See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/339788997

A Case Study on the Correlatıon between Sıze and Permeabılıty of the Sands

Article · November 2019

CITATIONS READS

0 357

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Strain estimation in layered soil View project

Soil Improvement View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Kaveh Dehghanian on 09 March 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 American Journal of Geosciences and Geomatics
Kaveh D et al. American Journal of Geosciences and Geomatics 2019, 1:1-8 Page 1 of 8
http://www.ivyunion.org/index.php/ajgg/

Research Article

A Case Study on the Correlatıon between

Sıze and Permeabılıty of the Sands
Dehghanıan Kaveh*, and Hakan Murat Soysal

Istanbul Aydin University, Engineering faculty, Civil Engineering department, Istanbul, Turkey

Abstract
Hydraulic conductivity or permeability coefficient is the most prevalent soil parameter in seepage
computations. It has been perceived that hydraulic conductivity of coarse- grained soils is correlated
to the grain size, in this way various empirical correlations have been proposed to evaluate
penetrability utilizing its grain size qualities. In this study, different sand samples from different sites
in Istanbul has been used to propose a correlation between sample size (D10,D30,D50 and D60) and
hydraulic conductivity (k). The permeability coefficient is measured using constant head
permeability test. It is observed that the polinomial function correlates diameter and permeability
with a good precision. The proposed correlation can help the engineers to claculate permeability in
the absence of in-situ field or laboratory tests.

Keywords: hydraulic conductivity coefficient; constant head permeability test; grain size
distribution; empirical correlation
Received: September 20, 2019; Accepted: October 20, 2019; Published: November 30, 2019
Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Copyright: 2019 Kaveh D et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
*Correspondence to: Dehghanıan Kaveh, Istanbul Aydin University, Engineering faculty, Civil
Engineering department, Istanbul, Turkey
E-mail: kavehdehghanian@aydin.edu.tr

Ivy Union Publishing | http: //www.ivyunion.org November 30, 2019 | Volume 1, Issue 1
 Kaveh D et al. American Journal of Geosciences and Geomatics 2019, 1:1-8 Page 2 of 8

Introduction
The hydraulic conductivity coefficient (k) of soils is the most important parameter in
groundwater seepage estimations. Assurance of a solid k is unavoidable to dependably compute,
model and assess leakage in permeable medium. There are a few methods such as in-situ tests,
experimental tests and empirical relations to estimate k. The exact accuracy of k is restricted by
the vulnerabilities in geometry of the researched soil layer and in hydraulic boundary
conditions. Other than these certainties, it must be additionally noticed that the installation
expenses of the wells are high. Moreover, it is hard to get agent tests for the laboratory tests; the
tested sample are somewhat restricted in size, so those may not properly represent the whole
layer on site [1-3]. To solve these problems, numerous researchers have proposed empirical
correlations between grain size distribution, density, grain shape and hydraulic conductivity
[4-8], and in some cases from geological specifications [9-11]. In a survey of 19 investigations
of particle size and permeability, Shepherd (1989) showed the reasonable pattern of expanding
permeability with expanding particle size [12]. D10 (theparticle size that 10 % of the example is
better than) is regularly observed as the best indicator of permeability and vital to numerous
formulae utilized for ascertaining permeability [for example refer to 13-15]. Nonetheless, a
wide range of techniques permeability utilizing particle size information. For instance,
Alyamani and Şen (1993) utilized the full distribution of particle sizes, as opposed to simply the
D10 [16-17]; and Cronican and Gribb (2004) built up a technique for deciding permeability from
particle size data in materials containing more than 70 % sand [18]. Permeability esteems got
from particle size examination are diverse relying on which formulae are utilized [19-22]. It is
commonly concurred that deciding permeability utilizing particle size investigation is most
appropriate to loose sand and gravel and is less fit to silt and clay [17, 22].

Materials and methods

In this research, different sand samples from Istanbul district is used for experiments. Different
three sites are chosen to represent a variety of sand types. Afterward, soils were classified using sieve
analysis according to TS-1900-1 and their effective size (D10) or in other words, diameter corresponding
to 10% finer in the grain size distribution; D30, diameter corresponding to 30% finer in the grain size
distribution; mean particle size (D50) diameter corresponding to 50% finer in the grain size distribution
and finally D60, diameter corresponding to 60% finer in the grain size distribution is calculated. The tests
are perfprmed in three sets and the obtained values for all sets were the same. The obtained results for
each sample is summerized in Table 1.

Table 1 Summary of particle size of samples

Sample No D10 (mm) D30 (mm) D50 (mm) D60 (mm)

1 2 3 4.4 4.75

2 1.85 3.6 3.6 4.5

3 1.8 2.8 3.8 4.3

Ivy Union Publishing | http: //www.ivyunion.org November 30, 2019 | Volume 1, Issue 1
 Kaveh D et al. American Journal of Geosciences and Geomatics 2019, 1:1-8 Page 3 of 8

All samples are classified as SP (poor-graded sand) using Unified Soil Classification System
(USCS). In order to have a better insight about our material, specific gravity (Gs) and unit weight (γ)
tests were performed on the samples. Unit weight test relates to the determination of the unit volume
weight of soils with or without a smooth geometric shape. Specific gravity test is a method for
measuring the relative density of a fine-medium and coarse-grained soil sample. Both of the tests are
performed according to TS 1900-1 [23]. Using TS 1900-1, after preparing the mixture, the sample is
separated by quartering method. The sample is cross-splited into two groups, and the seperated
sample is weighed. Then the empty pycnometer is weighed. In the next step, the sample is poured into
the pycnometer and we weigh it. Finally the pycnometer is filled up till the water marked and we
weigh it again. The tests results of three samples are in a close range which is summerized in Table 2.
The tests are carried out in three sets to ensure the results and their mean value is shown in Table 2.

Table 2 unit weight and specific gravity of the samples

Sample No Gs γ (gr/cm3)

1 2.54 1.54

2 2.68 1.58

3 2.62 1.56

The different steps of Gs calculations are shown in Fig. 1.

(a) (b) (c) (d)

Fig. 1 (a) Reduction of the sample by dividing it into four parts (b) Weighing of the filled pyknometer with water
(c) Weighing the sample filled pycnometer (d) Weighing of Sample and Water-filled Pycnometer

Constant head permeability test

This test is carried out to determine the permeability of coarse soils. Returns the amount of
water that passes through a soil sample of known length and area over a period of time. During the test,

Ivy Union Publishing | http: //www.ivyunion.org November 30, 2019 | Volume 1, Issue 1
 Kaveh D et al. American Journal of Geosciences and Geomatics 2019, 1:1-8 Page 4 of 8

the water tank is kept constantly filled to keep the water level constant. We set and weigh our sample to
1750 gr. Then the samples are mixed together. Afterwards, the sample is sieved the mixed by washing it
through a 1.7 mm sieve. Remaining on the sieve will be the sample we will use in the experiment. We
then fill this sample into the permeability container and fill it to remain 2 cm. The above chamber will be
filled with water to give water to the container at a certain height and deliver water with a constant flow
rate. Later, the values from the water scale that is hanging on the wall with the pipes connected to the
permeabilte chamber is controlled and written. The procedure of the test is shown in Fig. 2.

(a) (b)

Fig. 2 (a) Three different sand samples, (b) Constant head permeability test

Finally, k can be summarizes as it is depicted in Table 3. The tests are prformed in three sets to
ensure the accuracy of the results.

Table 3 Permeability coefficient of different sand samples

Sample 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 3

k (m/s) 0.00018 0.000232 0.00026 0.000361 0.000865 0.00572 0.02334 0.02153 0.0228 0.02132

For a given arrangement of information, the correlation between k and particle size can be
measurably assessed utilizing a straightforward regression function. The best-fit least-squares
line gives a straightforward practical connection between size and permeability, and how much
the data differ from the line is given by the estimation of R, the correlation coefficient. The
coefficient of assurance (R-squared) is the proportion of the disclosed variation to the complete
variation of the input concerning the regression line [24]. Grain size is the independent variable
(x), and penetrability is the dependent variable (y). Different regression functions such as
exponential, linear, logarithmic, polynomial, power and moving average is applied on the
obtained data to get a precise correlation. In the x-axis, D10, D30, D50 and D60 have been used
respectively. The summary of the results for different functions and D10 is depicted in Table 4.

Ivy Union Publishing | http: //www.ivyunion.org November 30, 2019 | Volume 1, Issue 1
 Kaveh D et al. American Journal of Geosciences and Geomatics 2019, 1:1-8 Page 5 of 8

Table 4 Correlation of D10 and permeability coefficient

Function Correlation R2
exponential y = 4E+14e-21.2x 0.7567
linear y = -0.0949x + 0.1877 0.5928
logarithmic y = -0.182ln(x) + 0.124 0.6031
2
polynomial y = 1.9235x – 7.4194x + 7.1451 0.9812

power y= 3E+08x-40.51 0.7637

Considering Table 4, it is clear that the polynomial function represents the correlation between the
permeability and D10 in the best way and can be used to represent the relation in the best way. The
graphical modeling of this relation is depicted in Fig. 3.

0.025
y = 1.9235x2 - 7.4194x + 7.1451
0.02
R² = 0.9812
0.015
0.01
k (m/s) 0.005

0
-0.005
-0.01
-0.015
1.75 1.8 1.85 1.9 1.95 2 2.05
D10 (mm)

Fig. 3 Correlation of D10 and permeability

In the next step, the correlation between D30 and k is shown in Table 5.
Table 5 Correlation of D30 and permeability coefficient

Function Correlation R2
exponential y = 2E+18e-16.81x 0.5613
linear y = -0.0674x + 0.2024 0.3524
logarithmic y = -0.195ln(x) + 0.2149 0.3524
2
ynomial y = 0.142x - 0.9337x + 1.5234 0.9812
-48.74
power y = 4E+19x 0.5613

Ivy Union Publishing | http: //www.ivyunion.org November 30, 2019 | Volume 1, Issue 1
 Kaveh D et al. American Journal of Geosciences and Geomatics 2019, 1:1-8 Page 6 of 8

Considering Table 5, it can be concluded that polynomial function alike Table 4, represents the
correlation with a good precision. The correlation can be illustrated as Fig. 4.

0.03
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
k (m/s)
0.005
0
-0.005
-0.01
-0.015
0 1 2 3 4
D30 (mm)

Fig. 4 Correlation of D30 and permeability

Using the same procedure, the correlation for D50 and D60 can be shown in Tables 5 and 6
respectively.

Table 5 Correlation of D50 and permeability coefficient

Function Correlation R2
exponential y = 3688.2e-3.641x 0.3309
linear y = -0.0119x + 0.0564 0.1383
logarithmic y = -0.045ln(x) + 0.0712 0.1233
2
polynomial y = -0.1705x + 1.3611x – 2.6883 0.9812
-14.18
power y = 575354x 0.3115

Table 6 Correlation of D60 and permeability coefficient

Function Correlation R2
exponential y = 3E+17e-10.28x 0.8673

linear y = -0.0494x + 0.2316 0.7817

logarithmic y = -0.225ln(x) + 0.3472 0.7924
2
polynomial y = 0.2029x – 1.885x + 4.3765 0.9810
-46.59
power y = 6E+27x 0.872

Ivy Union Publishing | http: //www.ivyunion.org November 30, 2019 | Volume 1, Issue 1
 Kaveh D et al. American Journal of Geosciences and Geomatics 2019, 1:1-8 Page 7 of 8

As a conclusion, the obtained correlations can be written as:

k = 1.9235D102 – 7.4194D10+ 7.1451 (1)

k = 0.142 D302 - 0.9337 D30 + 1.5234 (2)

k = -0.1705 D502 + 1.3611 D50 – 2.6883 (3)

k = 0.2029 D602 – 1.885 D60 + 4.3765 (4)

Conclusion
Three different sand samples from different districts are used to investigation of the correlation
between particle size and permeability coefficient. The sand samples are classified as Poor-graded Sand
(SP). Using the constant head permeability test, the hydraulic conductivity of samples was determined
and five different fuctions were used to find a regression fuction. It has been observed that polynomial
function best represents the correlation between D10, D30, D50 and D60 with a high (R2=0.9812) precision.
In the absence of in-situ and laboratory experimental data, these formulas can be used as a good
estimator.

References
1. Holtz RD, Kovacks WD, Sheahan TC. An introduction to geotechnical engineering.
Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, 853 p, 2011
2. Salarashayeri AF, Siosemarde M . 2012. Prediction of soil hydraulic conductivity from
particle-size distribution: World Acad Sci Eng Technol. 61:454-458
3. DeGroot DJ, Ostendorf DW, Judge AI . 2012. In situ measurement of hydraulic conductivity of
saturated soils. Geotech Eng J SEAGSAGSSEA. 43(4):63-72
4. Hazan A. Some physical properties of sands and gravels: mass. State Board of Health, Annual
Report, pp 539-556, 1892
5. Scheidegger, A. E. The Physics of Flow Through Porous Media. 3rd edition. U. of Toronto Press.
353 pp, 1974
6. Muskat M. Physical Principles of Oil Production. McGraw- Hill, New York. 922 pp.
7. Bear J. 1972. Dynamics of Fluids in Porous Media. Elsevier, New York. 764 pp, 1949
8. Boadu F K. Hydraulic conductivity of soils from grain-size distribution: new models. Journal of
Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering. 2000, 126(8):39-746
9. Song JX, Chen XH, Cheng C, Wang DM, Lackey S, Xu ZX. Feasibility of grain-size analysis
methods for determination of vertical hydraulic conductivity of streambeds. Journal of
Hydrology. 2009, 375, 428-437
10. Fogg GE, Noyes CD, Carle SF. Geologically based model of heterogeneous hydraulic
conductivity in an alluvial setting. Hydrogeology Journal. 1998, 6:131-143
11. McMillan AA, Heathcote JA, Klinck BA, Shepley MG, Jackson CP, Degnan PJ. Hydrogeological
characterization of the onshore Quaternary sediments at Sellafield using the concept of domains.
Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology. 2000, 33:301-323

Ivy Union Publishing | http: //www.ivyunion.org November 30, 2019 | Volume 1, Issue 1
 Kaveh D et al. American Journal of Geosciences and Geomatics 2019, 1:1-8 Page 8 of 8

12. Shepherd R G. 1989. Correlations of permeability and grain-size. Ground Water, 27, pp.
633–638.
13. Kozeny J. Uber Kapillare Leitung Des Wassers in Boden. Sitzungsber Akad. Wiss.Wien Math.
Naturwiss.Kl., Abt.2a, 136, pp. 271-306, 1927
14. Carman PC. Fluid Flow through Granular Beds. Transactions of the Institution of Chemical
Engineers. 1937, 15:150-157
15. Carrier WD. Goodbye, Hazen; Hello, Kozeny-Carman. Journal of Geotechnical and
Geoenvironmental Engineering. 2003, 129:1054-1056
16. Alyamani MS, Şen Z. Determination of Hydraulic Conductivity from complete grain size
distribution curves. Ground Water. 1993, 31:551-555
17. Chapuis RP. Predicting the saturated hydraulic 458 conductivity of sand and gravel using
effective diameter and void ratio. Canadian Geotechnical Journal. 2004, 41:787-795
18. Cronican AE, Gribb MM. Hydraulic conductivity prediction for sandy soils. Ground Water. 2004,
42, 459-464
19. Milham NP, Howes BL. A comparison of methods to determine K in shallow coastal aquifer.
Ground Water. 1995, 33: 49-57
20. Odong J. Evaluation of empirical formulae for determination of hydraulic conductivity based on
grain size analysis. Journal of American Science. 2007, 3:54-60
21. Vuković M, Soro A. Determination of Hydraulic Conductivity of porous media from grain size
composition. Water Resources Publication LLC, Colorado. 83pp, 1992
22. Vienken T And Dietrich P. Field methods of determining hydraulic conductivity from grain size
data. Journal of Hydrology. 2011, 400:58-71
23. TS 1900-1. Turkish Standard: methods of testing soils for civil engineering purposes in the
laboratory - Part 1: Determination of physical properties, Turkish Standards Institute, Ankara.
2006
24. Krumbein WC and Graybill FA. An Introduction to Statistical Models in Geology. McGraw-Hill,
NewYork. 475 pp, 1965

Ivy Union Publishing | http: //www.ivyunion.org November 30, 2019 | Volume 1, Issue 1

View publication stats