Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-019-01611-1

ORIGINAL PAPER

Effect of pore water pH on mechanical properties of clay soil

Jahangir Abedi Koupai 1 & Marieh Fatahizadeh 1 & Mohammad Reza Mosaddeghi 2

Received: 15 March 2019 / Accepted: 4 September 2019

# Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Abstract
Water quality, particularly pH, is one of the most important factors that may significantly influence soil physical and mechanical
properties leading to damage of structures. This study aimed to investigate the effect of pore water pH on engineering properties
of a natural clay soil. The soil was exposed to solutions with different pH values (4, 5, 6, 6.5, 9, 10, and 11) as buffered by acetate
and carbonate-bicarbonate. Atterberg consistency limits, unconfined compressive strength, and shear strength parameters of the
soil were measured after 90 days of exposure to the solutions. The results indicated that the unconfined compressive strength,
shear strength parameters, and liquid limit of the soil increased considerably when the pore fluid had a high pH or a low pH. Thus,
the results obviously showed that engineering properties of the soil greatly depend on the pH of pore water.

Keywords Water quality . Clay . pH . Soil strength . Atterberg limits

Introduction engineering (Yukselen-Aksoy et al. 2008). In recent years, the

Water pollution has gained much attention in environmental
studies in recent years. Unfortunately, due to modern civiliza-
tion and industrialization, industrial waste, toxic substances,
heavy metals, and harmful contaminants (such as alkaline and
acidic wastewaters, toxic gases, radioactive materials, fats and
oils, etc.) have entered into the water resources. In addition,
there is the possibility of seepage of contaminated waters into
the soil profile, especially in units where they are in contact
with the ground. Soil pore water quality would affect the
properties of soils even for a short period of time (Oztoprak
and Pisirici 2011; Shen et al. 2018; Wang et al. 2018; Yan et al.
2018). Clays are the most important components of cohesive
soils, which are classified as fine-grained soils in geotechnical
* Jahangir Abedi Koupai
koupai@cc.iut.ac.ir
Marieh Fatahizadeh
m.fatahizadeh@alumni.iut.ac.ir
Mohammad Reza Mosaddeghi
mosaddeghi@cc.iut.ac.ir
1
Department of Water Engineering, College of Agriculture, Isfahan
University of Technology, Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran
2
Department of Soil Science, College of Agriculture, Isfahan
University of Technology, Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran
growing trend of soil and water pollution has stimulated a
large number of research studies in which the influences of
chemicals on soil properties have been carefully examined
(Gratchev et al. 2007; Fernando 2010; Nguyen et al. 2013;
Deng et al. 2014; Tiwari and Ajmera 2014). One of the most
important quality indicators of pollutants is the pH of the soil
pore water, especially the situations in which the pH of the
environment alters (Spagnoli et al. 2012). Changes in pH val-
ue of the pore water can sharply alter the geotechnical prop-
erties of clayey soils (Kamon et al. 1997; Palomino and
Santamarina 2005; Sunil et al. 2006; Gajo and Maines 2007).
In recent years, some research studies have been done to
understand the impact of pH of soil water on Atterberg limits
(Bakhshipour et al. 2016; Jia-dan and Yan-bin 2018), compac-
tion (Bakhshipour et al. 2016), compressibility (Gratchev and
Towhata 2016; Bakhshipour et al. 2017; Chavali and Reddy
2018), hydraulic conductivity (D’Appolonia 1980; Ruhl and
Daniel 1997; Kashir and Yanful 2001), mineralogy (Ganor
et al. 1995; Sruthi and Reddy 2017), mechanical strength
(Wang and Siu 2006; Osuolale et al. 2012; Gratchev and
Sassa 2013), and swelling (Mulyukov 2008; Reddy and
Sivapullaiah 2010; Chavali et al. 2017; Rama Vara Prasad
et al. 2018). Shear strength and Atterberg consistency limits
are important soil characteristics that are required to evaluate
soil bearing capacity under high-weight structures and roads,
stability analysis of soil, and lateral pressure on the structures.
These characteristics would depend on different factors,

mostly including shapes and size distribution of the particles,
soil mineralogical composition, and chemical properties of
pore water (particularly pH).
It is well-known that the charges on the exposed edges of
particles are greatly pH-dependent, which are called variable
charges (Van Olphen 1991; Mitchell 1993; Gratchev and
Sassa 2009). At high pH values, they become increasingly
negative due to the adsorption of OH− ions, and conversely,
more positive at low pH values due to the adsorption of H+
ions (Gratchev and Sassa 2009). This situation often occurs
for 1:1 clays such as kaolinite (Ghobadi et al. 2014) that form
various particle associations. Van Olphen 1991 mentioned that
the face-to-face (F–F) associations prevail at high pH environ-
ments (pH > 7.5), while the edge-to-face (E–F) associations
tend to predominate at low pH environments (pH < 5.5)
(Gratchev and Towhata 2013).
Bowders and Daniel (1987) studied Atterberg limits of
soils, including dominant clay minerals of kaolinite, illite,
and montmorillonite infiltrated with acetic acid. They reported
that in an acidic environment, kaolinite particles form a floc-
culation with the dominant face-to-edge aggregation, which
causes an increase in the LL of kaolinitic soil. For montmo-
rillonitic soils, high concentrations of H+ ions (i.e., acidic en-
vironment) would diminish the thickness of the diffuse double
layer (DDL), leading to a lower value of LL. The DDL is an
ionic structure that describes the variation of electric potential
near a charged surface, such as clay, and behaves as a capac-
itor (McBride 1994). In contrast, the effects of pH on soil
structure and Atterberg limits for illitic soils were not well
defined. They concluded that the effect of pH on the clay
properties is complex and highly dependent on the mineralogy
of the particles.
Spagnoli et al. (2012) studied the influence of pH of pore
fluids on undrained shear strength of a kaolinitic clay. It was
found that the undrained shear strength of clay increased sig-
nificantly whether the pore fluid had a high or a low pH. In
acidic pH, a possible explanation could be related to the in-
creased dissolution of Al3+, which can increase the internal
shear strength, while in alkaline pH, the increasing ionic
strength face-to-face association resulted in increased
strength. Anandarajah and Zhao (2000) conducted several ex-
periments on kaolinite at different pore water qualities and
reported that the increase in soil strength was due to an in-
crease in the net inter-particle attractive forces (i.e., van der
Waals attractive forces acting between the clay particles) and
subsequently caused greater flocculation that gave additional
strength to the soil structure. Bakhshipour et al. (2016) also
reported changes in the mechanical properties of soils after
being exposed to acidic rain. Low pH led to a reduction in
soil strength and maximum dry density and an increase in the
coefficient of permeability, liquid limit, and optimum mois-
ture content of soil. The results showed that after infiltration
with artificial acid most of the minerals were leached out from
J. A. Koupai et al.
the soil, which resulted in the destruction of the bonds be-
tween clay aggregates/particles and a significant change in
the mineral structure.
Mitchell (1993) mentioned that acidic condition can solve
cementing agents, such as ferric oxides and calcium
carbonates. Imai et al. (2006) studied the clay from the
Osaka Bay leached with hydrogen chloride and showed that
acidic solutions solved the calcium carbonate, and
subsequently, destroyed carbonatic bonds between clay
particle. Besides, Gratchev and Towhata (2016) indicated that
LL and plasticity index (PI) of soils did indeed increase at low
pH, due to dissolution of calcium carbonates in acidic fluids.
In Table 1, some recent studies are shown and compared.
The above-mentioned studies show that the effect of pH on
soil engineering properties could be variable, depending on
the complexity of mineral composition of natural soils and
the chemical composition of pore solution. This means that
studying the mechanical behavior of soils (especially natural
soils) contaminated with acids and alkalines is very complex.
Owing to pH alterations of the surface and ground water re-
sources in recent years, detailed and quantitative investiga-
tions of mechanical behavior of contaminated natural soils
seem to be necessary. Therefore, the main objective of this
study was to evaluate the influence of pore water pH on the
shear strength and Atterberg consistency limits of a natural
clay soil.
Materials and methods
Soil sampling and characterization and preparation
of solutions with different pH values
The soil used for the study was clay collected from the Paveh
region located in the northwest of Kermanshah province, Iran.
The soil was collected from the layer of 0.5–1 m. Disturbed
soil samples were put in plastic bags and transported to the
laboratory for preparation and testing.
Geotechnical properties of the soil were initially deter-
mined after wetting by distilled water. The Proctor compaction
test was done to determine optimum water content and max-
imum dry bulk density. The physical properties of natural clay
are shown in Table 2. The soil was composed of 15% sand,
49% silt, and 36% clay, which can be classified, according to
the unified soil classification system (USCS), as CL.
Soil chemical properties were determined according to
standard methods as follows: pH and electrical conductivity
(EC) were determined potentiometrically in the saturated
paste, organic matter content was determined by the wet-
oxidation method, Ca2+ and Mg2+ concentrations by the titra-
tion with EDTA,1 Na+ and K+ concentrations by flame
1
Ethylene Diamine Tetra Acetic Acid
Effect of pore water pH on mechanical properties of clay soil

Table 1 Summaries of the recent studies on soil mechanical properties

Study Study focus Key finding and conclusion

Chavali and Reddy (2018)
Bakhshipour et al. (2017)
Chavali et al. (2017)
Bakhshipour et al. (2016)
Gratchev and Towhata
(2016)
Spagnoli et al. (2012)
Volume change behavior of phosphogypsum
treated clayey soils contaminated with
H2SO4
and H3PO4 solutions
Impact of acid rain on the compressibility
behavior of residual soils
Swelling characteristics of soils in acidic
environments
influence of acid rain on the geotechnical
properties of residual soils
Compressibility of soils containing kaolinite
subjected to acid contamination
Effect of pH variations on underained shear
strength parameters of a kaolinitic clay
• High swelling and low compressibility in acid contaminated soils
• The change in microstructure toward flocculated fabric and
mineralogical transformations result in the volume changes in soils
• The compressibility of residual soils increased at low pH value
• Acid rain destroyed the bonds between clay aggregates/particles
resulting in significant changes in mineral structure owing to the
dissolution of alumina and silica from soils, and thus formation of
‘loose’ structures with larger voids
• The mineralogical changes owing to cation exchange reactions,
and also the partial mineral dissolution, led to acid-induced
swelling in the montmorillonitic soils
• The formation of flocculated face-to-edge associations and
mineralogical changes, along with partial mineral dissolution,
result in acid-induced swelling in kaolin clay
• The type and concentration of acid and dominant cation appeared
to be a vital factor governing the swelling behavior of the soil
during the acid contamination
• At low pH, soil strength and maximum dry density decrease and
the coefficient of permeability, liquid limit, and optimum moisture
content of the soil increase
• Infiltration by artificial acid most of the minerals were leached out
from the soil, destroy the bonds between clay particles/aggregates,
and thus a significant change in mineral structure
• The compressibility increases at low pH.
• Destruction of the carbonate bonds between clay particles/aggregates
form a Bloose^ structure with larger voids, and thus greater compress-
ibility
• At high or a low pH, the undrained shear strength of clay increases
• In acidic pH, the dissolution of Al3+ can increase the internal shear
strength
• In alkaline pH, the increasing ionic strength face-to-face association
results in increased strength

photometry, the concentrations of anions of Cl−, SO43−, CO32 the dominant clay minerals of the soil sediment (Fig. 1).
−
, and HCO3− by chromatographic methods, calcium carbon- Quartz was also detected in the bulk soil sample.
ate equivalent (CCE) by the calcimetric method, and gypsum Distilled water with a pH of 6.5 was buffered by acetate
content by the acetone method (Sparks et al. 1996). Chemical and carbonate-bicarbonate to produce solutions with pH
properties of the soil are presented in Table 3. values in the range of 4 to 11. In order to make the acetate
X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis conducted on the soil buffer, acetic acid and sodium acetate solutions of 0.2 M were
specimens indicated that kaolinite, illite, and vermiculite were diluted to the desired concentrations with acidic pH values
being in the range of 4 to 6. In order to make carbonate-
Table 2 Physical properties of the studied clay soil bicarbonate buffer, a 0.2 M sodium bicarbonate solution with
dry sodium carbonate was dissolved in distilled water to the
Specific gravity (Gs) 2.7
desired concentrations with pH values being in the range of 9
Liquid limit (LL), % 45.0 to 11. All pH measurements were performed by a pH-meter
Plastic limit (PL), % 25.0 (Jenway 3510, accuracy ±0.01). Three reference solutions
Plasticity index (PI), % 20.0 with pH values of 4, 7, and 10 were used for calibrating the
Maximum dry unit weight (kN m−3) 16.1 pH-meter.
Optimum water content (%) 22.0
Clay content (%) 36 Atterberg consistency limits
Silt content (%) 49
Sand content (%) 15 Atterberg consistency limits were measured on the specimens
that had been exposed to different acidic and alkaline pH

Table 3 Chemical properties of the studied clay soil
OC CaSO4 CaCO3 EC pH Cl−
(%) (dS m−1) – (meq L−1)
1.10 2.23 20.0 0.45 7.43 0.01
values of 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, and 11 and distilled water with pH of
6.5 (as control sample) for 90 days. Then, the specimens were
dried, pulverized, and passed through a 425-μm sieve to en-
sure the homogeneity of the specimens. Liquid limit (LL) and
plastic limit (PL) were determined according to ASTM D4318
(ASTM 2010) with six replicates, and the average values were
considered.
Direct shear test
The direct shear test was performed according to ASTM D3080/
D3080M (ASTM 2011). Soil samples were first exposed to the
acidic, alkaline, and distilled water (as control sample) solutions
for 90 days. They were remolded at maximum dry bulk density
and optimum water content within the shear box mold with
20 mm height and 50 mm width. The soil samples were sheared
in the shear box with a horizontal displacement rate of
0.05 mm min−1 at three normal stress (σn) levels (i.e., 30, 60
and 90 kPa). Low loading rate would prevent significant alter-
ation of pore water pressure during shearing.
The shear test was stopped when the soil failed or reached a
displacement of 10 mm. The test results were used to obtain
the shear strength (τ) vs. normal stress (σn) diagram (shear
failure envelope). Finally, according to the several tests on
Fig. 1 XRD diffractogram for the studied natural clay soil
J. A. Koupai et al.
SO42 CO32 HCO3− Mg2+ Ca2+ Na+ K+
− −
0.08 0.01 0.01 1 7 1 0.05
samples, the average cohesion (c) and internal friction angle
(ϕ) of each sample were obtained as intercept and angle of
shear failure envelope, respectively. The direct shear tests
were replicated three times, and the average values were
considered.
Unconfined compressive strength
In order to investigate the effect of pH on unconfined com-
pressive strength (UCS), UCS tests were performed according
to ASTM D2166/D2166M(ASTM 2013) on the clayey sam-
ples that were exposed to distilled water (as control sample)
and solutions with different values of pH: 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, and 11.
The uniaxial machine was used for the UCS test with displace-
ment rate of 1 m min−1. The UCS tests were replicated several
times on each sample. The maximum axial stress (σ1max) was
considered equal to UCS or qu. It should be noted that only the
results diverted by less than 5% from the average were select-
ed. Moreover, axial stress–strain curve was obtained from
each UCS test.
Results and discussion
Effect of solution pH on soil pH and EC
The initial pH of the soil was 7.43. The pH of the soil samples
was measured after exposure to acidic and alkaline solutions
for 90 days. The results indicated that after 90 days, adding
acidic solutions to soil samples made small changes in soil pH,
dropping slightly to 6.96 (at pH 6 solution), 6.57 (at pH 5
solution), and 6.11 (at pH 4 solution). By contrast, alkaline
solutions with pH values of 9, 10, and 11 increased the soil pH
from an initial value of 7.45 to 8.01, 8.36, and 8.56, respec-
tively (Fig. 2).
The EC values of contaminated specimens after 90 days are
shown in Fig. 3. It is clear that EC gradually increased in both
acidic and alkaline environment, suggesting that the concen-
tration of dissolved ions has been increased.
Effect of solution pH on soil Atterberg consistency
limits
Atterberg limits are used for the classification of fine-grained
soils for engineering purposes. They are also related to several
Effect of pore water pH on mechanical properties of clay soil
9
8
Soil pH
7 PI
6
5
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
pH of exposing solution
Fig. 2 Changes of soil pH with pH variation of the exposing solution; the
initial soil pH is shown by a horizontal dashed line
soil mechanical and physical properties, also also such as
compressibility, shear strength, bearing capacity, and
shrinkage-swelling potential (Keller and Dexter 2012;
Zolfaghari et al. 2015). The results of Atterberg consistency
limits as affected by solution pH are plotted in Fig. 4. By
varying the pore solution pH value in the range of 4 to 11,
considerable differences have been obtained from the LL data.
The LL increased as the pH of solution changed in both acidic
and alkaline sides (Fig. 4). The LL of 47.7% in distilled water
increased to 53.4% in pH 5 and to 55.19% in pH 10, which
were the highest values in the acidic and alkaline ranges,
respectively.
In contrast with a large change in LL, small changes in PL
were observed (Fig. 4). Increased LL and small changes in PL
led to an increment in PI, as shown in Fig. 4. Therefore, the PI
has increased as the pH value advanced in acidic and alkaline
sides. Figure 4 shows the ranges of variation of PI in both
contaminated alkaline and acidic sample soils. The highest
PI value in the acidic range was 30.20%, which was recorded
at pH 5 (about 6% increase compared to the distilled water
sample). On the other hand, the highest value of PI in the
alkaline range was 32.35% at pH 10 (8% increase).
2.5
2
1.5
Soil EC (dS m-1)
1
0.5
0
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
pH of exposing solution
Fig. 3 Changes of soil EC with pH variation of the exposing solution; the
initial soil EC is shown by a horizontal dashed line
56
53
50
47
44
LL, PL and PI (%)
LL
41
38
PL
35
32
29
26
23
11 12 20
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
pH of exposing solution
Fig. 4 Changes of soil liquid limit (LL), plastic limit (PL), and plasticity
index (PI) with pH variation of the exposing solution; the initial values of
LL, PL, and PI are shown by horizontal dashed lines
Although some researchers stated that the LL of kaolinitic
soil is not very dependent on the pH variation of pore water
(Sridharan et al. 1986, 1988; Gori 1994), our results showed
that with the changes of pH environment, LL values of natural
soil containing kaolinite has clearly changed. Owing to the
adsorption of OH− ions, the charges on the exposed edges of
particles of kaolinite become more negative at high pH values
(Gratchev and Sassa 2009). The face-to-face (F–F) associa-
tions tend to prevail at high pH (i.e., pH > 7.5) (Van Olphen
1991; Gratchev and Sassa 2009). Our results showed that
when the soil pore water becomes alkaline (i.e., soil pH >
7.5, Fig. 2), the F–F associations are likely to be formed.
When the degree of manipulation increases, inter-particles
bonds break and create smaller particles and pores leading to
a greater specific surface area accessible for water adsorption
(Sunil et al. 2006). This manipulation results in higher LL
values. Therefore, when an alkali solution is added to a soil,
the degree of manipulation would increase (due to additional
ions, pH changes, and formation of new inter-particle F–F
associations), and greater specific surface area and water ad-
sorption resulted in higher LL values compared to distilled
water.
On the contrary, when an acid interacts with natural clays, it
might solve cemented agents between clay particles/
aggregates (Gratchev and Towhata 2011). Similarly, Imai
et al. (2006) indicated that acidic fluids could destroy the
structure of clay originally cemented (by calcium carbonates)
due to dissolution of the carbonate bonds of clay particles.
Therefore, such an effect on the LL of natural clay by acidic
fluids can be attributed to the mineral composition of this soil,
particularly the existence of calcium carbonate. Then, it can be
assumed that acidic solution would destroy the cementing
11 12 agents between clay particles, produce structures with larger
voids, and result in the greater LL of the clays. The results of
the soil samples contaminated with acid are in agreement with
Ola (1978) and Gratchev and Towhata (2016) who reported
 J. A. Koupai et al.

33
that increasing LL and therefore PI of the soils are correlated
32
with a decrease in pH, as a result of leaching of cementations.
The effect of alkaline pore fluid on PI and LL of the natural 31
soil and its range of variations are greater than those of acidic
30
ones (Fig. 4). The changes in soil particle arrangements (i.e.,

φ (degree)
F–F associations) and increased manipulation can create 29

smaller particles and pores leading to a higher specific surface 28

area accessible for water adsorption. These microstructural
27
alterations might be considered as the reasons for higher LL
and PI in alkaline conditions when compared with those of 26

acidic ones. 25
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
pH of exposing solution
Effect of solution pH on soil shear strength Fig. 6 Changes of soil angle of internal friction (φ) with pH variation of
the exposing solution; the initial φ was shown by a horizontal dashed line
Direct shear test results
maximum value of φ, 30.2°, was also observed at pH 4. On
Shear strength parameters play a significant role in determin-
the other hand, its highest value (i.e., 29.9°) was recorded at
ing the mechanical behavior of soil, as these parameters are of
pH 11, for the alkaline range of pH. This indicates that at the
importance in many engineering issues, such as the bearing
lowest and highest studied pH values, the angle of internal
capacity of foundations, slope stability, and lateral pressure of
friction increased by 10 and 9% as compared with the distilled
the soil around the retaining walls. The strength properties of
water, respectively.
soil were widely influenced by the interaction between parti-
Typical examples of Mohr–Coulomb failure envelope (i.e.,
cles and internal structure of the soil. The shear strength pa-
shear strength vs. normal stress) at different pH values of
rameters including cohesion (c) and angle of internal friction
exposing solution are shown in Fig. 7. It is obvious from the
(φ) as affected by solution pH are presented in Figs. 5 and 6,
failure envelopes that soil shear parameters c and φ generally
respectively. It is revealed that both parameters c and φ in-
increased within the acidic and alkaline environments.
crease when exposed to acidic and alkaline solutions. Figure 5
indicated that cohesion clearly increased as the environment
became more acidic. The highest value of cohesion (i.e., Unconfined compressive strength test results
21.6 kPa) was observed in the solution of pH 4 (at which,
the pH of soil pore solution was lowest) and increased by The results showed that the unconfined compressive strength
32% when compared to the sample in distilled water. For the (UCS) of the clay soil increases when the pH of pore fluid
alkaline contaminated treatments, the highest value of cohe- increases or decreases. Figure 8 illustrates the variations of
sion (i.e., 20.1 kPa) was recorded at a solution pH of 11 which UCS with respect to different pH levels of pore fluid for
increased by 28% when compared with the distilled water.
90
The variations of internal friction angle with the pH of pH 6.5
exposing solution are shown in Fig. 6. The trend of φ was 80 pH 6
pH 10
similar to that of cohesion. In the acidic pH range, the
70 pH 9
22 pH 11
60 pH 5
21 pH 4
20 50
τ (kPa)

19
40
18
c (kPa)

30
17

16 20

15
10
14
0
13
0 20 40 60 80 100
3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0

pH of exposing solution σn (kPa)

Fig. 5 Changes of soil cohesion (c) with pH variation of the exposing Fig. 7 Examples of Mohr–Coulomb failure envelope [shear strength (τ)
solution; the initial c was shown by a horizontal dashed line vs. normal stress (σn)] with pH variation of the exposing solution
Effect of pore water pH on mechanical properties of clay soil
260
240
220
qu (kPa)
200
180
160
140
120
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
pH of exposing solution
Fig. 8 Changes of soil unconfined compressive strength (qu) with pH
variation of the exposing solution; the initial qu was shown by a
horizontal dashed line
natural soil. The highest value of UCS (i.e., 256.6 kPa, 61%
increase) was observed at pH 4 for the samples that were
exposed to different acidic pH ranges. The highest strength
was recorded (i.e., 231.1 kPa, 45% increase) at pH 11 when
the specimens were in contact with different alkaline pH
levels.
Furthermore, for both contaminated acidic and alkaline
samples, the axial strain at peak stress increased. Figure 9
shows the stress–strain behavior of contaminated specimens
as influenced by different pH levels in comparison with the
specimen with distilled water pore fluid (with pH 6.5 as con-
trol sample). The highest strain at peak stress for the contam-
inated acidic treatments (i.e., 62%) was observed for the spec-
imen with the pore fluid pH of 4. For the contaminated alka-
line specimens, the highest strain was recorded (i.e., 45%) at
the pore fluid pH of 11. In fact, the results indicated that both
lowering and raising the pH of pore water could change the
soil mechanical behavior such as to be more deformable with
a higher compressive strength.
The results of direct shear and unconfined compressive
tests showed that pH of solution had a strong influence on
the shear strength of natural soil. These results can be
interpreted by the chemical variations induced by pH changes.
As the pH of exposing solution decreases from neutral to
slightly acidic, the concentration of H+ in the soil pore water
would increase (Gratchev and Towhata 2013). Besides, the
CaCO3 (which is present in the studied natural soil) would
be dissolved in the acidic condition (Gratchev and Towhata
2011). Since the pore solution was not leached from the sam-
ples (i.e., was not renewed), the Ca2+ ions increased in the soil
solution. Increased soluble ions were confirmed by the higher
EC values in the acidic condition (Fig. 3). Thus, inter-particles
attractive forces were increased due to the increasing concen-
tration of soluble ions in the acidic conditions. As a result, the
clay particles would be flocculated due to contraction of DDL.
Therefore, the clay soil showed higher mechanical strength
12
Fig. 9 Unconfined compressive stress–strain behavior [axial stress (σ1)
vs. axial strain (εa)] of the studied soil as affected by the pH of exposing
solution
due to flocculation of the particles at low pH (Anandarajah
and Zhao 2000).
As previously mentioned, when soils including kaolinite
clay are exposed to the alkaline fluid (i.e., high pH), the ions
such as OH− will be adsorbed on the clay edges (Gratchev and
Sassa 2009). Variable charges on the exposed edges become
increasingly more negative at high pH (i.e., pH > 7.5) and the
F–F associations would predominate (Van Olphen 1991;
Gratchev and Sassa 2009). The higher shear strength values
in the alkaline condition might be explained by increased ionic
strength of the soil solution, which favors the formation of F–
F association. These findings are in agreement with Spagnoli
et al. 2012 and Ghobadi et al. 2014.
The acidic pore fluids had greater impacts on soil shear
strength parameters, including c, φ, and UCS, in comparison
with those of alkaline ones (see Figs. 5, 6, and 7). In acidic
conditions, inter-particles attractive forces were increased
leading to the flocculation of particles and therefore could
increase the soil mechanical strength. This increment in
inter-particles attractive forces in acidic pore fluids has most
probably a greater impact on the soil strength than those rea-
son for higher strength in alkaline conditions.
Conclusions
Based on the Atterberg consistency limits, direct shear test,
and unconfined compressive strength that were carried out on
a natural soil exposed to solutions with different pH values
(i.e., 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, and 11), the following conclusions are
drawn:
Variation in the pH of environment toward both acidic and
alkaline conditions increased the soil liquid limit and plasticity
index and turned the soil into a plastic soil. These findings are
attributed to the dissolution of carbonates in acidic condition,
which produce structures with larger voids, and the formation

of the face-to-face clay associations in alkaline condition that
cause an increase in the specific surface area of soil, resulting
in high adsorption of water.
The pH of the soil pore solution had a significant impact on
soil mechanical properties, especially the shear strength. Both
low and high pH values led to an increment in the soil shear
strength. In the acidic condition, this behavior could be related
to the increasing concentrations of soluble ions that increased
the inter-particle attractive forces and flocculation of the par-
ticles, while in the alkaline condition, the greater ionic
strength of soil solution favored the formation of face-to-
face clay associations.
It is recommended to investigate the effect of water quality
on mechanical properties of different soils in column studies
where the soil pore solution is renewed (i.e., displaced).
Similar studies in the in situ field conditions would be recom-
mended for future. It is also suggested to characterize the
changes in soil fabric and the mineralogy by SEM or XRD
measurements after the soil is exposed to solutions with dif-
ferent qualities.
Acknowledgments The authors would like to appreciate the staff mem-
bers of Soil Mechanics Laboratory of BKermanshah Province Road and
Town Planning Office^ especially Eng. Mohsen Kaffashi for providing
all the necessary measurement devices. Also, we appreciate Prof.
Shamsollah Ayoubi of Department of Soil Science, College of
Agriculture, Isfahan University of Technology for his helpful discussions.
References
Anandarajah A, Zhao D (2000) Triaxial behavior of kaolinite in different
pore fluids. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 126(2):148–156. https://doi.
org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2000)126:2(148)
ASTM (2010) Standard test methods for liquid limit, plastic limit, and
plasticity index of soils. ASTM D4318. American Society for
Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken
ASTM (2011) Standard test method for direct shear test of soils under
consolidated drained conditions. ASTM D3080/D3080M.
American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken
ASTM (2013) Standard test method for unconfined compressive strength
of cohesive soil. ASTM D2166/D2166M. American Society for
Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken
Bakhshipour Z, Asadi A, Sridharan A, Huat BB (2017) Acid rain intru-
sion effects on the compressibility behaviour of residual soils.
Environmental Geotechnics https://doi.org/10.1680/jenge.15.00081
Bakhshipour Z, Asadi A, Huat BB, Sridharan A, Kawasaki S (2016)
Effect of acid rain on geotechnical properties of residual soils.
Soils Found 56(6):1008–1020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.
2016.11.006
Bowders JJ Jr, Daniel DE (1987) Hydraulic conductivity of compacted
clay to dilute organic chemicals. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng
11 3 ( 1 2 ) : 1 4 3 2 – 1 4 4 8 . h t t p s : / / d o i . o rg / 1 0 . 1 0 6 1 / ( A S C E )
07339410(1987)113:12(1432)
Chavali RVP, Reddy HP (2018) Volume change behavior of phospho-
gypsum treated clayey soils contaminated with inorganic acids–a
micro level study. J Environ Eng Landsc 26(1):8–18. https://doi.
org/10.3846/16486897.2017.1331168
J. A. Koupai et al.
Chavali RVP, Vindula SK, Babu A, Pillai RJ (2017) Swelling behavior of
kaolinitic clays contaminated with alkali solutions: a micro-level
study. Appl Clay Sci 135:575–582. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.
2016.10.045
D’Appolonia DJ (1980) Soil-bentonite slurry trench cutoffs. J Geotech
Geoenviron Eng 106(4):399–417
Deng Y, Yue X, Cui Y-J, Shao G, Liu S, Zhang D (2014) Effect of pore
water chemistry on the hydro-mechanical behaviour of
Lianyungang soft marine clay. Appl Clay Sci 95:167–175. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2014.04.007
Fernando J (2010) Effect of water quality on the dispersive characteristics
of soils found in the morwell area, Victoria, Australia. Geotech Geol
Eng 28(6):835–850. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-010-9345-1
Gajo A, Maines M (2007) Mechanical effects of aqueous solutions of
inorganic acids and bases on a natural active clay. Géotechnique
57(8):687–699. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2007.57.8.687
Ganor J, Mogollón JL, Lasaga AC (1995) The effect of pH on kaolinite
dissolution rates and on activation energy. Geochim Cosmochim
Acta 59(6):1037–1052. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-7037(95)
00021-Q
Ghobadi M, Abdilor Y, Babazadeh R (2014) Stabilization of clay soils
using lime and effect of pH variations on shear strength parameters.
Bull Eng Geol Environ 73(2):611–619. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10064-013-0563-7
Gori U (1994) The pH influence on the index properties of clays. Bull
Eng Geol Environ 50(1):37–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF02594954
Gratchev I, Towhata I (2011) Compressibility of natural soils subjected to
long-term acidic contamination. Environ Earth Sci 64(1):193–200.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-010-0838-2
Gratchev I, Towhata I (2013) Stress–strain characteristics of two natural
soils subjected to long-term acidic contamination. Soils Found
53(3):469–476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2013.04.008
Gratchev I, Towhata I (2016) Compressibility of soils containing kaolin-
ite in acidic environments. KSCE J Civ Eng 20(2):623–630. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s12205-015-0141-6
Gratchev IB, Sassa K (2009) Cyclic behavior of fine-grained soils at
different pH values. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 135(2):271–279.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2009)135:2(271)
Gratchev IB, Sassa K (2013) Cyclic shear strength of soil with different
pore fluids. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 139(10):1817–1821. https://
doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000901
Gratchev IB, Sassa K, Osipov VI, Fukuoka H, Wang G (2007) Undrained
cyclic behavior of bentonite–sand mixtures and factors affecting it.
Geotech Geol Eng 25(3):349. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-006-
9115-2
Imai G, Komatsu Y, Fukue M (2006) Consolidation yield stress of Osaka-
Bay pleistocene clay with reference to calcium carbonate contents. J
ASTM Int 3(7):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1520/JAI13325
Jia-dan L, Yan-bin G (2018) Effects of acid and base contamination
on geotechnical properties of Shanghai remolded silty clay. In:
Proceedings GeoShanghai international conference, Springer
Singapore, pp 611–619. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-
0125-468
Kamon M, Ying C, Katsumi T (1997) Effect of acid rain on physico-
chemical and engineering properties of soils. Soils Found 37(4):23–
32. https://doi.org/10.3208/sandf.37.423
Kashir M, Yanful EK (2001) Hydraulic conductivity of bentonite perme-
ated with acid mine drainage. Can Geotech J 38(5):1034–1048.
https://doi.org/10.1139/t01-027
Keller T, Dexter AR (2012) Plastic limits of agricultural soils as functions
of soil texture and organic matter content. Soil Research 50(1):7–17.
https://doi.org/10.1071/SR11174
McBride MB (1994) Environmental chemistry of soils. Oxford Press,
New York
Effect of pore water pH on mechanical properties of clay soil
Mitchell JK (1993) Fundamentals of soil behavior. Wiley, New York, p
437
Mulyukov È (2008) Alkaline swelling and consequences of alkalization
of clayey bed soils. Soil Mech Found Eng 45(5):182–185. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11204-008-9026-8
Nguyen X-P, Cui Y-J, Tang AM, Deng Y, Li X-L, Wouters L (2013)
Effects of pore water chemical composition on the hydro-
mechanical behavior of natural stiff clays. Eng Geol 166:52–64.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2013.08.009
Ola S (1978) Geotechnical properties and behaviour of some stabilized
Nigerian lateritic soils. Q J Eng Geol Hydrogeol 11(2):145–160.
https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.QJEG.1978.011.02.04
Osuolale OM, Falola OD, Ayoola MA (2012) Effect of pH on geotech-
nical properties of laterite soil used in highway pavement construc-
tion. Civil Environ Res 2(10):23–28
Oztoprak S, Pisirici B (2011) Effects of micro structure changes on the
macro behaviour of Istanbul (Turkey) clays exposed to landfill
leachate. Eng Geol 121(3):110–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enggeo.2011.05.005
Palomino AM, Santamarina JC (2005) Fabric map for kaolinite: effects of
pH and ionic concentration on behavior. Clay Clay Miner 53(3):
211–223. https://doi.org/10.1346/CCMN.2005.0530302
Rama Vara Prasad C, Hari Prasad Reddy P, Ramana Murthy V,
Sivapullaiah PV (2018) Swelling characteristics of soils subjected
to acid contamination. Soils Found 58(1):110–121. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.sandf.2017.11.005
Reddy PHP, Sivapullaiah P (2010) Effect of alkali solution on swell
behavior of soils with different mineralogy. GeoFlorida: advances
in analysis, modeling and design. Geotech Spec Publ 199:2692–
2701. https://doi.org/10.1061/41095(365)273
Ruhl JL, Daniel DE (1997) Geosynthetic clay liners permeated with
chemical solutions and leachates. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng
123(4):369–381. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(1997)
123:4(369)
Shen P, Tang H, Huang L, Wang D (2018) Experimental study of slaking
properties of red-bed mudstones from the Three Gorges Reservoir
area. Georesour Geotec Online. https://doi.org/10.1080/1064119X.
2018.1504839
Spagnoli G, Rubinos D, Stanjek H, Fernández-Steeger T, Feinendegen
M, Azzam R (2012) Undrained shear strength of clays as modified
by pH variations. Bull Eng Geol Environ 71(1):135–148
Sparks D, Page A, Helmke P, Loeppert R, Soltanpour P, Tabatabai M,
Sumner M (1996) Methods of soil analysis. Part 3-Chemical
methods. Soil Sci Soc AmInc Madison
Sridharan A, Rao S, Murthy N (1986) Liquid limit of montmorillonite
soils. Geotech Test J 9(3):156–159. https://doi.org/10.1520/
GTJ10623J
Sridharan A, Rao S, Murthy N (1988) Liquid limit of kaolinitic soils.
Geotechnique 38(2):191–198. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1988.
38.2.191
Sruthi PL, Reddy PHP (2017) Characterization of kaolinitic clays sub-
jected to alkali contamination. Appl Clay Sci 146:535–547. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2017.07.012
Sunil B, Nayak S, Shrihari S (2006) Effect of pH on the geotechnical
properties of laterite. Eng Geol 85(1):197–203. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.enggeo.2005.09.039
Tiwari B, Ajmera B (2014) Effects of saline fluid on compressibility of
clay minerals. Environ Geotech 1(2):108–120. https://doi.org/10.
1680/envgeo.13.00053
Van Olphen H (1991) An introduction to clay colloid chemistry for clay
technologists, geologists, and clay scientists. Krieger, Malabar
Wang Y-H, Siu W-K (2006) Structure characteristics and mechanical
properties of kaolinite soils. II. Effects of structure on mechanical
properties. Can Geotech J 43(6):601–617. https://doi.org/10.1139/
t06-027
Wang X, Huang L, Yan C, Lian B (2018) HKCV rheological constitutive
model of mudstone under dry and saturated conditions. Advances in
Civil Engineering 2018(1049802):10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/
2621658
Yan C, Xu X, Huang L (2018) Identifying the impact factors of the
dynamic strength of mudded intercalations during cyclic loading.
Advances in Civil Engineering 2018(5805294):9. https://doi.org/
10.1155/2018/5805294
Yukselen-Aksoy Y, Kaya A, Ören AH (2008) Seawater effect on consis-
tency limits and compressibility characteristics of clays. Eng Geol
102(1):54–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2008.07.005
Zolfaghari Z, Mosaddeghi M, Ayoubi S (2015) ANN-based pedotransfer
and soil spatial prediction functions for predicting Atterberg consis-
tency limits and indices from easily available properties at the wa-
tershed scale in western Iran. Soil Use Manag 31(1):142–154.
https://doi.org/10.1111/sum.12167