Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-021-01723-0 (0123456789().,-volV)
( 01234567
89().,-volV)

STATE-OF-THE-ART REVIEW

A Review to Develop new Correlations for Geotechnical

Properties of Organic Soils
Ahmed ElMouchi . Sumi Siddiqua . Dharma Wijewickreme .
Herbert Polinder

Received: 23 August 2019 / Accepted: 5 February 2021 / Published online: 1 March 2021
Ó The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG part of Springer Nature 2021

Abstract Organic soils are considered one of the correlations found in the literature depend on relating a
most problematic soils due to their high compressibil- certain parameter with either the organic content or
ity and low shear strength at small strains. Character- water content. However, the organic content and the
izing organic soils based on their simple index water content are related. Hence, the proposed corre-
properties is useful for the preliminary design stages lations presented in this study aim to connect the
of construction projects. There are three main index particular soil parameter with both the water content
properties used for assessing organic soils properties, and the organic content, using the same equation.
namely: the water content, the organic content, and the Unfortunately, there is not much data in the literature
fiber content. Organic soils are distinguished by their about the soil texture or fiber content, and their relation
relatively high water content. The organic content with other parameters. Hence, all the proposed corre-
includes the carbonaceous and combustible compo- lations in this study are not considering the fibre
nents. Whereas the fiber content accounts for the content or the soil fabric.
presence of fibers in organic soils based on their
botanical composition and the degree of decomposi- Keywords Organic soil  Water content  Organic
tion. The data available in literature regarding organic content  Index properties  Compressibility
soils parameters (index, compressibility and shear properties  Correlations
strength) were collected and analyzed in this study to
obtain new correlations between the different organic
soil parameters, and the simple index parameters
(water content and organic content). The available 1 Introduction

Over 1.5 km2 (12%) of the Canadian landscape is

A. ElMouchi  S. Siddiqua (&) covered with Muskeg soils (MacFarlane 1969;
The University of British Columbia, Kelowna, Tarnocai 2006; Xu et al. 2018). Muskeg is a term that
British Columbia, Canada
refers to organic terrain, peatlands, and mires (Farell
e-mail: sumi.siddiqua@ubc.ca
1994). The fossilized fragmented organic matter from
D. Wijewickreme past vegetation is called peat (MacFarlane 1969).
The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Organic soils are natural soils with a ratio of the liquid
British Columbia, Canada
limit of the dry state over the liquid limit of the natural
H. Polinder state being smaller than 0.75 (as per ASTM D
Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands 2487–17). The open database of Tarnocai et al.

123
3316
(2005) for estimating the effect of the climate change
on the Canadian peatlands showed that 67% of these
peatlands are bogs, 32% are fens, and about 1% are
marshes and swamps. Many of the energy pipelines
throughout Canada are buried in Muskeg. Due to the
lack of knowledge to the soil-pipe interaction of the
Muskeg, very conservative design procedures are
followed according to the PRCI (2009) recommenda-
tions; this, however, increases the cost of the project.
Organic soils are distinguished by their high natural
water content, high initial void ratio, low bulk density,
high initial permeability, high compressibility, and low
shear strength at small strains (MacFarlane 1969;
Dhowain and Edil 1980; Landva 1980; Robinson 2003;
Cola and Cortellazzo 2005; Mesri and Ajlouni 2007;
Huat et al. 2011; Kazieman et al. 2011). Hence, organic
soils are considered one of the most problematic soils
due to their poor engineering properties. Many recent
failures have occurred due to construction on organic
soils, such as slope failures (Long and Jennings 2006;
Boylan et al. 2008; long et al. 2011), embankments
failures, (Den Haan and Feddema 2013) and dikes
failures (Benzuijan et al. 2005; O’Kelly 2008).
This paper is divided into four main sections. In the
first section, a review for the different geotechnical
classifications for organic soils is presented, in addi-
tion to the problems of the available classifications.
The second section reviews the index properties of
organic soils, and discusses correlations between
index properties (void ratio, specific gravity, bulk
density, liquid limit, and acidity) to the two main
parameters (water content and organic content). In the
third section, a short review for the compressibility is
presented, with more focus on the correlations of the
compression index as a function of the water content,
organic content, and void ratio. The fourth section,
illustrates the shear strength properties of organic soils
and correlations between the shear strength parame-
ters to the basic index properties (water content and
organic content) are presented. All proposed correla-
tions in this paper are based on data collected from
literature and listed in the references section.
2 Geotechnical Classification of Soils Containing
Organic Matter
The particle size distribution, the texture, and the
Atterberg limits are the main components for mineral
123
Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336
soils classification as per the Unified Soil Classifica-
tion System (USCS) ASTM D2487-17. However,
these components are not applicable for the organic
soils classification, as the Atterberg limits cannot be
measured in organic soils. In addition, it is not feasible
to determine grain size distribution in organic soil for
classification. Texture, mineral content, organic con-
tent, fiber content, degree of humification, and pH are
the properties that can be used for effectively classi-
fying organic soils (Ajlouni 2000). Von Post (1922),
presented a scale to obtain the degree of humification
for organic soils, which ranges between H1 for the.
un-decomposed peat to H10 for the completely
decomposed peat. The Von Post determination for the
degree of humification is used and standardized by the
ASTM D5715-14. MacFarlane (1969) proposed a
classification of Canadian peat into seventeen categories
based on fibres and divide them into three major groups
(Amorphous granular, fine fibrous, and coarse fibrous).
The ASTM D4427-18 proposed the classification of
peat soils based on five characteristics as follows:
(i) Fiber Content: fibric, hemic and sapric (ASTM
D1997-13) (ii) Ash Content: low, medium and high ash
(ASTM D2974-14). The ash content is a direct
measurement of the organic content, such that the
organic content equals 100% minus the percentage of
the ash content (i.e. 25% of ash content indicates 75%
organic content). Moreover, the ASTM defined the peat
soils as soils that have organic content higher than 75%.
(iii) Acidity pH: high acidic, moderate acidic, slightly
acidic and basic peat (ASTM D2976-15) (iv) Absor-
bency: extremely, highly, moderately and slightly
absorbent (ASTM D2980-17) and (v) Botanical Com-
position (if single or two names of the botanical
designations should be added to the peat naming, at
least 75% of the fiber content of this peat should be
derived from these botanical designations). As per the
ASTM D1997-13 and ASTM D5715-14, the degree of
humification is related to the fiber content such that the
fibric peat has a degree of humification from H1 to H3,
the hemic peat has degree of humification between H4 to
H7, and the sapric peat has a degree of humification
between H8 to H10. The ASTM classification for peat is
preferred over other classification systems because it
includes different index properties that can distinguish
most of peat soils with respect to the geotechnical
engineering properties. However, the ASTM D4427-18
classification does not clearly mention how to deal with
the fabric or texture of the soil mass when calculating the
Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336
different index properties. From a geotechnical point of
view, the cut off value of organic content that distinguish
between peat soils and organic soils is not universally
agreed upon. Figure 1 shows the different cut off values
between peat and organic soils based on the organic
content of the soil mass in different countries (after
Anderjko et al. 1983; Woliski et al. 1988). The
figure reveals that there are three major categories: peat,
which has high organic content, muck, which has
moderate organic content, and mineral organics, which
has low organic content. The fixed limits between these
three categories are not unique, as the transition in
behavior between the three categories is rather subtle
(Farrell 1994). According to McVay and Nugyen
(2004), a tentative standard classification system to
distinguish between these three categories was consid-
ered by the ASTM. The tentative classification is shown
in Table 1.
3 Index Properties of Organic Soils (Physical
and Chemical)
In order to use organic soils in any engineering
application, the different properties (physical and
Fig. 1 Comparison of Classification Systems Used for Peat and Organic Soils in Various countries. (after Anderjko et al 1983; Woliski
et al. 1988)
3317
chemical) of the soils should be incorporated. The
following physical properties are relevant to the
engineering behavior of organic soils: water content,
organic content, fiber content, void ratio, bulk density,
specific gravity, and Atterberg limits (if applicable).
For chemical properties, acidity is considered the most
relevant chemical property for engineering purposes
(MacFarlane 1969).
3.1 Water Content (wc)
One of the distinctive properties of organic soils are
their high water content (Mesri and Ajlouni 2007). The
high water content is attributed to the large voids,
formed by the fiber structure, and the high cation
exchange capacity of organic matter, which increases
the attraction of water molecules (FHWA 2009).
Approximate estimation of the organic content, bulk
density, specific gravity, compressibility and shear
strength parameters can be obtained using available
correlations by measuring the water content. Ajlouni
(2000) concluded that the origin, degree of decompo-
sition, and the chemical composition of organic soils
are the main factors accounting for their wide range of
water contents.
123
3318
Table 1 A tentative Material description Organic content (%)
classification of soils
containing organic matters Peat [ 75
based on organic content as
per (ASTM) (after Mcavy
and Nugyen 2004)
Muck 25–75
Organic silt or Clay \ 25
The lab determination for the water content of
organic soils is similar to mineral soils. A represen-
tative sample of organic soils is dried in the oven at
110 C, and the weight of the water expelled from the
wet sample divided by the weight of the dry sample
provides the water content (as per ASTM D2974-14).
Goodman and Lee (1962), MacFarlane and Aleen
(1964), and Miyakawa (1959) proposed an oven
temperature of 85 °C to avoid burning the organic
content within soils. Afterwards, Skempton and Petley
(1970) investigated the effect of drying the organic
soil samples using different temperatures, and con-
cluded that low temperatures retain an amount of
water within the organic soils particles, whereas at
110 °C the loss of organic material was minimized.
O’Kelly and Sivakumar (2014) concluded that the
ASTM D2974-14 suggests the proper method of
determining the water content.
The amount of water held in fibrous peat is more
than the amount of water held in amorphous peat.
There are five sources for the water content in organic
soils (Ajlouni 2000): (i) free water in pores between
particles, (ii) free water in pores inside particles, (iii)
double layer (osmotically bond) water around all
surface areas, (iv) adsorbed water covering all the
surface areas, and (iv) water within and between
components due to chemical bonds.
3.2 Ash and Organic Content (OC)
Organic soils, in general, have two major components;
the organic component, and the mineral component.
The organic component is carbonaceous and com-
bustible. Whereas the mineral component is incom-
bustible and ash forming (MacFarlane 1969). The
organic content of organic soils plays an important
role in organic soils classification and their mechanical
properties. The higher the organic content, the higher
123
Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336
Subheading
95–100 Low ash peat
85–95 Medium ash peat
75–85 High ash peat
50–75 Peaty Muck
25–50 Silty or Clayey Muck
10–25 Highly organic Silt or Clay
1–10 Highly organic Silt or Clay
the water content, void ratio, and compressibility.
(Abdel Kader 2010).
Measuring the organic content (combustible car-
bonaceous component) requires measuring the ash
content (incombustible mineral component) in
advance. According to ASTM D2974-14, ash content
of an organic soil sample is defined as the percent of
the weight of the remained substance after igniting the
oven-dried samples in a furnace at 440° ± 40 °C with
respect to the weight of the oven dried sample.
Afterwards, the organic content is determined by
subtracting the ash content percentage from one
hundred percent. The ash content determination of
organic soils is also referred to as loss of ignition in
literature. The loss of ignition method has some
element of error; as additional minerals may be burned
off during the test (Jackson 1958). The colorimetric
method can be used to eliminate this error (Lechowicz
et al. 1996).
3.3 Fiber Content (FC)
The fiber content of organic soils is determined in the
lab based on ASTM D1997-13. The fiber content is the
ratio between the mass of fibers, which is retained on
the 150 lm (No. 100) sieve, to the weight of the solids
on the sample. Organic soils are classified according to
their fiber content. High fiber content will result in less
decomposition. According to the ASTM D4427-18
classification, organic soils are classified as fibrous
peat if the fiber content is higher than 67%, corre-
sponding to a degree of humification between H1 to
H3 (less decomposed peat) on the Von Post scale. The
amorphous peat is peat with a fiber content less than
67%. Organic soils with a fiber content between 33 and
67% are defined as hemic, which corresponds to a
degree of humification between H4 to H6 (moderately
decomposed) on Von Post scale. Fiber content less
Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336
than 33% refers to highly decomposed soils (H7 to
H10) on Von Post scale, and are defined as sapric soils.
Fiber content affects other organic soil properties
such as: water content, organic content, bulk density,
void ratio, permeability, shear strength, and com-
pressibility. Table 2 shows the effect of different fiber
contents (as per MacFarlane 1969 classification) on
other organic soil properties.
More organic material in soil results in higher water
content, leading to less favorable engineering param-
eters. Higher fiber content also results in higher water
content, but results in more favorable soil properties
(Den Edil and Wang 2000; Al Adili 2013; ; Haan
1997). Price et al. (2005) has failed to determine a
correlation between bulk density and fiber content, or
degree of humification and fiber content, although the
Von Post humification indicates the loss of any
structure in the organic soil (Price et al. 2005; Mesri
and Ajlouni 2007; O’Kelly and Pichan 2014). This
could be attributed to the method of measuring the
fiber content, without considering the fabric dimen-
sions of the soil. However, MacFarlane (1969) corre-
lated the bulk density with high fiber content greater
than 50%, and indicated a decreasing trend for the
density with increasing fiber content. Landva and
Pheeney (1980) concluded that knowing the type of
fibers, like sedge or leave, would be advantageous to
estimating the soil suitability for engineering pur-
poses. Correlations based on fiber content, the fabric
of the soil, and associated engineering properties
should be further investigated.
3.4 Void Ratio (e)
Organic soils are distinct with their high void ratio.
High void ratio means higher water content,
Table 2 Effect of different fibre contents on organic soils and peaty soils properties (after Macfarlane 1969)
Designated Property
High
Amorphous- Unit Weight
granular
Fine fibrous Water Content Void Ratio
Compressibility
Coarse fibrous Permeability Shear Strength
(woody)
3319
permeability, and compressibility. Fibrous organic
soils have a higher void ratio than the amorphous soils
due to the fiber structures. MacFarlane (1969) men-
tioned that the void ratio of organic soils ranges
between 5 and 15. The void ratio may reach as high as
25 in fibrous soils and as low as 2 in amorphous peat.
The void ratio is correlated to water content and
organic content. There is a linear increasing relation
between the water content and the void ratio, as both
the water content and the void ratio are mathemati-
cally linked in phase diagram calculations (MacFar-
lane 1969). McVay and Nugyen (2004) reported an
increasing relation between void ratio and organic
content for void ratios ranging between 1 and 9.
3.5 Bulk Density (q)
Organic soils are featured by their low densities
compared to mineral soils. ASTM D4531-15 describes
the procedures for measuring the bulk and dry
densities of organic soils using the Paraffin wax
method. The bulk density of organic soils is close to
the density of water, and any significant increase in the
bulk density would be attributed to the mineral
components (MacFarlane 1969).
Bulk density of organic soils is correlated to both
the water content and the organic content. The bulk
density of organics soils equals roughly the water
density for organic soils of water content higher than
500%. This could be attributed to the high fiber
content and organic content at high water content
(MacFarlane 1969; Hobbs 1986 and Bell 2000). The
bulk density is frequently correlated to the water
content in the literature; however, Den Hann and El
Amir (1994) proposed a correlation between the bulk
Moderate Low
Void Ratio Water Content permeability Shear
Compressibility Strength
Permeability Shear Unit Weight
Strength
Water Content Unit Void Ratio Compressibility
Weight
123
3320
density and the organic content for high organic
contents of Dutch peat.
3.6 Specific Gravity (Gs)
The specific gravity of organic soils is smaller than the
specific gravity of mineral soils. Higher organic
content leads to smaller specific gravity, as the specific
gravity mainly depends on the inorganic component of
the organic soils (MacFarlane 1969 and Ajlouni 2000).
Specific gravity for organic soils ranges between 1 and
2 (MacFarlane 1969; Lechowicz et al. 1996 and Bell
2000). Higher Gs reflects high mineral contamination
(FHWA 2009). Specific gravity is measured according
to ASTM D854-14 using a water pycnometer, how-
ever more accurate results could be achieved using the
gas (kerosene) pycnometer as per ASTM D5550-14.
Measuring Gs of organic soils is a fairly difficult
process as it might not be possible to remove all
entrapped air or gases inside and between particles
(Ajlouni 2000).
Organic content is correlated to the specific gravity.
Cook (1956), Lea and Brawner (1963), Skempton and
Petley (1970) and Den Haan (1997) proposed different
equations for calculating the specific gravity of
organic soils as a function of the organic content.
Landva and La Rochelle (1983) proposed the extreme
limits for the specific gravity of organic soils as a
function of the organic content. These limits will be
verified in this study.
3.7 Atterberg Limits
Consistency indices, or Atterberg limits, are the limits
that define the water content limits at which the soil
consistency passes from one state to another (Terzaghi
et al. 1996). Atterberg limits for organic soils are
determined in lab, using the same procedures that is
generally used for mineral soils, according to ASTM
D4318–17 or BS 1377(1990). The liquid limit is also
measured using the fall cone penetrometer as per the
BS 1377(1990). Determination of both the liquid limit
and plastic limit for organic soils is a difficult task due
to the presence of fibers. Hence, for fibrous peat, it is
not possible to measure the consistency indices,
whereas for the amorphous peat, it is possible to
measure them. (MacFarlane 1969; Hobbs 1986;
Yamaguchi et al. 1987; Nakayama et al. 1990; Lan
1992).
123
Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336
Lewis (1965), Casagrande (1966), MacFarlane
(1969), Olson (1984), and Yamaguchi et al. (1985)
presented some data for the liquid and plastic limits of
both amorphous and fibrous peat. However, they did
not mention how to deal with fibers and what
difficulties were encountered. The undrained shear
strength of mineral soil is correlated to the liquid limit.
Soil with a water content equal to the liquid limit has
an undrained shear strength around 2 kPa (ASTM
D4318–17). The correlation between the liquid limit
and the undrained shear strength for organic soils is
rather questionable (Boylan et al. 2008; O’Kelly
2016). The larger fibers are removed from the samples
(ASTM D4318–17 and BS 1377:1990), but those
fibers influence the strength properties (Long 2005;
Boylan et al. 2008; O’Kelly 2015). In addition, liquid
limits are correlated to the undrained shear strength,
which is a function of the interparticle water for
organic and mineral soils (Adon et al. 2012 and
O’Kelly 2014). Organic soils have intraparticle water
which can amount up to two- thirds of the total water
content (Landva and Pheeney 1980; O’Kelly and
Zhang 2013).
Since the results of the liquid and plastic limits have
no significant meaning for classification or correla-
tions of soils of considerable amount of organic
content, as shown by Ajlouni (2000) and O’Kelly
(2016), it is recommendable to obtain other correla-
tions based on more suitable tests. Further research
related to the correlation between the measured liquid
limit and the correlated undrained shear strength
should be conducted to identify index properties that
are reliable to be correlated to the undrained shear
strength. Such criteria can be related to the presence of
fibers in the soil, as well as the degree of humification.
3.8 Acidity (pH)
The acidity of organic soils is measured according to
ASTM D2976-15 using either water or calcium
chloride solution. However, using the calcium chlo-
ride solution is preferred over the water because the
pH value is affected by salts dissolved in water.
Organic soils are characterized by its acidic behavior
due to low pH values (less than 7). As per the ASTM
classification (ASTM D 4427–18), organic soils are
classified according to their pH value into four groups;
(i) high acidic (pH \ 4.5), (ii) moderate acidic
(4.5 \ pH \ 5.5), (iii) slightly acidic (5.5 \ pH \
Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336
7), and (iv) basic peat (pH [ 7). Acidic behavior of
peat and organic soil is an important property, as it
may lead to corrosion for concrete and steel structures
in contact with organic soils (MacFarlane 1969). In
general, the pH value for organic soils decreases with
depth and might be high at the top of the underlying
layer (Ajlouni 2000).
4 Correlations between Index Properties
One of the major characteristics of organic soils, as
previously discussed, is their high water content. Most
of the index properties of organic soils are correlated
to the water content in the literature. However, the
organic content of the organic soils is a major
component in the classification of organic soils, and
thus, it might affect their properties. Hence, the index
properties are correlated to the organic content based
on the data collected from literature in this study. After
demonstrating the correlations between different
index properties and the water content and the organic
content in separate 2D figures, it is proposed to find a
3D surface that correlate a certain index property with
the water content and the organic content in the same
plot by one equation.
4.1 Correlations of Void Ratio (e) with Water
Content and Organic Content
In the phase diagram relations, the void ratio and water
content are related to each other as a function of the
specific gravity (Gs) and the degree of saturation
(S) such that e = wc*Gs/S. For organic soils, Tessier
(1966) and Lea and Brawner (1963) proposed a
correlation for the void ratio as a function of the water
content without measuring the values of the specific
gravity or the degree of saturation.
Figure 2a depicts the relation between the void
ratio and the water content based on collected data
from the literature. In addition, the figure shows the
95% confidence interval around the trend line as a
shaded area. The 95% confidence interval limits are
calculated by adding and subtracting twice the stan-
dard deviation to the trend line. The correlation
between the void ratio and the water content is
presented in Eq. 1. Correlations by Tessier (1966),
Lea and Brwaner (1963), and Den Haan (1997) are
presented in the same graph to verify and compare the
3321
compatibility of the proposed 95% confidence interval
around the trend line. Equations proposed by Tessier
(1966) and Den Haan (1997) are located in the shaded
zone of the 95% confidence interval range, however
part of the results of Lea & Brwaner (1963) for water
contents higher than 500% is located outside this
shaded zone.
e ¼ 0:0138  wc þ 1:125 : R2 ¼ 0:9734 ð1Þ
where the value of wc is in percentage (%).
Mcavy and Nugyen (2004) correlated the organic
content and the void ratio by a linear equation. The
collected data in this study was used to obtain a
correlation between the void ratio and the organic
content. The proposed correlation (Eq. 2), the 95%
confidence interval, and the Mcvay and Nuguen
(2004) equation are presented in Fig. 2b. The fig-
ure reveals a good agreement, in terms of the
increasing trend, between the proposed equation and
McVay and Nugyen (2004) equation.
e ¼ 1:6355  e0:0187OC : R2 ¼ 0:7291 ð2Þ
where the value of OC is in percentage (%).
The organic content and the water content are the
simplest index properties for measurement in organic
soils. Equations (1) and (2) show that the void ratio is
correlated to the organic and water contents. It might
be useful to obtain one equation that correlates the
void ratio with both the water content and the organic
content simultaneously, as presented in Eq. (3) and
Fig. 2c.
e ¼ 1:2539  3:255=OC þ 0:01353  wc
ð3Þ
: R2 ¼ 0:9749
where the value of wc and OC are in percentages (%).
4.2 Correlations of Bulk Density (q) with Water
Content and Organic Content
Figure 3a shows the correlation between the bulk
density and the water content. The collected data from
literature was used to obtain the trend line of the
correlation. Afterwards, a range for the 95% confi-
dence interval was obtained based on the trend line
plus and minus twice the standard deviation of the
trend line. The shaded area represents a 95% confi-
dence interval for the deduced equation.
123
3322 Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336

Fig. 2 Void Ratio 30

Correlations a Void Ratio a Tessier 1966
e = 0.0138* w c + 1.1256
25 R² = 0.9734
Vs. Water Content Lea & Brwaner 1963
correlation, b Void Ratio
Den Haan 1997

Void Rao e
20
Vs. Organic Content
Correlation and c Void Ratio 15
Collected Data in This Study
vs. both water content and
organic content 10

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Water Content Wc (%)

25
b
20 McVay and Nugyen , 2004
Collected Data in This Study
15 e = 1.6355 * e 0.0187*OC
Void Rao e

R² = 0.7291

10

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Organic Content OC (%)

q ¼ 2:2951  w0:123 : R2 ¼ 0:6446 ð4Þ organic content. The same concept of the 95%
c
confidence interval used in Fig. 3a is used in this
where the value of wc is in percentage (%). The figure as well.
compatibility of the deduced equation and the range
with the equations available in literature have been q ¼ 2:3183  OC0:182 : R2 ¼ 0:8354 ð5Þ
checked by adding Hobbs (1986) data points and
where the value of OC is in percentage (%). The 95%
Moore (1962) equations to the same figure. The results
confidence interval range is compared with the Den
are located in the 95% confidence interval range. The
Hann and ElAmir (1994) equation for Dutch peat, and
figure shows that the bulk density tends to settle
shows a good agreement with the deduced equation at
around 1 gm/cm3 for water contents higher than 500%
high organic content, since the Dutch peat is charac-
(Hobbs 1986 and MacFarlane 1969). Figure 3b pre-
terized by its high organic content. On the other hand,
sents the correlation between bulk density and the
the McVay and Nugyen (2004) equation almost

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336 3323

Fig. 3 Bulk Density

Correlations a Bulk Density a
Vs. Water Content
correlation, b Bulk Density
Vs. Organic Content
correlation and c Bulk
Density vs. both water
content and organic content

coincides with the proposed equation. The different
correlations reveal that the bulk density tends to be
close to 1 gm/cm3 at high organic contents (peaty
soils). As long as the bulk density is correlated to the
water content and the organic content for organic soils,
then it would be more reasonable to correlate the bulk
density with both the organic content and the water
content in the same equation or graph, as shown in
Fig. 3c and stated in Eq. 6.
q ¼ 1:498  0:1135  lnðOCÞ þ 21:6716=wc
: R2 ¼ 0:8907
ð6Þ
where the value of wc and OC are in percentages (%).
The bulk density could be calculated with Eqs. 1, 2
and 3 during the preliminary stages of the project using
simple index properties: the water content and the
organic content.

123
3324 Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336

4.3 Correlations of Specific Gravity (Gs)
with Water Content and Organic Content
Previous trials to correlate the specific gravity with
water content were carried out by MacFarlane (1969)
and MacFarlane and Rutka (1962). A correlation
between the specific gravity and the water content is
proposed (Eq. 7), based on the collected data from
literature. The 95% confidence interval for the
proposed equation is shown as the shaded area in
Fig. 4a. Equations from MacFarlane (1969) and
MacFarlane and Rutka (1962) are added to the same
figure to verify the 95% concept, and indeed, they are
also located in the shaded area of the 95% confidence
level. In addition, the figure reveals that the specific
gravity tends to be constant around 1.5 at high water
contents (higher than 500%), similar to the bulk
density that tends to be constant at the same water
content.

Fig. 4 Specific Gravity Correlations a Specific Gravity Vs. Water Content correlation, b Specific Gravity Vs. Organic Content
correlation and c Specific Gravity vs. both water content and organic content

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336
Gs ¼  0:342  lnðwc Þ þ 3:7093
ð7Þ
: R2 ¼ 0:7006
where the value of wc is in percentage (%). The
specific gravity of organic soils is correlated to the
organic content, as demonstrated by various research-
ers. Figure 4b illustrates the proposed correlation
between the specific gravity and the organic content,
based on the data collected from literature in this study
(Eq. 8). The 95% confidence interval around the trend
line, the Kazemian et al. (2009) equation, and the
extreme limits of Ladnava (1983) are presented in the
same figure. Comparing the collected data from
literature with the extreme limits of Landva and la
Rochelle (1983) yields many points outside these
limits. Hence, the 95% confidence interval shaded area
is a more suitable representation for most of the
collected data. The proposed correlation and the
available correlations, reveal that the specific gravity
tends to be constant around 1.5 at high organic
contents (for peaty soils).
Gs ¼  0:422  lnðOCÞ þ 3:3875
ð8Þ
: R2 ¼ 0:8046
where the value of OC is in percentage (%).
Equations (7) and (8) reveal that the specific gravity of
organic soils might be correlated to both the water
content and the organic content. Hence, one correla-
tion that combines both the water content and the
organic content in the same correlation, along with the
specific gravity, is presented in Fig. 4c and Eq. (9).
Gs ¼ 2:8631  0:99476OC  w 0:035122
c
ð9Þ
: R2 ¼ 0:8243
where the value of wc and OC are in percentages (%).
4.4 Correlations of Liquid Limit (wL) with Water
Content and Organic Content
The liquid limit of organic soils is not considered
critical for classification or physical properties of this
soils. In addition, it is difficult to determine the liquid
limit of organic soils, due to the presence of fibers.
However, there is much data available in literature for
the liquid limit for organic soils. In this study, the
liquid limit is correlated to the water content and
organic content based on the collected data from
literature despite the uncertainty of the liquid limit
3325
contribution in the organic soils classification. The
correlations can be used in the future, after further
research is carried out highlighting a new aspect for
the liquid limit determination and its relation to the
organic soils properties.
Figure 5a shows the proposed correlation between
the liquid limit and the water content. Based on
collected data from literature, the liquid limit is well
correlated to the water content for lower values (less
than 500%). There are not enough data points for
higher values (higher than 500%), and there are some
points located outside the shaded area of the 95%
confidence level. The proposed correlation to get the
liquid limit of organic soils, based on the natural water
content wc, is presented in Eq. (10).
wL ¼ 0:8106  wc þ 100:06 : R2 ¼ 0:6399
ð10Þ
where the value of wc is in percentage (%). The
correlation between the liquid limit and the organic
content is depicted in Fig. 5b and stated in Eq. (11).
The 95% confidence interval around the trend line is
shown as the shaded area in the same graph. For low
organic content smaller than 50%, there is a small
amount of scatter for the data points collected from the
literature around the proposed trend line. While there
is a large scatter around the tend line for the high
organic content (higher than 50%), the majority of the
data points are still located in the 95% shaded zone.
wL ¼ 84:693 e0:0185 OC : R2 ¼ 0:5658 ð11Þ
where the value of OC is in percentage (%). Despite
the high scattering of collected data for the liquid limit
correlation with the water content (Fig. 5a) and
organic content (Fig. 5b), there is a good representa-
tion of the data when considering the 3D plot of the
liquid limit as a function of the water content and the
organic content simultaneously, as shown in Fig. 5c
and stated in Eq. (12).
WL ¼ 2:5396  1:0053^OC  W^OC:8291
c
ð12Þ
: R2 ¼ 0:9054
where the value of wc and OC are in percentages (%).
123
3326 Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336

Fig. 5 Liquid Limit

Correlations a Liquid Limit a
Vs. Water Content
correlation, b Liquid Limit
Vs. Organic Content
correlation and c Liquid
Limit vs. both water content
and organic content

5 Compressibility of Organic Soils
Organic soils are distinguished by their high com-
pressibility, and they exhibit high volume changes
under loading (MacFarlane 1969; Kogure 1999;
O’Kelly 2015; Dehghanbanadaki 2017). Organics
soils undergo large and rapid short term primary
consolidation (until the complete dissipation of the
pore water pressure) and continuous long term
secondary consolidation due to the particle compres-
sions and the plastic yielding of the solids (Adams
1965; Macfralne 1969; Samson and La Rochelle 1972;
Kogure et al. 1993; Fox 2003; Govar 2007; O’Kelly
2009; Long and Boylan 2015). Some researchers
argued that the organic soils exhibit tertiary consol-
idation after the secondary consolidation (Candler and
Chartres 1988; Fox 1992; Kazemian et al. 2009).
However, this amount of compression can be
neglected because it generally takes place after the
design life of structures (Dhowian and Edil 1980;
Hansbo 1991; Fox and Edil 1994). The different
compressibility indices of organic soils, such as,
compression index Cc, recompression index Cr,
swelling index Cs, coefficient of consolidation Cv,
preconsolidation pressure Pc, and a secondary com-
pression index Ca, are discussed in the following
paragraph.

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336
5.1 Recompression index (Cr), Compression
Index (Cc) and Swelling Indices (Cs)
The recompression index Cr represents the soil
behavior under loading until the preconsolidation
pressure is achieved, which is the highest pressure the
soil has been subjected to throughout its history. Many
of the consolidation tests for organic soils do not show
the recompression component in the e-log P’ curve
due to the small values of the preconsolidation
pressure P’c and the sample disturbance (Barden
1969; Berry 1983). However, the reported values for
the Cr/Cc ratio for organic soils range between 0.1 and
0.3, and this range is close to the range for clayey soils
(Ajlouni 2000; Abdel Kader 2010).
The compression index Cc shows the soil deforma-
tion behavior under increased applied loads to simu-
late new loads that the soil is expected to be exposed
to. The compression index of organic soils is relatively
high compared to the clayey soils, such that the Cc
ranges between 0.5 and 18 for organics soils compared
to 0.2–0.8 for clay. (Lefebvre et al. 1984; Yamaguchi
et al. 1985; Abdel Kader 2010; Ajlouni 2000). The
relatively high Cc for organic soils is attributed to the
high initial void ratio and water content. Cc is not
constant for organic soils and is dependent on the
applied consolidation pressure. Cc increases sharply in
the normal consolidation range and then decreases
after twice the preconsolidation pressure while
increasing the applied consolidation pressure (Yam-
aguchi et al. 1985; Kogura et al. 1986; Mesri et al.
1997; Santagata et al. 2008).
The compression index Cc is correlated to the liquid
limit of clayey soils (Terzaghi and Peck 1967). It is
difficult to determine the liquid limit of organic soils
because of the presence of fibers, as well as the amount
of intraparticle water, which may lead to incorrect
results. However, there are some correlations avail-
able in the literature for the compression index Cc as a
function of the liquid limit wL (Hobbs 1986; Farrel
et al. 1994; Al-Raziqi et al. 2003). Most of the
correlations available to determine the compression
index Cc for organic soils are related to the natural
water content and the initial void ratio. (MacFarlane
1969; Kogura and Ohira 1977). The correlation that
combines the compression index and all other related
parameters such as water content wc, void ratio e, and
organic OC might be useful, and is presented in this
study. Figure 6a presents the proposed correlation
3327
between the compression index Cc and the natural
water content wc, based on the data collected from
literature. The correlation is stated in Eq. 13. The
trend shows an increase in the compression index Cc,
while the water content wc increases. This could be
explained by the increasing compression due to the
large amount of pore water pressure dissipation at high
water contents. Figure 6a shows the 95% confidence
interval concept which is shaded by the blue area. The
area covers most of the data collected from literature.
The 95% confidence interval concept is verified using
the previous correlations of MacFarlane (1969) and
Kogura and Ohira (1977). MacFarlane (1969) pre-
sented the boundaries of the compression index Cc and
water content relation. However, some of the data
points collected from more recent literature are located
outside MacFarlane (1969) boundaries, but they are
located in the shaded area of the proposed 95%
confidence level.
Cc ¼ 0:0083  wc : R2 ¼ 0:906 ð13Þ
where the value of wc is in percentage (%). It is not
common to correlate the compression index Cc with
the organic content OC, rather, it is usually correlated
with the water content directly. In this study, the
compression index Cc is correlated to the organic
content OC as shown in Fig. 6b in order to check the
effect of the organic content on the compression index.
The figure shows an increasing trend for the compres-
sion index Cc while increasing the organic content as
the organic components are compressible. The corre-
lation is stated in Eq. (14).
Cc ¼ 0:0798  OC  1:0704 : R2 ¼ 0:5423
ð14Þ
where the value of OC is in percentage (%).
Figures (6a) and (7b) show that the compression
index is a function of both the water content wc and the
organic content OC. Figure 6c presents the proposed
3D graph that shows the compression index Cc as a
function of the water content wc and organic content
Cc. The correlation is stated in Eq. (15) with a least
square error R2 value around 0.9.
Cc ¼ 0:5669  0:023  OC þ 0:0097  wc
ð15Þ
: R2 ¼ 0:8939
where the value of wc and OC are in percentages (%).
123
3328 Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336

Fig. 6 Compression Index

Cc Correlations a
a Compression index Cc Vs.
Water Content correlation,
b Compression index Cc Vs.
Organic Content correlation
and c Compression index Cc
vs. both water content and
organic content

Organic soils are distinguished by their high initial
void ratio which can lead to a large deformation when
the soil is subjected to external loads. The compres-
sion index is correlated to the void ratio as shown in
Fig. 7 based on the data collected from literature. The
95% confidence interval is presented in the same graph
as a shaded area. The proposed correlation between
the compression index Cc and the void ratio e is
presented in Eq. (16). The previous correlation of
MacFarlane (1969) between Cc and e is presented in
Fig. 7 to determine the applicability of the proposed
correlation and the 95% confidence level. The fig-
ure shows a good agreement between the proposed
correlation with the 95% confidence level and the two
boundaries of MacFarlane (1969).
Cc ¼ 0:6318  e  1:0405 : R2 ¼ 0:9065
ð16Þ
where the value of e is represented as a ratio.
Equations (13) to (16) show that the compression
index Cc is related to the water content wc, organic
content OC, and void ratio e.

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336
Fig. 7 Correlation between
compression index Cc and
Void Ratio e
Equation (17) states the proposed correlation
between the compression index Cc and the three
parameters wc, OC, and e based on the collected data
from literature. The calculated least square error R2 for
the equation is 0.99.
Cc ¼ 0:01958  OC þ 0:0057063  wc
þ 0:268193  e þ 0:27316 ð17Þ
: R2 ¼ 0:99
where the value of wc and OC are in percentages (%)
whereas the value of e is a ratio.
The swelling (rebound) index Cs of organic soils is
determined in unloading stages by adding unloading/
reloading cycle in the consolidation test. There is not
much data in the literature for the swelling index Cs.
The swelling index Cs is related to both the organic
content and the preconsolidation pressures, such that
high organic content and high preconsolidation pres-
sure leads to a high swelling index and vise versa
(Lefebvre et al. 1984; Yamaguchi et al. 1985). The Cs/
Cc for organic soils is reported between 0.1 and 0.3,
which is the same as clayey soils (Hobbs 1986;
Ajlouni 2000).
5.2 Coefficient of Consolidation (Cv)
According to Terzaghi et al. (1996), the coefficient of
consolidation of clayey soils is almost constant while
increasing the applied consolidation pressure, as the
primary consolidation of clayey soils may take years
or even decades to complete. The long period required
for the primary consolidation is due to the small
hydraulic conductivity of clayey soils. On the other
3329
hand, organic soils are distinguished by their high
initial void ratio and permeability. Hence, the primary
consolidation is rapid and may require only a few
weeks or months to complete. The rapid primary
consolidation of organic soils due to the decrease of
permeability while increasing the applied consolida-
tion pressure is the main reason for the variable
coefficient of consolidation Cv (Lea and Brawner
1963; Berry and Vickers 1975; Hansbo 1991; Mesri
1997). However, the log time method proposed by
Casagrande and Fadum (1940) and the square root
time method presented by Taylor (1942) is generally
used to determine Cv. Sanatagata et al. (2008)
presented the variation of the coefficient of consoli-
dation Cv with changing the applied stress level for
soft clay, muck peaty soils, and fibrous peaty soils, and
confirmed the change of Cv with stress level for
organic soils and the stability of Cv with stress level for
clayey soils. Moreover, the decrease in Cv while
increasing the stress level is greatly marked in soils
with high organic content (Farrell et al. 1994). Oikawa
and Igarashi (1997), proposed an equation to calculate
the Cv directly without conducting the consolidation
test based on the initial water content and the applied
consolidation pressure.
5.3 Preconsolidation Pressure (Pc)
Organic soils are generally characterized by their low
preconsolidation pressure values due to the small unit
weight of organic soils, and their location close the
ground surface. The main source of preconsolidation
pressure for organic soil is the structure of the
123
3330
composing planet. Other natural activities, such as
drainage, age, and decomposition, may increase or
decrease the Pc (Hobbs 1986; Ajlouni 2000). Based on
the quality of the consolidation test to avoid disturbing
the sample, the preconsolidation pressure is deter-
mined using the same method as for the clayey soils.
However, in many consolidation tests carried out on
organic soils, the point of maximum curvature in the
e-log p curve was not marked, and the determination
of the preconsolidation pressure was difficult (Mesri
et al. 1997). The preconsolidation pressure of organic
soils is correlated to the void ratio e (Ajlouni 2000;
Kogure and Ohira 1977). The general trend shows a
linear decrease of the preconsolidation pressure with
an increase in the void ratio.
5.4 Secondary Compression Index (Ca)
The primary consolidation of organic soils is rapid,
large, and always occurs in the early stages of
construction (Mesri et al. 1997; MacFarlane 1969).
Hence, the estimation of settlement due to the
secondary consolidation of organic soil deposits is
important, as it occurs during the design life of the
structure (Ajlouni 2000). For mineral soils, Ca is
generally related to Cc by the (Ca/Cc) concept. The
same concept (Ca/Cc) is presented for organic soils
(Samson and La Rochelle 1972; Lefebvre, 1984;
Jorgenson 1987; Mesri and Ajlouni 2007). The typical
range of Ca/Cc for mineral clayey soils is 0.02 ± 0.01
(Mesri 1997; Abdel Kader 2010). Whereas for organic
soils the Ca/Cc range is 0.05 ± 0.01 (Mesri and
Ajlouni 2007). The value of Ca of organic soils
increases by increasing the applied consolidation
pressure (Lea and Brawner 1963; Adam 1965; Barden
1969).
6 Shear Strength of Organic Soils
The suitability of soil mass upon which an engineering
project should be rested on requires the determination
of both the compressibility and the shear strength
properties. Organic soils are distinguished by their
high compressibility and low shear strength proper-
ties. Both the compressibility and shear strength
properties are improved when those soils are subjected
to a load, and the soil is consolidated (Lea and
Brawner 1963; Samson and la Rochelle 1972;
123
Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336
Lechowicz 1994; Edil and Wang 2000). For amor-
phous organic soils, they exhibit low shear strength
properties from the apparent cohesion of the inorganic
component. Whereas, for the fibrous peat, they gain
strength from the friction resistance due to the fiber
interaction such that the fibers act as reinforcement to
the soil sample. However, for the fibrous peat in the
loose state, the fibers do not interact together, and the
corresponding shear strength is small like the amor-
phous peat (Arman 1969; Amaryan 1973; Landva
et al. 1983; Kazemian et al. 2012).
The main three shear strength parameters for
organic soils are the undrained cohesion cu, the
effective cohesion c’, and the effective angle of
internal friction u’. The undrained cohesion cu is
better determined in the field by the full-flow
penetrometer test, the field vane test, and the cone
penetration test. Field vane tests are preferred over the
cone penetration test by many researchers (MacFar-
lane 1969; Landva and La Rochelle 1983; Huang
1982; Ajlouni 2000). However, recent research prefers
the full-flow penetrometer test as it does not disturb the
soil mass to the same extent as the field vane test and
the cone penetration test (Boyaln 2011). The
undrained shear strength of organic soils is generally
small and is correlated to the effective overburden
pressure on site, or to the preconsolidation pressure
such that the cu/r’o ranges between 0.36 and 0.68
(Abdel Kader 2010). The effective strength parame-
ters c0 and /’’ are determined using the lab tests such as
the triaxial test and the direct shear test, which are the
two common lab tests for the shear strength determi-
nation of organic soils. It is important to choose the
appropriate test for determining the shear strength
parameters of organic soils based on the application.
For most applications, such as for road embankments,
bearing capacity and dykes, the triaxial compression
test is the most reasonable test as it simulates the same
conditions of these applications. Whereas for the slope
stability analysis, the direct shear test should be
adopted, as the failure plan is forced to be horizontal to
simulate the horizontal part of the slope stability slip
surface. O’Kelly (2017) presented a detailed review
for the shear strength of fibrous peat and the recom-
mendations for the measurements and interpretations
of shear strength properties.
There are several trials to correlate the water
content and the organic content with the shear strength
parameters; however, as long as the fiber content and
Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336
the texture of fibers are not presented in the correla-
tions, these correlations should only be used as
guidance in the preliminary design stage of the project.
6.1 Undrained Cohesion cu
The undrained cohesion of organic soils is better to
determine by in-situ testing. MacFarlane 1969 corre-
lated the measured undrained cohesion cu using the
field vane testing with the water content. There are no
earlier trials which correlated the undrained cohesion
cu with the organic content. The data available in the
literature for measuring undrained cohesion and the
organic content are not adequate for a good correla-
tions, as the available data only covers the high
organic content.
Figure 8 shows the effect of the water content and
the high organic content on the undrained cohesion of
the organic soil. The figure demonstrates a decreasing
trend for the undrained cohesion while increasing the
water content. The same trend is observed by many
researchers (Wyld 1965; MacFarlane 1969; O’Kelly
2017). In contrast, the undrained cohesion increases
while increasing the organic content. The deduced
correlations shown on the figure exhibit high scatter
and a small least square error value. The figure reveals
that the undrained shear strength parameter of the
organic soils is small and ranges between 2 and
15 kPa, which is much smaller than the undrained
cohesion of the soft clay (20 kPa to 40 kPa). This
Fig. 8 Effect of water
content and the organic
content on the undrained
shear strength of the organic
soils
3331
small value of the undrained shear strength is the main
reason for the lateral spreading failure mechanism for
embankments (Ajlouni 2000).
6.2 Effective Cohesion c0
Organic soils are distinguished by their small cohesion
values. The triaxial compression and the direct shear
test are the two most commonly used lab tests for
determining the effective shear strength parameters.
The Consolidated Undrained CU test is the most
suitable test for the organic soils. The organic soils
behavior starts as drained behavior at very small
stresses due to the high initial void ratio and perme-
ability, but while the load increases, the behavior
rapidly transfers to the undrained behavior when the
soil consolidates (Dhowian and Edil 1980; Edil et al.
1991, 1994). In this section, the correlations between
the effective cohesion c0 , the water content, and the
organic content are presented.
The effect of both the water content and the organic
content on the effective cohesion of organic soils,
based on the data available in the literature, is
presented in Fig. 9. There is not much data in the
literature for the effective cohesion at small organic
content. The effective cohesion generally decreases
while the water content increases, as the water
surrounds the particles and decreases the particle
cohesion. Based on the available data for the effective
cohesion at the high organic content, Fig. 9 shows that
123
3332 Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336

Fig. 9 Effect of water

content and the organic
content on the effective
cohesion of the organic soils

the effective cohesion is increasing while the organic
content increases. Figure 9 shows that, the effective
cohesion of organic soil is generally decreasing as
more water is added, and increases as more organic
matters are added. The presence of fibres in the
organic soils would affect both the undrained cohesion
and the effective cohesion. Hence, the fibre content
and the fibre texture would greatly affect the cohesion
(undrained or effective).
6.3 Effective angle of shearing resistance /
The two main shear strength parameters are the
effective cohesion c0 and the effective angle of
shearing resistance u’. The main source of the induced
/’ in organic soils is the fiber interactions among each
other, or with minerals, and that explains why the /’ is
small at small strains. There are many trials to
correlate the effective angle of shearing resistance /’
with water content, but the range is very wide. Landva
(1980) stated that there is no reliable empirical
relationship that has been developed yet for organic
soils shear strength. A trend lines for the effect of the

Fig. 10 Effect of water

content and the organic
content on the effective
angle of shearing resistance
of the organic soils

123
Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336
water content and the organic content on the effective
angle of internal friction are presented in Fig. 10,
based on the available data from the literature. The
figure reveals that the effective angle of shearing
resistance increases while both the water content and
the organic content increases. This could be attributed
to the high fibre content at high water content. The data
available in the literature are not enough to establish a
correlation between the water content and the effective
angle of shearing resistance, or for the organic content
and the effective angle of shearing resistance.
7 Conclusions
This paper presented a comprehensive review for the
most common parameters of organic soils that engi-
neerinf professionals use in design. Besides, some new
correlations have been proposed for some of these
parameters as a function of the easily measured
properties: water and organic contents.
The proposed correlations showed that the void
ratio and liquid limit are better estimated based on the
water content. The unit weight and the specific gravity
showed a better correlation with the organic content.
Whenever the water content increases, more than
500%, the bulk density tends to settle around one, and
the specific gravity tends to settle around 1.5. This
study revealed that the proposed minimum limit by
Landava (1983), for the determination of the specific
gravity Gs as a function of the water content, is not in a
good agreement with the 95% confidence interval
proposed in this study. The 95% confidence interval
covers many data points that the minimum limit of
Landava (1983) does not cover.
The high initial water content and void ratio lead to
high compressibility of organic soils. Furthermore, the
study revealed that the lower bound proposed by
Macfarlane (1969) for the determination of the
compression index as a function of the water content
is not applicable for the full range of the organic
content. Besides, a high scatter of the compression
index is noticed when the organic content is used for
the correlations. Therefore, it is recommended for the
initial tentative estimate of the compression to use the
proposed equation of the water content instead.
Organic soils are distinguished by their low shear
strength parameters for both amorphous peat and
fibrous peat at small strains. It is difficult to correlate
3333
the shear strength parameters as a function of water or
organic contents without considering the presence of
fibres and their textures. However, the undrained shear
strength parameter Cu and the effective cohesion c’
show a decreasing trend while the water content
increases. Generally, organic soils’ cohesion is small
and ranges between 2 and 14 kPa for both the drained
and undrained conditions.
Acknowledgements This work was supported by an NSERC
CRD (Grant # 11R77115) to Drs. Dharma Wijewickreme and
Sumi Siddiqua. The authors would like to thank TransCanada
and ConeTec for providing funding, samples and/or in-kind
support for this research.
References
Abdel Kader HI (2010) Compressibility Characteristics of
Organic Soils in Egypt. MSc Thesis Department of Public
Works, Cairo University
Adams J (1965) The engineering behavior of a Canadian
muskeg. In: 6th International Conference of Soil
Mechanics and Foundations Engineering. Montreal 3–7
Adon R, Bakar I, Wijeyesekera DC, Zainorabidin A (2012)
Overview of the sustainable uses of peat soil in Malaysia
with some relevant geotechnical assessments. Int J Integr
Eng, Spec Issue ICONCEES 4(3):38–46
Ajlouni, MA (2000) Geotechnical Properties of Peat and Rela-
ted Engineering Problems. PhD Thesis Department of Civil
Engineering, University of Illinois
Al Adili A (2013) Assessing and Evaluating the Effect of
Organic Matters on Clayey and Silty Soil Stiffness. Eng
Technol J 31(19):103–119
Al-Raziqi AA, Huat BBK, Munzir HA (2003) Potential usage of
hyperbolic method for prediction of organic soil settle-
ment. In: 2nd International Conference on Advances in
Soft Soil Engineering and Technology. Putrajaya, 439–45
Amaryan LS, Sorokina GV, Ostoumova LV (1973) Consolida-
tion laws and mechanical-structural properties of peat soils.
In: 8th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Engineering. Moscow, pp 1–6
Anderjko MJ, Fiene F, Cohen, AD (1983) Comparison of ashing
techniques for determination of the inorganic content of
peats, in: Jarrett P. (Ed.), Testing of Peats and Organic
Soils, STP820-EB, ASTM International, West Con-
shohocken, 5–20. https://doi.org/10.1520/STP37331S
Arman A (1969) A definition of organic soils (an engineering
identification). Engineering Research Bulletin No. 101,
Louisiana State University, Division of Engineering
Research, for Louisiana Department of Highways
ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) (2013)
Standard test method for laboratory determination of the
fiber content of peat samples by dry mass. ASTM
D1997–13 West Conshohocken: PA
ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) (2014a)
Standard practice for estimating the degree of humification
123
3334
of peat and other organic soils (visual/manual method).
ASTM D5715–14, West Conshohocken, PA
ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) (2014b)
Standard test methods for moisture, ash, and organic matter
of peat and other organic soils. ASTM D2974–14, West
Conshohocken, PA
ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) (2014c)
Standard test method for specific gravity of soil solids by
gas pycnometer. ASTM D5550–14, West Conshohocken,
PA
ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) (2014d)
Standard test methods for specific gravity of soil solids by
water pycnometer. ASTM D854– 14, West Conshohocken:
PA
ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) (2015)
Standard test methods for bulk and dry density of peat and
peat products. ASTM D4531–15, West Conshohocken: PA
ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) (2015)
Standard test method for pH of peat materials. ASTM
D2976–15, West Conshohocken: PA
ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) (2017a)
Standard practice for classification of soils for engineering
purposes (Unified Soil Classification System). ASTM
D2487–17, West Conshohocken: PA
ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) (2017b)
‘‘Standard test methods for liquid limit, plastic limit, and
plasticity index of soils.’’ ASTM D4318–17, West Con-
shohocken, PA
ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) (2017c)
Standard test method for saturated density, moisture-
holding capacity, and porosity of saturated peat materials.
ASTM D2980–17, West Conshohocken, PA
ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) (2018)
Standard classification of peat samples by laboratory test-
ing. ASTM D4427–18, West Conshohocken: PA
Barden L (1969) Time dependent deformation of normally
consolidated clays and peats. J Soil Mech Found Engrg
Div, ASCE 95(SM I): 1–31
Bell FG (2000) Engineering Properties of Soils and Rocks.
Blackwell Science Limited, London
Berry PL (1983) Application of consolidation theory for peat to
the design of a reclamation scheme by preloading. Q J Eng
Geol 16:103–112. https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.QJEG.
1983.016.02.03
Berry PL, Vickers B (1975) Consolidation of Fibrous peat.
J Geotech Engrg ASCE 101(8):741–753
Bezuijen A, Kruse GAM, Van MA (2005) Failure of peat dikes
in the Netherlands. In: 16th International Conference on
Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering. Osaka,
1857–1860
Boylan N, Jennings P, Long M (2008) Peat slope failure in
Ireland. Q J Eng Geol 41(1):93–108. https://doi.org/10.
1144/1470-9236/06-028
Boylan N, Long M, Mathijssen FAJM (2011) In situ strength
characterisation of peat and organic soil using full flow
penetrometers. Can Geotech J 48(7):1085–1099. https://
doi.org/10.1139/t11-023
BSI (British Standard Institute) (1990) Methods of Test for Soils
for Civil Engineering Purposes. BS 1377: 1990, Milton
Keynes
123
Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336
Candler CJ, Chartres FRD (1988) Settlement and Analysis of
Three Trial Embankments on Soft Peaty Ground. In: 2nd
Baltic Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering. Tallinn, 268–272
Casagrande L (1966) Construction of embankments across
peaty soils. J Boston Soc Civil Engineers, BSCE, 53(3),
272–317
Casagrande A, Fadum RE (1940) Notes on Soil Testing for
Engineering Purposes. Publication 268, Graduate School
of Engineering, Harvard University, Cambridge: MA
Cola S, Cortellazzo G (2005) The shear strength behavior of two
peaty soils. Geotech Geol Eng 23:679–695. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10706-004-9223-9
Cook PM (1956) Consolidation characteristics of organic soils.
In: 9th Canadian Soil Mechanics Conference, NRC,
ACSSM Tech Memo 41: 82–87
Dehghanbanadaki A, Arefnia A, Keshtkarbanaeemoghadam A,
Ahmad K, Motamedi S, Hashim R (2017) Evaluating the
compression index of fibrous peat treated with different
binders. Bull Eng Geol Environ 76(2):575–586. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10064-016-0890-6
Den Haan EJ (1997) An overview of the mechanical behaviour
of peats and organic soils and some appropriate construc-
tion techniques. In: Recent Advances in Soft Soil Engi-
neering Conference. Kuching 17–45
Den Haan EJ, El Amir LSF (1994) A Simple Formula for Final
Settlement of Surface Loads on Peats. Advances in
Understanding and Modelling the Mechanical Behavior of
Peat, den Haan, Termaat & Edil (eds). Balkema: Rotterdam
Den Haan EJ, Feddema A (2013) Deformation and strength of
embankments on soft Dutch soil. Proceedings of the
Institution of Civil Engineers–Geotechnical Engineering,
ICE Publishing, 166 (3): 239–252 https://doi.org/10.1680/
geng.9.00086.
Dhowian AW, Edil TB (1980) Consolidation behavior of peats.
Geotech Test J ASTM 3(3):105–114. https://doi.org/10.
1520/GTJ10881J
Edil TB, Wang X (2000) Shear strength and Ko of peats and
organic soils. Geotechnics of High Water Content Mate-
rials, ASTM STP 1374 (eds. T. B. Edil and P. J. Fox),
American Society for Testing and Materials, West Con-
shohocken, PA, 209–25
Edil TB, Fox PJ, Lan LT (1991) End-of-primary consolidation
of peat.In: 10th ECSMFE. Florence 1:65–68
Edil TB, Fox PJ, Lan LT (1994) An assessment of one-dimen-
sional peat compression. In: 13th International Conference
on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. New
Delhi 229–32
Farrell ER, O’Neill C, Morris A (1994) Changes in the
mechanical properties of soils with variation in organic
content. In: Conference on Advances in Understanding and
Modelling the Mechanical Behaviour of Peat. Balkema
19–25
FHWA Joint Transportation Research Program. (2009) Classi-
fication of organic soils. Indiana department of
transportation
Fox PJ (1992) An Analysis of One Dimensional Creep Beha-
viour of Peat. PhD Thesis, University of Wisconsin
Fox PJ (2003) Consolidation and Settlement Analysis. The Civil
Engineering Handbook, 2nd Edition. Chen WF and Liew
JYR. (eds) Washington: DC
Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336
Fox PJ, Edil TB (1994) Temperature-Induced One Dimensional
Creep of Peat. In: International Workshop on Advances in
Understanding and Modeling the Mechanical Behavior of
Peat. Delft 27–34
Goodman LJ, Lee CN (1962) Laboratory and field data on
engineering characteristics of some peat soils. In: 8th
Muskeg Research Conference, NRC, ACSSM Tech.
Memo. 74: 107–129
Govar N (2007) Long term compression behavior of fibrous
peat. Malaysian J Civil Eng 19(2):14–26
Hansbo S (1991) Full-scale Investigations of the Effect of
Vertical Drains on the Consolidation of a Peat Deposit
Overlying Clay. De Mello Volume, E. Blacher Ed., Sao
Paolo-sp Brasil
Hobbs NB (1986) Mire Morphology and the Properties and
Behaviour of Some British and Foreign Peats. Q J Eng Geol
19(1):7–80. https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.QJEG.1986.019.
01.02
Huang AB (1982) In-Situ Testing of Peat. Internal Report
Ground Engineering, No. 105, Purdue University, west
Lafayette, IN
Huat BK, Kazemian S, Prasad A, Barghchi M (2011) State of an
art review of peat: general perspective. Int J Phys Sci
6(8):1988–1996
Jackson M (1958) Soil chemical analysis. Prentice-Hall,
Englewwod Cliffs, NJ
Jorgenson MB (1987) Secondary settlement of 4 Danish road
embankments on soft soils. In: 9th. European Conference
Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. Rotterdam
577–560
Kazemian S, Asadi A, Huat BBK (2009) Laboratory study on
geotechnical properties of tropical peat soils. Int J Geotech
Environ 1:69–79
Kazemian S, Huat BBK, Moayedi H (2012) Undrained shear
characteristics of tropical peat reinforced with cement
stabilized soil column. Geotech Geol Eng J 30:753–759.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-012-9492-7
Kogure K (1999) Consolidation and Settlement of Peat under
Loading. Problematic Soils, Yanagisawa, Moroto &
Mitachi (eds). Balkema, Rotterdam
Kogure K, Ohira Y (1977) Statistical forecasting of compress-
ibility of peaty ground. Can Geotech J 14:562–570. https://
doi.org/10.1139/t77-057
Kogure K, Yamuguchi H, Shogaki T (1993) Physical and Pore
Properties of Fibrous Peat Deposit. In: 11th Southeast
Asian Geotechnical Conferences. Singapore, 135–19
Lan LT 1992 A Model for One Dimensional Compression of
Peat. PhD. Thesis. University of Wisconsin: Madison
Wisconsin
Landva AO (1980) Geotechnical Behavior and Testing of Peat.
PhD Thesis, Universite Laval
Landva AO, La Rochelle P (1983). Compressibility and shear
characteristics of Radforth peats. In: Jarrett P. (Ed.),
Testing of Peat and Organic Soils, STP820-EB, ASTM
International, West Conshohocken 157–191 https://doi.
org/10.1520/STP37341S
Landva AO, Pheeney PE (1980) Peat fabric and structure. Can
Geotech J 17(3):416–435. https://doi.org/10.1139/t80-048
Lea ND, Brawner CO (1963) Highway design and construction
over peat deposits in the lower British Colombia. Highway
Res Rec 7:1–32
3335
Lechowicz Z (1994) An evaluation of the increase in shear
strength of organic soils. In: International Workshop on
Advances in Understanding and Modeling the Mechanical
Behavior of Peat. Delft, pp. 167–179
Lechowicz Z, Szymanski A, Baranski T (1996) Laboratory
Investigation. Embankments on Organic Soils. J. Hartlen
and J. Wolski (eds). Development in Geotechnical Engi-
neering, Elsevier, 167–179
Lefebvre GK, Langlois P, Lupien C, Lavallée JG (1984) Lab-
oratory Testing and in-situ Behavior of Peat as Embank-
ment Foundation. Can Geotech J 21(2):101–108. https://
doi.org/10.1139/t84-033
Lewis WA (1956) The settlement of the approach embankments
to a new road bridge at Lockford. West Suffolk Geotechn
6(3):106–114
Long M (2005) Review of peat strength, peat characterization
and constitutive modelling of peat with reference to land-
slides. Studia Geotechnica et Mechanica 27:67–90
Long M, Boylan N (2015) Predictions of settlements in peat
soils. Q J Eng Geol 46:303–322. https://doi.org/10.1144/
qjegh2011-063
Long M, Jennings P (2006) Analysis of the peat slide at Pol-
latomish, County Mayo. Ireland Landslides 3(1):51–61.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-005-0006-z
Long M, Jennings P, Carroll R (2011) Irish peat slides
2006–2010. Landslides 8(3):391–401. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s10346-011-0254-z
MacFarlane IC (1969) Muskeg engineering handbook. Univer-
sity of Toronto Press, Canada
MacFarlane IC, Aleen CM (1964) An examination of some
index test procedures for peat; a progress report. Proc. 9th
Muskeg Res. Conf., NRC, ACSSM Tech. Memo. 81,171-
183
MacFarlane IC, Rutka A (1962) An evaluation of pavement
performance over muskeg in northern Ontario. . Highway
Res Board Res Bull Washington, DC 316:32–43
McVay MC, Nugyen D (2004) Evaluation of Embankment
Distress at Sander’s Creek-SR20. Final Report, BC 354,
RPWO# 17, Florida Department of Transportation
Mesri G, Ajlouni MA (2007) Engineering properties of fibrous
peats. J Geotech Geoenviron ASCE 133(7):850–866.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2007)133:
7(850)
Mesri G, Stark TD, Ajlouni MA, Chen CS (1997) Secondary
compression with or without surcharging. J Geotech,
Geoenviron Engrg, ASCE 123(5):411–421. https://doi.org/
10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(1997)123:5(411)
Miyakawa I (1959) Soil engineering research on peaty alluvia:
reports 1 to 3. Civil Eng. Res. Inst., Hokkaido Development
Bureau, Bull. No. 20, Sapporo, 88
Moore LH (1962) A correlation of the engineering character-
istics of organic soils in New York State (preliminary).
New York State Dept. Public Works, Bureau of Soil Mech.,
Tech. Report. 13 leaves
Nakayama M, Yamaguchi H, Kougra K (1990) Changes in pore
size distribution of fibrous peat under various one-dimen-
sional consolidation conditions. Memories Def Acad
30(1):1–27
O’Kelly BC (2008) On the geotechnical design and use of peat
bunds in the conservation of bogs. In: 1st International
123
3336
Conference on Geotechnical Engineering. Hammamet, pp,
259–267
O’Kelly BC (2009) Development of a large consolidometer
apparatus for testing peat and other highly organic soils.
SUO-Mires Peat 60:23–36
O’Kelly BC (2014) Characterization and undrained strength of
amorphous clay. ICE Proc, Geotech Eng 167(3):311–320.
https://doi.org/10.1680/geng.11.00025
O’Kelly BC (2015) Effective stress strength testing of peat.
Environ Geotech 2(1):33–44. https://doi.org/10.1680/
envgeo.13.00112
O’Kelly BC (2016) Briefing: Atterberg limits and Peat. Environ
Geotech 3(6):359–363. https://doi.org/10.1680/envgeo.15.
00003
O’Kelly BC (2017) Measurement, interpretation and recom-
mended use of laboratory strength properties of fibrous
peat. Geotech Res 4(3):136–171. https://doi.org/10.1680/
jgere.17.00006
O’Kelly BC, Pichan SP (2014) Effects of decomposition on the
compressibility of fibrous peat — A review. Geomech
Geoeng 8(4):286–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/17486025.
2013.804210
O’Kelly BC, Sivakumar V (2014) Water content determinations
for peat and other organic soils using the oven-drying
method. Drying Technol 32(6):631–643. https://doi.org/
10.1080/07373937.2013.849728
O’Kelly BC, Zhang L (2013) Consolidated-drained triaxial
compression testing of peat. Geotech Test J 36(3):310–321.
https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ20120053
Olson RE (1984) Performance of an Embankment on Peat.
International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechni-
cal Engineering. 26
Oikawa H, Igarashi M (1997) A method for predicting e-log p
curve and log cv-log p curve of a peat from its natural water
content. In: Recent Advances in Soft Soil Engineering
(eds) Huat and Bahia (pp 201–209). Kuching Sarawak
PRCI (2009) Guidelines for constructing natural gas and liquid
hydrocarbon pipelines in areas subject to landslide and
subsidence hazards. Technical Committee of Pipeline
Research Council International Inc., Catalog No. L52292
(V)
Price JS, Cagampan J, Kellner E (2005) Assessment of peat
compressibility: is there an easy way? Hydrol Process
19:3469–3475. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.6068
Robinson RG (2003) A study on the beginning of secondary
compression of soils. J Test Eval 31(5):388–397. https://
doi.org/10.1520/JTE12362J
Samson L, La Rochelle P (1972) Design and performance of an
expressway constructed over peat by preloading. Can
Geotech J 9:447–466. https://doi.org/10.1139/t72-044
123
Geotech Geol Eng (2021) 39:3315–3336
Santagata M, Bobet A, Johnston CT, Hwang J (2008) One-
dimensional compression behavior of a soil with high
organic matter content. J Geotech Geoenviron Engrg.
ASCE 134(1):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-
0241(2008)134:1(1)
Skempton AW, Petley DJ (1970) Ignition loss and other prop-
erties of peats an clays from Avonmouth. King’s Lynn
Cranberry Moss Geotech 20(4):343–356. https://doi.org/
10.1680/geot.1970.20.4.343
Tarnocai C (2006) The effect of climate change on carbon in
Canadian peatlands. Glob Planet Chang 53:222–232.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2006.03.012
Tarnocai C, Kettles IM, Lacelle B (2005) Peatlands of Canada
Database. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Research
Branch, Ottawa, ON (digital database)
Taylor DW (1942) Research on consolidation clays. Department
of Civil and Sanitation Engineering, Massachusetts Insti-
tute of Technology, Report 82
Terzaghi K, Peck R (1967) Soil Mechanics in Engineering
Practice. Wiley, New York, USA
Terzaghi K, Peck R, Mesri G (1996) Soil Mechanics in Engi-
neering Practice. Wiley, New York
Tessier G (1966) Deux exemples - types de construction de
routes sur muskegs au Quebec. Proc. 11th Muskeg Res.
Conf., NRC. ACGR Tech Memo 87:92–141
Wolski W, Szymanski A, Mirecki J, Lechowicz Z, Larsson R,
Hartlen J, Garbulewski K, Bergdahl U (1988). Behaviour
of two test embankments on organic soils. Report No. 32.
Swedish Geotechnical Institute, Linköeping
Wyld RC (1956). A Further Investigation of the Engineering
Properties of Muskeg. MSc Thesis, Faculty of Engineering,
University of Alberta
Xu J, Morris PJ, Liu J, Holden J (2018) PEATMAP: Refining
estimates of global peatland distribution based on a meta-
analysis. CATENA 160:134–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.catena.2017.09.010
Yamaguchi, H. Ohira, Y., Kogure, K., Mori, S., (1985)
Undrained shear characteristics of normally consolidated
peat under triaxial compression and extension conditions.
Japanese Society of Soil Mech. and Found. Engr., 25 (3)
1–18. https://doi.org/10.3208/sandf1972.25.3_1
Yamaguchi H, Yamauchi K, Kawano K (1987) Simple shear
properties of peat. In: 6th. International Symposium of
Geotechnical Engineering of Soft Soils. Ciudad 163–170
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with
regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.