill,
Inc., New York
Brandes IM (2005) The negative chargeability of clays. PhD Thesis,
School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of
New South Wales
Chiogna G, Eberhardt C, Grathwohl P, Cirpka OA, Rolle M (2010)
Evidence of compound-dependent hydrodynamic and mechanical
transverse dispersion by multitracer laboratory experiments.
Environ Sci Technol 44(2):688–693. https://doi.org/10.1021/
es9023964
Cremer CJM, Neuweiller I, Bechtold M, Vanderborght J (2016) Solute
transport in heterogeneous soil with time-dependent boundary con-
ditions. Vadose Zone J 15(6):1–17. https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2015.
11.0144
1317 Page 10 of 10
Domenico PA, Schwartz FW (1998) Physical and chemical hydrogeolo-
gy, 2nd edn. John Wiley & Sons ISBN: 978-0-471-59762-9
Fetter CW (1994) Applied Hydrogeology, 3rd edn. Macmillan College
Publishing Company, New York ISBN: 0-02-336490-4
Feyen J, Jacques D, Timmerman A, Vanderborght J (1998) Modelling
water flow and solute transport in heterogeneous soils: a review of
recent approaches. J Agric Eng Res 70:231–256. https://doi.org/10.
1006/jaer.1998.0272
Freeze RA, Cherry GA (1979) Groundwater. NJ Prentice Hall,
Englewwod Cliffs
Hunt AG, Skinner TA (2010) Incorporation of effects of diffusion into
advection-mediated dispersion in porous media. J Stat Phys 140:
544–564
Jury WA, Flühler H (1992) Transport of chemicals through soil: mecha-
nisms, models, and field applications. Adv Agron 47:141–201.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113(08)60490-3
Kumahor SK, de Rooij GH, Schlüter S, Vogel HJ (2015) Water flow and
solute transport in unsaturated sand—a comprehensive experimental
approach. Vadose Zone J 14(2). https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2014.08.
0105
Leitao TE, Lobo-Fereira JP, Valocchi AJ (1996) Application of a reactive
transport model for interpreting non-conservative tracer experi-
ments: the Rio Maior case-study. J Contam Hydrol 24:167–181
Lobbo-Ferreira JP (1988) A comparative analysis of mathematical mass
transport models and tracer experiments for groundwater pollution
studies. LNEC, Lisboa, Mem. Report No 724.
Luckner L, Schestakow WM (1991) Mitigation processes in the soil and
groundwater zone. Leipzig Lewis Publishers Inc. ISBN 978-0-203-
71132-3
Mayer A, Sandman T, Breidenbach M (2008) Effect of flow regime on
physical nonequilibrium transport in unsaturated porous media.
Vadose Zone J 7(3):981–991. https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2007.0167
Arab J Geosci (2021) 14:1317
Nielsen DR, Van Genuchten MT, Biggar JW (1986) Water flow and
solute transport processes in the unsaturated zone. Water Resour
Res 22(9):89–108. https://doi.org/10.1029/WR022i09Sp0089S
Parker JC, Van Genuchten MT (1984) Determining transport parameters
from laboratory and field tracer experiments. Va Agric Exp Stn Bull:
84–83
Rolle M, Kitanidis PK (2014) Effects of compound-specific dilution on
transient transport and solute breakthrough: a pore-scale analysis.
Adv Water Resour 71:186–199
Rowe RK (1987) Pollutant transport through barriers. Waste Dispos
Pract:159–181
Rowe RK, Quigley RM, Booker JR (1995) Clayey barrier systems for
waste disposal facilities. CRC Press. ISBN 978-0-419-22600-0.
Silliman S, Zheng L, Conwell P (1998) The use of laboratory experiments
for the study of conservative solute transport in heterogeneous po-
rous media. Hydrogeol J 6:166–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s100400050142
Van Genuchten MTh (1981) Non-equilibrium transport parameters from
miscible displacement experiments. US Dep Agric Salin Lab Res.
Report No 119.
Vanderborght J, Vereecken H (2007) Review of dispersivities for trans-
port modeling in soils. Vadose Zone J 6(1):29–52. https://doi.org/
10.2136/vzj2006.0096
Zheng D, Bennett GD (1995) Applied contaminant transport modeling:
theory and practice. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-471-28536-6
Zhuang L, Raoof A, Mahmoodlu MG, Biekart S, de Witte R, Badi L, Van
Genuchten MT, Lin K (2021) Unsaturated flow effects on solute
transport in porous media. J Hydrol 598:126301. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.126301