CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

Sem/Session 1 2021/2022

Name of Experiment CIVIL ENGINEERING LAB III

(CIVE 3112)
PERMEABILITY

Date of Experiment 27/11/2021

Group 1. BELKACEM MOHAMED (1710977)

2. MOHAMMAD NOR IQMAN HAFIZ BIN

KAMARUDDIN (1911361)

3. NORLIANA BINTI AHMAD SABRI (1911850)

4. NUR SHARIZAN BT MOHD ABDUL NAIM (1917994)

5. WAN NORAINA SUFIAH BT ARIFFIN (1915880)

Lecturer’s Name Ir. Ts. Dr. NORHIDAYU BINTI KASIM

Due Date of Submission 31/12/2021

Lecturer’s Comment(s)

Lecturer’s Stamp and Sign:

Date Received:
 ABSTRACT
For a range of reservoir and production engineering applications, understanding the flow

characteristics in the laminar and turbulent flow regimes is crucial. One of the most important

features in fluid flow is the permeability of porous material. The permeability of the samples was

measured at a constant flow rate in the laminar regime. After that, the flow rate was gradually

increased, and the permeability was measured. A plot of permeability vs flow rate was used to

trace the evolution of flow regimes in the core porous material. There are many concerns with

using core flooding studies to observe the transition between laminar and turbulent regimes. A

study of the literature as well as experimental data are used to address these challenges in this

paper. Core sample preparation, experiment control settings, and test profiles are all crucial for

measuring permeability in the lab, according to the findings.

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Firstly, we would like to express our gratitude to Allah The Almighty, because, with His

Blessings, we managed to complete this study within the stipulated time. Then, we would like to

dedicate our piece of work to our lovely parents and family, who are always by our side through

thick and thin. This report will not be completed without all of us putting up considerable effort

and cooperation with great passion and desire. All of our efforts and time spent searching for and

discussing ideas were well worth it.

Finally, we would like to express our gratitude to our professor, Ir. Ts. Dr. Norhidayu

binti Kasim, as well as two lab assistants, for their assistance throughout the experiment. We

hope that our Permeability Experiment lab report is comprehensive and well accepted.

iii
 TABLE OF CONTENT
ABSTRACT ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT iii
TABLE OF CONTENT iv
LIST OF FIGURES v
LIST OF TABLES vi
LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATION vii
CHAPTER 1 1
INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT 1
1.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE EXPERIMENT 2
1.3 BACKGROUND STUDY 2
CHAPTER 2 4
METHODOLOGY 4
2.1 APPARATUS 4
2.2 ELABORATION OF METHODOLOGY 5
2.3 FLOWCHART OF METHODOLOGY (PICTURE BASED) 6
CHAPTER 3 7
RESULTS 7
3.1 DATA COLLECTION 7
3.2 EXAMPLE OF MANUAL CALCULATION 9
3.3 ANALYSIS OF DATA 11
CHAPTER 4 12
DISCUSSION 12
4.1 RESULT ACCURACY 12
4.2 ERROR 12
4.2.1 SYSTEMATIC ERROR 12
4.2.2 RANDOM ERROR 13
CHAPTER 5 14
REFERENCES 14

iv
 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1 Typical Values of K

Figure 2.1 De-airing tank

Figure 2.2 Falling Head cell for compacted material

Figure 2.3 Soaking reservoir

Figure 2.4 Falling Head cell

Figure 2.5 Falling Head Panel with optional ruler

Figure 2.6 Anchoring system to help connect the manometer tubes with valves

Figure 2.7 Flowchart of the methodology

Figure 3.1 Change of head vs time for Test 1

Figure 3.2 Change of head vs time for Test 2

Figure 3.2 Change of head vs time for Test 3

iv
 LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1 Data Collected During The Experiment

Table 3.2 Data obtained for Test 1

Table 3.3 Data obtained for Test 2

Table 3.4 Data obtained for Test 3

Table 3.5 Value of Coefficient of Permeability

vi
 LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATION

Symbols Definition
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KT coefficient of permeability at temperature T, cm/sec.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
L length of the specimen in centimeters
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
t time for discharge in seconds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q volume of discharge in cm3 (assume 1 mL = 1cm3)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A cross-sectional area of permeameter
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
h hydraulic head difference across length L, in cm of water.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

vii
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT

Permeability is a crucial reservoir feature that reservoir engineers must assess during the

well exploration process. Testing in a lab is difficult and necessitates a high level of awareness

and control over a variety of factors. When a result, the permeability must be measured under

various settings as factors are altered in order to understand how it changes as a result of the

changes. The permeability in the laminar regime is particularly essential since the turbulent

regime might cause issues surrounding the wellbore. As a result, core flooding experiments must

be used to determine the boundaries between the two flow regimes. Darcy's Law is the

fundamental law of fluid mobility in porous media. The velocity of a homogeneous fluid in a

porous media is proportional to the pressure gradient and inversely proportional to the fluid

viscosity. Because the pressure drop in the laminar domain is a linear function of flow rate, the

permeability is assumed to be flow rate independent using the laminar flow assumption. The

flow pattern, on the other hand, gradually transitions to a turbulent regime as the flow rate

increases, and hence does not obey the Darcy equation. As the flow velocity increases, he

realized that inertial effects begin to dominate the flow. As a consequence, he devised an

equation that is extensively used to calculate permeability in the turbulent regime, as illustrated

in the diagram below.

1
1.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE EXPERIMENT
- To measure the capacity of soil that allows the flow of water through the pore spaces

between solid particles.

- To know the different types of soil such as sand, silt and clay

- To determine the coefficient of permeability of a soil using falling head permeameter

- To determine whether the hydraulic conductivity or decay value is dependent on the

factors such as permeability of the soil, degree of saturation, the density and viscosity of

the fluid.

1.3 BACKGROUND STUDY

Major constructions such as reservoir dams, tunnels, and nuclear power plants are built.

Water commonly surrounds engineering rock masses, including complicated chemical ions with

varying pH levels. The chemical environment can produce significant changes in rock at the

microscopic level, such as an increase in porosity or a weakening of the microstructure. These

alterations may result in macroscopic mechanical property degradation and an acceleration of the

failure process, resulting in additional mechanical property degradation and a greater risk of

geological disasters such as landslides and earthquakes. Several investigations have been

conducted on the mechanical properties of rocks under chemical–mechanical linked settings.

Previous research, on the other hand, has mostly been done at the macroscopic scale and has

focused on rock under continuous stress, such as uniaxial or triaxial compression.

2
 Figure 1.1: Typical Values of K

Figure 1.1 shows the typical values of coefficient of permeability or known as K value. It
can be divided into a few types based on its K value. Each K value represents how good the soil
sample is. There are five types of soil based on its value of coefficient of permeability, K.

3
 CHAPTER 2

METHODOLOGY

2.1 APPARATUS

Figure 2.1 Figure 2.2

Figure 2.3 Figure 2.4

Figure 2.5 Figure 2.6

4
2.2 ELABORATION OF METHODOLOGY

The weight of permeameter mold with the base plate and gasket attached were recorded.

The inner diameter of the permeameter mold at several sections were also taken, (D). A soil

sample containing clay and sand with a ratio of 50:50 was prepared and has been compacted into

the mold. Then, the permeameter mold was placed in a sink and has been submerged with water.

All of the four burette were filled with water to a convenient height. The heights were recorded

as the initial hydraulic head, h1. Next, the outlet tube was opened simultaneously with the

stopwatch. The water is allowed to flow through the sample until the burette is almost empty.

Then the clock stopped and simultaneously clamped the outlet tube. The elapsed times and the

height of water level were recorded to obtain the final hydraulic head, h2. Lastly, the burettes

were refilled. Step 5 was repeated to obtain 3 sets of experiments.

5
2.3 FLOWCHART OF METHODOLOGY (PICTURE BASED)

Figure 2.7: Flowchart of the methodology

6
 CHAPTER 3

RESULTS

3.1 DATA COLLECTION

Table 3.1: Data Collected During The Experiment

Diameter of specimen, D (cm) 9.712

Length of specimen, L (cm) 14.326

Area of specimen, A ( 𝑐𝑚 )
2 74.081

Volume of specimen, V ( 𝑐𝑚 )
3 1061.28

Specific gravity of soils solids, 𝐺𝑠 2.67

Weight of empty mould with base 2.847

plate (kg)

Weight of empty mould + soil + 4.37

base plate (kg)

Weight of container after 4.78

submerged (kg)

Table 3.2: Data obtained for Test 1

Tube No. 1 2 3 4

Diameter of tube (cm) 2.00 0.90 0.82 0.72

2
Area of tube (𝑐𝑚 ) 3.1416 0.6362 0.5281 0.4072

Initial reading of tube (cm) 122.5 150 120 130

Final reading of tube (cm) 54.3 47.9 50.3 36.6

Time (s) 22.72 6.32 3.09 6.47

7
Volume of water flow 214.26 64.95 36.81 38.03
through the specimen, Vw
3
(𝑐𝑚 )

Table 3.3: Data obtained for Test 2

Tube No. 1 2 3 4

Diameter of tube (cm) 2.00 0.90 0.82 0.72

2
Area of tube (𝑐𝑚 ) 3.1416 0.6362 0.5281 0.4072

Initial reading of tube (cm) 125.5 122.3 124.5 125.9

Final reading of tube (cm) 50.5 41.8 46.2 41.3

Time (s) 23.68 7.48 3.82 4.10

Volume of water flow 235.62 51.21 41.35 34.44

through the specimen, Vw
3
(𝑐𝑚 )

Table 3.4: Data obtained for Test 3

Tube No. 1 2 3 4

Diameter of tube (cm) 2.00 0.90 0.82 0.72

2
Area of tube (𝑐𝑚 ) 3.1416 0.6362 0.5281 0.4072

Initial reading of tube (cm) 124.5 128.8 128.5 130

Final reading of tube (cm) 42 30.7 50 40.4

Time (s) 26.89 10.13 4.32 4.51

Volume of water flow 259.18 62.41 41.46 36.48

through the specimen, Vw
3
(𝑐𝑚 )

Table 3.5: Value of Coefficient of Permeability

Test Average
No. k value

8
 Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 (cm/s)

Tube 1 0.027 0.026 0.023 0.025

k
value Tube 2 0.019 0.016 0.012 0.016
(cm/s)
Tube 3 0.012 0.019 0.017 0.016

3.2 EXAMPLE OF MANUAL CALCULATION

a) Area of Tube:

Area = (π / 4) x D²
= (π / 4) x 2.00²
= 3.14 cm²

b) Volume of water:

Q = π r² h
= 3.1416 x 1.00² x (122.5 - 54.3)
= 214.26 cm³

c) Weight of soil:

= [Weight of empty mould + soil + base plate (kg)] - [Weight of empty

mould with base plate (kg)]
= 4.37 - 2.847
= 1.523 kg

d) Bulk Density:

𝛒 = Mass / Volume
= 1.523 kg / 1061.28 cm³
= 0.00144 kg/cm³

e) Water Content

w = [(Gs x ρ𝑤) - ρ] / [(Gs x ρ) - ρ𝑤]

= [(2.67 x 0.001) - 0.00144] / [(2.67 x 0.00144) - 0.001]

9
 = 0.432

f) Dry Density

ρ
ρ𝑑 =
1+𝑤

= 0.00144 / (1 + 0.432)
= 0.00101 kg/cm³

g) Void Ratio

ρ𝑤 𝑥 𝐺𝑠
e = -1
ρ𝑑

0.001 𝑥 2.67
= -1
0.00101

= 1.644

h) Degree of Saturation

𝑆𝑟 = (𝐺𝑠 x w) / e

= (2.67 x 0.432) / 1.644

= 0.702

i) Coefficient of Permeability

𝑄𝐿
k =
𝐴 ∆ℎ 𝑡

= (214.26 x 14.326) / [74.081 x (122.5 - 54.3) x 22.72]

= 0.027 cm/s

The dry density and void ratio have to be reported along with the test results.

10
3.3 ANALYSIS OF DATA

Figure 3.1: Change of head vs time for Test 1

Figure 3.2: Change of head vs time for Test 2

Figure 3.3: Change of head vs time for Test 3

11
 In this experiment, we consider Darcy’s Law method in order to calculate the

permeability coefficient. Permeability test is crucial because engineers can study the

characteristics and the condition of the soil thus they can help to improve the workability of soil.

As indicated in figure 3.1, figure 3.2 and figure 3.3 for each test, the linear part of the curve

represents the validity of Darcy's Law. However, the figure showed that not all data points

collected from the permeability experiment can be calculated using that method. Thus, we

continue and repeated the test and as a result a fluctuated graph has been plotted according to the

data that we obtain in the experiment.

12
 CHAPTER 4

DISCUSSION

4.1 RESULT ACCURACY

This permeability test was being conducted in order to determine whether the soil

is in its intermediate or low degree of permeability. The data from the coefficient of

permeability that have been calculated should indicate and show that the specimen

examined is from a mixture of fine sand and clay. Based on the data obtained and

calculated in this experiment, it can be concluded that the type of soil that has been

investigated is under “coarse sand” type with a value of K in the range of 1.0 - 0.01. The

higher the K value, the easier the fluid moves through the soil sample. In order to keep

the K value consistent in every test, the soil sample was fully mixed between the sand

and clay and no hardened-shape clay in the mixture during the mixing procedure.

However, the data of weight of the soil sample during the weighting procedure after the

experiment is done may be not accurate as the soil sample may split out from the

container used in this experiment. So, to avoid this from happening, the soil sample was

well-compacted and the screws and bolts at the container were tightened very well.

4.2 ERROR

4.2.1 SYSTEMATIC ERROR

Systematic error is predictable and proportional to the measurement, and it is

influenced by the accuracy of the measurement. Most of the systemic errors were caused

by observational error, imperfect instrument calibration and environmental interference.

The systematic errors happening in the experiment include not taking the measurement of

13
the water level in the tube from eye level (parallax error) or imprecise pressure reading

that will result in an inaccurate reading making the value become inconsistent. Next,

another systematic error in this particular experiment is the accuracy of the pressure

gauge is low.

However, systematic errors can be reduced by calibrating equipment on a regular

basis, utilizing controls in studies and warming up the instruments before taking readings.

4.2.2 RANDOM ERROR

The term "random error" refers to a variation in error from one measurement to

the next that is unpredictable and mostly affects the precision of the data. These changes

could be caused by changes in the measuring instruments or by changes in the

environment. In this experiment, it could be that the fine sand and clay were not mixed

properly and not being compacted well before the test began. Next, since we mixed the

soil sample with our own ratio, it can be less or more than the value needed and to some

extent it affects the result obtained.

Unlike systematic error, random error is unavoidable and cannot be predicted.

Hence, it is crucial to take multiple data points and average them to get a sense of the

amount of variation and estimate the true value.

14
 CHAPTER 5

REFERENCES

1. Sattler, A. R. (1989). Core Analysis in a Low Permeability Sandstone Reservoir: Results

from the Multiwell Experiment (No. SAND-89-0710). Sandia National Labs.,
Albuquerque, NM (USA).
2. Li, H., Zhong, Z., Eshiet, K. I. I., Sheng, Y., Liu, X., & Yang, D. (2019). Experimental

Investigation of the Permeability and Mechanical Behaviours of Chemically Corroded

Limestone Under Different Unloading Conditions. Rock Mechanics and Rock

Engineering, 53(4), 1587–1603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-019-01961-y

3. Zhang, Y., Korkiala-Tanttu, L. K., Gustavsson, H., & Miksic, A. (2019). Assessment for

Sustainable Use of Quarry Fines as Pavement Construction Materials: Part

I—Description of Basic Quarry Fine Properties. Materials, 12(8), 1209.

https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12081209

15