J. Cent. South Univ.

(2018) 25: 432−447

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-018-3748-1

Prediction of soil–water characteristic curve for

Malan loess in Loess Plateau of China
LI Ping(李萍)1, LI Tong-lu(李同录)2, S. K. Vanapalli3
1. Department of Geology, Northwest University, Xi’an 710069, China;
2. School of Geological & Surveying Engineering, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710054, China;
3. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Ottawa, Ottawa K1N6N5, Canada
© Central South University Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Abstract: To predict the soil–water characteristic curve (i.e. SWCC) of natural and remoulded Malan loess from soil
physical properties, one-point methods for determining the SWCC that are much simpler than experimental methods are
proposed. The predicted SWCC is presented in the form of the BRUTSAERT equation, in which the four model
parameters can be estimated from soil physical properties using the best correlations obtained in the present study along
with one measured data point. The proposed one-point methods are validated using the measured SWCC data reported
in the literature. The results of validation studies suggest that the proposed one-point methods can provide reasonable
prediction of the SWCC for natural and remoulded Malan loess. The measured data point should be within the transition
zone; the measured suction is suggested between 25 to 100 kPa for natural loess, while between 100 to 500 kPa for
remoulded loess.

Key words: soil–water characteristic curve; Malan loess; natural loess; remoulded loess; one-point method;
physical properties

Cite this article as: LI Ping, LI Tong-lu, S. K. Vanapalli. Prediction of soil–water characteristic curve for Malan loess
in Loess Plateau of China [J]. Journal of Central South University, 2018, 25(2): 432–447. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11771-018-3748-1.

0.01 Ma). Therefore, loess soils may behave

1 Introduction differently with the depth due to the influence of
climate factors over a long period of time.
Loess soils are widely distributed in arid and Geotechnical problems in loess deposits, such as
semi-arid regions, covering about 10% land area of landslide and wetting-induced collapse, are more
the world. Many countries in Asia, Europe, North commonly associated with loess soils that deposited
America, South America and Africa have loess soil during Late Pleistocene period (i.e. Malan loess)
deposits. In China, the well-known Loess Plateau and Holocene period (i.e. Holocene loess) because
extends over 4.4×105 km2, occupying about 7% of their relatively loose structure. Holocene loess is
land area of the country [1, 2]. In the Loess Plateau, typically the vegetation layer; therefore, studies on
the arid to semi-arid climate condition and the loess soils are pervasively related to Malan loess.
basin-shaped landscape are favourable for the Malan loess, which is a typical example of
deposition of wind-blown loess soils. In China, collapsible loess, has an open, potentially
loess soils have deposited since 2.4 million years meta-stable structure. LI et al [3] developed a
(i.e. 2.4 Ma), spanning over the Pleistocene period comprehensive understanding of the collapsible
(i.e. 2.4–0.01 Ma) and Holocene period (i.e. recent loess soil structure from four elements; namely,
Foundation item: Project(41372329) supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China; Project(2014CB744701) supported
by the National Basic Research Program of China
Received date: 2016−06−14; Accepted date: 2017−12−10
Corresponding author: LI Tong-lu, PhD, Professor; Tel: +86–29–82339964; E-mail: dcdgx08@chd.edu.cn
J. Cent. South Univ. (2018) 25: 432–447
particles, contacts, pores and bonds. As a soil with
open structure, Malan loess has a two-level
structure (i.e. macro-level and micro-level) [4].
Each aggregate, the assemblage of elementary
particles (i.e. sands, silts and clays) cemented by
bonding materials (such as clay platelets and
calcium carbonates) or held by some forces (for
example, capillary tension), can be regarded as a
micro-level structure. Whereas the arrangement of
aggregates is referred to as the macro-level
structure. Correspondingly, the pores can be divided
into two series based on the pore size and location
with respect to aggregates: inter-aggregate pores (or
macro-pores) and intra-aggregate pores (or micro-
pores). The former series of pores are larger in size
and distributed among the aggregates, while the
later series of pores are smaller and distributed
within the aggregates. Essentially, collapse is a
process of the failure of macro pores and transition
from an open to a close structure due to wetting as
well as loading [5, 6].
Loess soils are typically in a state of
unsaturated condition. Since the 1990s, principles
of unsaturated soil mechanics have been used to
address geotechnical problems associated with loess
soils, especially with respect to the shear strength
and flow behaviour. The soil–water characteristic
curve (i.e. SWCC) along with saturated soil
properties has been widely used for the estimation
of unsaturated soil properties [7–10]. This is
because variation in the unsaturated soil properties
is primarily function of the amount of water in the
soil. For example, the coefficient of permeability of
an unsaturated soil is a function of the volume of
water in the soil, while the shear strength and
volume change behaviour are primarily functions of
the area of water on an unbiased cross section. The
SWCC is defined as the relationship between soil
suction and water content (volumetric or
gravimetric) or degree of saturation. The soil
suction is influenced by many factors, including
soil structure, soil properties, temperature, degree of
saturation, stress applied on the soil or stress history
experienced by the soil [11, 12]. For a given soil,
the SWCC is actually a three- dimensional curve in
the (Sr : e : ψ) space (Sr=degree of saturation;
e=void ratio; ψ=soil suction). This is because even
at constant suction, degree of saturation varies
when there are strains due to either consolidation or
shearing) [13–15]. Furthermore, even under
433
constant external stresses, volume change in terms
of changes in pore-size distribution could arise
during the SWCC measurement as soil suction
changes [16].
In the laboratory, the SWCC is measured
typically with no (or constant) net stress by
changing the imposed matric suction; volume
change is conventionally neglected for non-
deformable soils. The measured SWCC is
influenced by the test device, operators’ ability and
experience, size of the specimen, experimental
procedure and test temperature [17, 18].
Furthermore, the SWCC used in numerical
calculation is influenced by the mathematical
equation that is used to fit the measured data,
number of measured data points and measurement
range of suction [17]. Various methods for
measuring soil suction include 1) direct methods
using the pressure plate, pressure membrane and
tensiometer; 2) indirect methods using the filter
paper, porous blocks and heat dissipation sensors.
Almost all of the methods are based on the
equilibrium of pore-water pressure in the soil with
matric suction in the measuring system or
stabilization of variables that are sensitive to
changes in water content. Therefore, typically a
long-time period is required to measure soil suction,
1–2 d and 3–7 d are typically required to achieve
the equilibrium at each matric suction in coarse-
and fine-grained soil specimens, respectively, using
the pressure plate [19]. The time varies depending
on the level of suction; longer time is required at
higher suction value.
The above discussion suggests that it is
time-consuming and cumbersome to measure soil
suction. In addition, the measured data may not
provide an accurate representation of the SWCC.
An interesting study was performed by ZAPATA
et al [17] to evaluate the variability in the SWCC
drawn using the measured data. The soil specimens
of three soils (i.e. sandy, silty and clayey soils) were
tested in ten laboratories around the United States
for acquiring their SWCC information. A
preliminary analysis found that the data provided by
some laboratories significantly deviate from the
potential best-fit SWCC. Some other laboratories’
data were found to misrepresent the potential
best-fit SWCC over the entire suction range or
within a certain range, with the variability as high
as 54%. Besides, different methods (i.e. the
434
pressure plate, pressure membrane and filter paper
were involved in their study) were found to produce
high variability for different soils and in different
suction ranges (i.e. boundary effect zone, transition
zone and residual zone). For these reasons, it is
desirable to predict the SWCC from soil properties
that are easy to measure and have lower variability
from the measurements, such as dry density (or
porosity) and grain-size distribution (i.e. GSD).
Such methods that can be applied with ease are
better choices for engineering practice to determine
the SWCC with reasonable accuracy.
The SWCC is typically unimodal in nature for
homogeneous soils. However, a bimodal SWCC
may be associated with any soil with two-level
structure, such as soils of dual-porosity structure
and cracked soils [20–22]. For this reason,
collapsible Malan loess may have a bimodal SWCC.
Recent studies provide evidence of bimodal SWCC
behaviour for several loess soils [23]. A bimodal
SWCC can be visualized as the superposition of
two unimodal SWCCs, one for the water stored in
inter-aggregate pores and the other for the water
stored in intra-aggregate pores. As per the
experimental results on loess soils, the unimodal
SWCC for the inter-aggregate pore water is within a
low suction range (less than 10 kPa). It indicates
that the relationship between soil suction and water
content in the field (either during the drying or
wetting stress paths) can be well represented using
a unimodal SWCC that is for the intra-aggregate
pore water. Reliable measurement of a bimodal
SWCC using the presently available test facilities is
of a great challenge for operators. In addition, the
prediction and application of a bimodal SWCC are
still evolving since both measured bimodal SWCC
data and mathematical equations for representing
the bimodal SWCC are rather limited [24–26]. To
date, unimodal SWCCs are more widely used in
numerical modelling and characterization of
unsaturated soil behaviour. For these reasons, the
present study is directed towards prediction of the
SWCC that is unimodal. The key objectives include
1) to summarize the methods/models proposed for
predicting the SWCC from soil physical properties;
2) to develop simple methods for predicting the
SWCC of natural and remoulded Malan loess; 3) to
validate the proposed methods using the measured
data.
J. Cent. South Univ. (2018) 25: 432–447
2 Summary of methods proposed for
predicting the SWCC
As stated above, the SWCC is a three-
dimensional curve in the (Sr : e : ψ) space. Even at
constant void ratio, the hydraulic hysteresis during
inflow and outflow of water through the individual
voids makes the SWCCs during drying and wetting
stress paths different. In addition, the SWCC
behaviour is dependent on the drying–wetting
cycling (i.e. main curves and scanning curves).
Natural soils have experienced numerous drying–
wetting cycles in the field and their SWCCs
measured in the laboratory would be the scanning
curves, especially within the suction range around
the natural condition. However, the SWCCs
measured using remoulded soil specimens would be
the main curves. The typical main drying and
wetting curves in terms of volumetric water content
are illustrated in Figure 1. There are an infinite
number of scanning curves that bridge between the
main drying and wetting curves. The SWCC which
is consistent with the process being simulated (i.e.
drying or wetting) should be used in modelling the
flow behavior of unsaturated soil. However, drying
curves are more commonly used since they are
easier to measure in the laboratory [19]. The
SWCCs (both drying and wetting) are sigmoidal in
shape; the two transition points on the drying curve
are the air-entry value and residual suction value.
The air-entry value, ψa, is defined as the matric
suction at which air enters into the largest pores by
drying. The residual water content, θr, is the water
content at which water phase is discontinuous; the
suction value corresponding to θr is called the
residual suction, ψr. The air-entry value and residual
su ction divide th e drying SWCC into th ree
Figure 1 Typical main drying and wetting soil–water
characteristic curves
J. Cent. South Univ. (2018) 25: 432–447
identifiable stages, namely, boundary effect zone,
transition zone and residual zone [8].
Typically, there are three different approaches
to predict the SWCC for a soil; 1) database mining
for the SWCC from similar soils; 2) prediction
from the grain-size distribution (i.e. GSD) curve; 3)
correlations relating parameters in the SWCC
equations to soil properties [27]. Numerous studies
have been performed on the last two approaches.
The GSD has enjoyed a great popularity being used
for prediction of the SWCC since information of
the distribution of voids in the soil, which primarily
controls the SWCC behaviour, can be extrapolated
from the GSD. The method using the GSD for
predicting the SWCC is referred to as pedo-transfer
function (i.e. PTF), which includes the 1) physico-
empirical methodology, and 2) functional parameter
regression methodology [17, 27, 28].
The first category indicates the physico-
empirical models using the GSD as a tool. ARYA
and PARIS [29] were the first to propose a
physico-empirical model for predicting the SWCC
from the GSD. The GSD is translated into the pore-
size distribution (i.e. PSD), which is then related to
the SWCC through the capillary theory. The pore
radius prediction was based on the assumption of
spherical particles and cylindrical pores. The ARYA
and PARIS [29] model was later modified and
improved by considering the random packing of
spherical particles and the influence of soil structure
[30]. Recently, the PSD was directly measured and
used to predict the SWCC and changes in the PSD
during drying and wetting were also considered.
SIMMS and YANFUL [31] developed a model for
predicting the drying SWCC based on the evolution
of measured PSDs for a compacted clayey soil. HU
et al [15] proposed a hysteretic SWCC model based
on changes in the PSD taking account of the
influence of volumetric deformation on the SWCC.
There are other physico-empirical models that do
not have to translate the GSD into the PSD. The
FREDLUND et al [32] model, for example, makes
use of a combination of the capillary theory and an
understanding of changes in the SWCC with respect
to particle size. FREDLUND [32] modified the
FREDLUND and XING [33] SWCC equation to
permit the fitting of the GSD data by considering
the similarity between the GSD and SWCC. The
GSD can be divided into small divisions of uniform
particle size and each division corresponds to a
435
unique SWCC (for example, the SWCC for pure
sands, pure silts and pure clays). The divisional
SWCCs are then summed to form the SWCC of the
soil. However, these physico-empirical models
could not provide reasonable prediction for fine-
grained soils due to the complex particle packing in
fine-grained soils [32]. Also, they could not reliably
predict the SWCC in the high range of suction,
where capillary tension is overwhelmed by
adsorption mechanism [23]. In addition, they
involve complicated computation and hence are
difficult to be used in routine engineering practice.
The second category is based upon statistical
prediction of water contents at selected soil suction
values. The water content is presented as a function
of soil suction and various soil properties based on
regression analysis of a dataset. Early studies
focused on involving grain size properties (for
example; contents of sands, silts and clays, medium
particle size, geometric mean particle size, etc.),
morphological properties (for example, organic
matter, bulk density and porosity, etc.) and chemical
properties (for example, CEC (cation exchange
capacity) and SAR (soil adsorption ratio, etc.) into
the equation. To increase the accuracy, the water
contents at several specific suction values (for
example, 33 and 1500 kPa that are commonly
measured) were involved into the regression
equations (for example, Refs. [34–36]). RAWLS
et al [37] presented a comprehensive summary of
the methods of this category. WILLIAMS et al [28]
compared four methods using a dataset of 366 cores
of Bernow soil and concluded that regression
equations based on soil texture and bulk density
provide poor prediction of the water contents, with
large errors at some suction values. The results were
however significantly improved when two
measured water contents (i.e. at suction values 33
and 1500 kPa) are included as variables in the
regression equations. Some investigators proposed
equations to represent the SWCC of loess soils as
functions of matric suction and soil properties (i.e.
dry density is the most commonly used variable)
[38, 39].
The third category includes the methods which
relate the fitting parameters in mathematical
equations to soil properties. The widely-known
SWCC equations, such as the BROOKS and
COREY [40] equation, GENUCHTEN [7] equation
436
and FREDLUND and XING [33] equation, were
commonly used for this purpose. Also, there were
PTFs attempting to relate the parameters in the
CAMPBELL [41] equation and modified Kovacs
equation [42] to the grain-size and morphological
properties. A summary of some PTFs of this
category is presented in Table 1. Similar to the
second category, these PTFs were proposed based
on regression analysis of a dataset (including soils
with the same structure and mineralogical
composition or not). Most of them can provide
J. Cent. South Univ. (2018) 25: 432–447
satisfactory prediction only for the soil types that
are available in their datasets. Nevertheless, these
PTFs are simple and convenient for practicing
engineers to determine the SWCC, and alleviate the
need of cumbersome laboratory tests.
3 Introduction of the BRUTSAERT
SWCC equation
The BRUTSAERT [52] equation is one of the
earliest continuous SWCC mathematical

Table 1 Summary of PTFs relating fitting parameters in SWCC equations to soil properties
Parameter Required soil property
SWCC equation Source Dataset
addressed information
BROOKS and COREY [40] Sand (>0.05 mm)
1 for    b RAWLS
ψb, λ, θr
content, clay
 et al [43] (<0.002 mm) content,
Θ   b   for ψ>ψb (1) porosity
 
  
 r (2)
Θ
s  r
where θ=volumetric water content;
TOMASELLA Silt (0.05–0.002 mm)
θs is saturated volumetric water content; θs, θr, ψb, λ 613 Brazilian soils
et al [44] content, clay content
θr is residual volumetric water content;
Θ is normalized water content;
ψb is air-entry value of soil;
ψ is soil suction;
λ is pore size distribution index.
Gravimetric compacted
water content; gravimetric
optimum water content;
plasticity index; a
24 compacted clay
TINJUM et al [45] a, n categorical variable for
samples
GENUCHTEN [7] compaction effort, C
1 (C=–1 for standard
Θ (3) Proctor and C=1 for
[1  (a ) n ]m modified Proctor)
where a is fitting parameter related with Coarse sand (2–0.2 mm)
the inverse of the air-entry value; content, fine sand
n is fitting parameter related with the TOMASELLA (0.1–0.05 mm) content,
a, n, θs, θr 517 Brazilian soil
pore-size distribution of the soil; et al [46] silt content, clay content;
m is fitting parameter related with the Organic matter; moisture
asymmetry of the model. equivalent, bulk density
16 compacted loess
WANG et al [47] a, n, θs, θr Dry density
soils
75 soils with
GHANBARIAN-
m varying structural Clay content
ALAVIJEH et al [48]
composition
1448 soils with
CAMPBELL [41] varying structural Sand content, silt content,
COSBY et al [49] θs, ψb, b
composition from clay content
 s for    b
 U. S.
1
     b for ψ>ψb (4) 1) Sand content, content
 s  
b
Soils with varying
of silt and clay, bulk
    density;
MADANKUMAR [50] θs, ψb, b structural
2) Sand content, silt
where b is fitting parameter. composition
content, clay content,
bulk density
To be continued
J. Cent. South Univ. (2018) 25: 432–447 437
continued
Parameter Required soil property
SWCC equation Source Dataset
addressed information
FREDLUND and XING [33] 1) The weighted plasticity
1) 70 soils with index, wIp (the percentage
s
  C ( ) c
(5) plasticity index, IP passing the 200 # sieve
     b   ZAPATA et al [17] a, b, c, ψr greater than 0; multiply the IP);
ln e      2) 120 soils with 2) D60 (grain diameter
   a    IP equal to 0 corresponding to 60% passing
by weight)
   1) The weighted plasticity
ln1  
  r  1) 63 plastic soils index, wIp for plastic soils;
C ( )  1  (6) (with the weighted 2) D10, D20, D30, D60, D90
 10 6 
ln1  

PERERA et al [18] a, b, c, ψr plasticity index, wIP≥1); (grain diameter corresponding
 r  2) 154 non-plastic to 10%, 20%, 30%, 60%, 90%
soils (with wIP<1) passing by weight) for
where a is fitting parameter related to the non-plastic soils
air-entry value; b is fitting parameter related
to the rate of water extraction from soil once 1) The weighted void ratio,
the air-entry value has been exceeded; c is eP200 (the percentage passing
1) 30 fine-grained soils;
fitting parameter related to the rate of residual CHIN et al [51] the 200 # sieve multiply the e)
a, b, c, ψr 2) 30 coarse-grained
water content; ψr is soil suction at residual for fine-grained soils;
soils
state; C(ψ) is correction factor related to the 2) D50, D60 for coarse-grained
residual suction. soils

expressions that can fit the SWCC data over the  ( )   r

entire range of suction. This equation is chosen in
the present study to propose simple methods for
predicting the SWCC not only because it has less
fitting parameters (i.e. it is a two-parameter
equation), but it is the best equation to fit the
SWCC data of a variety of soils among two-
parameter equations [53]. In addition, both fitting
parameters are physically meaningful and the effect
of one parameter can be distinguished from that of
the other. In a study by SILLERS [53], nine SWCC
equations including both two-parameter and three-
parameter equations were compared by using them
to fit the SWCC data of 231 soils (8 USDA soil
classification system groups). The results showed
that the BRUTSAERT equation performs better
than the other two-parameter equations, with the
fitting capacity just behind the FREDLUND and
XING equation and the van GENUCHTEN
equation, which are three-parameter equations. The
BRUTSAERT equation can be written in terms of
the normalised volumetric water content, Θ, which
is defined as the amount of water in the soil
normalised between the residual and saturated
volumetric water contents (see Eqs. (7) and (8)).
1
Θ nb
(7)
 
1  
 ab 
Θ (8)
s   r
where Θ is normalised volumetric water content;
θ(ψ) is volumetric water content at the suction, ψ; θs
is volumetric water content at saturated state; θr is
volumetric water content at residual state; ab and nb
are fitting parameters.
Parameter ab is a function of the air-entry
value, and nb is a function of the rate at which the
soil desaturates once the air-entry value has been
exceeded. Figure 2(a) presents a plot of the
BRUTSAERT equation with constant nb (i.e. 1.5)
and varying ab. ab has the same unit as suction (i.e.
kPa) and appears at the inflection point on the
log-normal scale. The BRUTSAERT equation is
symmetrical on the log-normal scale and the curve
is translating toward the higher suction region as ab
increases [54]. Figure 2(b) presents a plot of the
BRUTSAERT equation with constant ab (i.e. 30 kPa)
and varying nb. The larger the value of nb, the
steeper the curve in the transition zone.
4 SWCC behaviour of Malan loess in
the Loess Plateau of China
According to a comprehensive review of
studies on the SWCC of loess soils in the Loess
Plateau of China, some key findings are concluded
as below:
438
Figure 2 Plots of BRUTSAERT equation with one
varying parameter while the other is constant:
(a) Constant nb (i.e. 1.5) and varying ab; (b) Constant ab
(i.e. 30 kPa) and varying nb
1) Studies on the SWCC of loess soils in the
Loess Plateau were mostly undertaken during the
last fifteen years and were published in the local
language (i.e. Chinese).
2) Loess soils distributed in Gansu Province
(especially around the city of Lanzhou) and Shaanxi
Province (especially around the city of Xi’an) were
extensively studied, while few studies were about
that in other regions in the Loess Plateau. In
addition, Malan loess deposited during the Late
Pleistocene period was extensively studied, while
few measurements of the SWCC were conducted on
the loess soils deposited earlier (i.e. Lishi loess
deposited during the Middle Pleistocene period, the
upper Lishi loess is also potentially meta-stable
upon wetting).
3) The pressure plate, pressure membrane,
tensiometer and unsaturated triaxial test apparatus
were commonly used to measure the soil suction.
Due to this reason, the measured SWCC was
limited to a low range of suction (i.e. less than
J. Cent. South Univ. (2018) 25: 432–447
1500 kPa). Centrifuge and filter paper were also
used in some studies.
4) For remoulded loess, both static compaction
and proctor compaction techniques were used to
prepare soil specimens for measuring the SWCC.
The key variable that was mostly concerned is the
dry density. In most cases, the soils collected from
the same site were compacted at the same initial
water content (for example, natural water content)
to different dry densities by controlling the
specimen volume. For such a scenario, soil
structure that is dependent on the moulding water
content and can have a significant influence on the
SWCC behavior was rarely considered.
5) The drying SWCC was commonly
measured in the laboratory applying the axis
translation technique; however, the wetting curve
was often measured using tensiometer. The
hydraulic hysteresis among drying and wetting
branches was rarely studied for loess soils.
These findings suggest that studies on the
SWCC behaviour of loess soils in the Loess Plateau
are limited. Some of the reasons can be attributed to
1) this is an emerging research area, which has been
receiving attention only during the last two decades;
2) comprehensive test facilities and various devices
for reliably measuring soil suction were rather
limited; 3) highly qualified and trained operators for
performing these tests are not widely available. Due
to these reasons, it is rather difficult for
geotechnical engineers to reliably determine the
SWCC of loess soils from experimental results. In
other words, there are difficulties in promoting the
unsaturated soil technology in conventional
engineering practice applications for addressing
geotechnical problems related to loess soils.
Therefore, it is desirable and urgent to develop
simple methods to predict the SWCC for loess soils
from soil properties that are easy to measure.
4.1 SWCC of natural Malan loess
In total, 24 Malan loess soils were tested using
natural soil specimens for obtaining their SWCC
information. Either the pressure plate or pressure
membrane was used to measure soil suction.
These soils were mostly collected from Gansu and
Shaanxi Province. The measured data were fitted
with the BRUTSAERT equation and the values of
model parameters (i.e. ab, nb, θs and θr) were
determined for each soil, which were then used to
J. Cent. South Univ. (2018) 25: 432–447
predict the volumetric water contents using the
BRUTSAERT equation at given suction values for
each soil. A comparison was made between the
measured and predicted volumetric water contents
at identical suction values, a good agreement was
found between two sets of volumetric water
contents (the deviation parameter R2=0.89, see
Figure 3).
Figure 3 Predicted and measured volumetric water
contents for natural Malan loess soils
Besides the SWCC, physical properties
including dry density, liquid limit, plastic limit, clay
content and silt content that were measured for all
of the natural Malan loess soils, as summarized in
Table 2. These soil properties can be easily and
reliably determined from simple tests. They were
classified into three groups, namely, dry density,
Atterberg limits (i.e. liquid limit, plastic limit and
plastic index) and GSD (i.e. clay content, silt
content and sand content).
439
to soil physical properties. This procedure was not
followed for θs since it depends more on the
technique used to saturate the soil specimen.
Typically, the soil specimen is submerged in
de-aired water inside a vacuum container for at least
24 h. The soil specimen by doing this can reach a
degree of saturation typically greater than 97% [55].
The best correlations between the
BRUTSAERT model parameters (i.e. ab, nb and θr)
and soil physical properties (i.e. dry density, ρd, clay
content, Pclay and plastic index, IP) were obtained by
means of a statistical multiple regression program,
as expressed in Eqs. (9), (10) and (11), where gi, bi,
ci and di are constants. Their values are: g1=0.451,
b1=2.991, c1=0.003, d1=0.010, g2=0.001, b2=5.996,
c2=–0.023, d2=–0.015, g3=8.813, b3=–0.010, c3=
0.034 and d3=–0.016 for the available SWCC data.
These values and the best correlations (i.e. Eqs. (9),
(10) and (11)) are then used to estimate the
BRUTSAERT model parameters for natural Malan
loess soils from their soil properties (i.e. ρd, Pclay
and IP). The estimated model parameters (i.e. abp,
nbp and θrp) are compared with the best-fit values
(i.e. ab, nb and θr), as shown in Figure 5. Reasonable
agreement between abp and ab as well as θrp and θr)
(R2=0.76 and 0.73 for both parameters, respectively)
suggests that ab and θr for natural Malan loess can
be estimated from soil physical properties through
the best correlations obtained in the present study.
abp  g1 exp(b1  d  c1 Pclay  d1 I P ) (9)
nbp  g 2 exp(b2  d  c2 Pclay  d 2 I P ) (10)
 rp  g 3 exp(b3  d  c3 Pclay  d 3 I P ) (11)

Table 2 Soil physical properties of natural Malan loess Therefore, a simple method is suggested for
soils predicting the SWCC that is presented in the form
Soil Total number of Soil property Average of the BRUTSAERT equation from soil physical
property data sets variation value properties for natural Malan loess. The four model
ρd 24 [1.15, 1.54] 1.33 parameters (i.e. abp, nbp, θsp and θrp) can be
Psand/% 24 [2, 30] 11 determined from physical properties that can be
Psilt/% 24 [58, 84] 69 reliably measured from simple tests. abp and θrp can
Pclay/% 24 [3, 32] 20
be determined from ρd, Pclay and IP through Eqs. (9)
and (11); θsp can be calculated using ρd and specific
wL/% 24 [24.4, 38.0] 31.4
gravity, Gs through the volume–mass relations. The
wP /% 24 [17.2, 25.4] 20.1
estimated abp and θrp agree well with the best-fit
IP 24 [2.1, 19.4] 11.3 values, ab and θr (see Figures 4(a) and (b). However,
Note: ρd=dry density; Psand = sand content; Psilt = silt content; Pclay=
clay content; wL =liquid limit; wP =plastic limit; IP =plastic index.
there is considerable inconsistency between nbp and
nb, with a relatively low R2 of 0.63 (see Figure 4(c)).
One property from each group was chosen to To increase the reliability, a measured data point
obtain the best correlations that relate the with measured suction and the corresponding
BRUTSAERT model parameters (i.e. ab, nb and θr) volumetric water content, along with abp, θrp and θsp
440
Figure 4 Estimated model parameters in comparison to
best-fit values for natural Malan loess: (a) abp vs ab;
(b) θrp vs θr; (c) nbp vs nb
that have been already estimated, are suggested to
be used to determine the value of nbp. Such a simple
method for predicting the SWCC from soil physical
properties along with one measured data point is
referred to as one-point method.
4.2 SWCC of remoulded Malan loess
There is significant difference between the
mechanical behaviour of natural and remoulded
loess [56, 57]. A number of experimental studies
J. Cent. South Univ. (2018) 25: 432–447
reported in the literature focused on the comparison
between natural loess and the same soil in
remoulded state, especially with respect to the shear
strength and volume change behaviour. For
example, JIANG et al [58] conducted a series of
triaxial tests on natural and remoulded loess soils.
The results suggest that natural loess is more likely
to exhibit strain-softening behavior than remoulded
loess. The shear strength of natural loess is typically
higher than that of remoulded loess under low
confining pressures, while the opposite is true under
high confining pressures. HU et al [57] highlighted
the difference between the volume change
behaviour of natural and remoulded loess.
Remoulded loess is found more compressible than
natural loess under low vertical stresses, while the
opposite is true under high vertical stresses. The
flow behaviour of natural and remoulded loess was
also compared by some investigators [59, 60]. At
high degrees of saturation (for example, higher than
60%), the coefficient of permeability of natural
loess is larger than that of remoulded loess, while
the opposite is true at low degrees of saturation [59].
In addition, several studies were conducted to
compare the SWCCs of natural and remoulded
loess [23, 61, 62]. For example, ZHANG and JI
[61] found that remoulded loess has slower rate of
water extracting from the soil and higher air-entry
value. A similar conclusion was drawn by NG et al
[23], who observed lower air-entry value, milder
adsorption and desorption rates for remoulded loess
than natural loess. However, in studies by YAO et al
[59] and WEI et al [60], they found that at low
suction values, the rate of water escaping from the
soil is higher than that of remoulded loess, while
the opposite is true at high suction values. These
differences can be attributed to the different
microstructure characteristics such as the PSD and
bonding type between natural and remoulded loess.
JIANG et al [63] carried out MIP (i.e. mercury
intrusion porosity) and SEM (i.e. scanning electron
microscopy) tests on natural loess and the same soil
in remoulded state. They found from the results that
the fabric of remoulded loess is featured by a
relatively uniform distribution of pores, while the
particles in natural loess are grouped in connected
assemblages. In short, remoulded loess has a more
homogenous fabric than natural loess. In addition,
two peaks were observed on the pore size density
curves of both natural and remoulded loess, which
J. Cent. South Univ. (2018) 25: 432–447
define two major pore series in the soil structure,
namely, inter-aggregate pores and intra-aggregate
pores. Natural loess has larger dominant macro-
pore diameter than remoulded loess; however,
interestingly, they have identical dominant micro-
pore diameter. In other words, both the natural and
remoulded loess samples tested have dual-porosity
structure. That is because the remoulded loess soil
sample in study by JIANG et al [63] was compacted
at an initial water content equal to the natural water
content (i.e. 15%), while the optimum water content
is about 18%. For such a scenario, the compacted
soil has a structure of flocculated type that exhibits
dual-porosity. However, the soils compacted at wet
side of the optimum water content have relatively
homogenous or dispersed structure [4, 11]. They
even observed that the volume of pores with small
diameter (for example, smaller than 5 µm) is nearly
identical in both natural and remoulded loess,
irrespective of their different modes of formation.
Besides the PSD, different bonding types can also
explain the difference between the mechanical
behaviour of natural and remoulded loess. In
natural loess, the particles or aggregates are in
contact with neighboring particles or aggregates by
cementation bonding, and the bonding materials are
always calcium carbonates and clays [3, 5, 64]. On
the contrary, in remoulded loess, particles are
predominantly bonded by matric suction [63, 65].
For these reasons, at low degrees of saturation, the
structure of remoulded loess is more favorable for
drainage of water since more pores in it are filled
with water. On the contrary, at high degrees of
saturation, the structure of natural loess is more
favorable as large size pores in it are filled with
water. On the other hand, under low confining
pressures or vertical stresses, the bonding strength
from cementation in natural loess contributes
towards the shear strength and provides resistance
to prevent the soil from being compressed. On the
contrary, natural loess would experience quick and
dramatic reduction in the shear strength and total
volume as the confining pressure or vertical stress
is high enough to destroy the bonding agents. This
reasoning can explain the test results discussed
above.
Remoulded loess has different microstructures
in spite of having the same mineralogy and physical
properties (such as GSD and dry density) from
natural loess. For this reason, it is required to study
441
the SWCC behaviour of remoulded loess especially
when compacted loess is increasingly used in
earth-fill structures in local regions [66]. Disturbed
Malan loess soils extracted from 11 different sites
around the cities of Lanzhou, Xi’an and Lvliang
(Shanxi Province) of China were used to prepare
remoulded soil specimens for measuring their
SWCC information. Both static compaction and
proctor compaction techniques were applied. In
most cases, the soils from each site were compacted
at the same initial water content (i.e. natural water
content) to different dry densities by controlling the
volume of soil specimens. For such a scenario, the
produced soil specimens could have similar soil
structure (i.e. flocculated or dispersed type). The
influence of soil structure associated with the
moulding water content on the SWCC is not
considered. In total, 44 soil specimens with
different dry densities were produced, and their
SWCC information was measured using either
pressure membrane or pressure plate apparatus. The
measured data were fitted with the BRUTSAERT
equation and the values of model parameters (i.e. i.e.
ab, nb, θs and θr) were determined for each of the
soil specimens. These values were then used to
predict the volumetric water contents using the
BRUTSAERT equation at given suction values for
each soil specimen. The predicted volumetric water
contents were compared with the measured values
(see Figure 5). A good agreement was found
between two sets of volumetric water contents with
a high R2 (i.e. 0.99). It is interesting to note that nb
shows little variation for remoulded Malan loess
soils, with most of them lying between the values of
1 and 2 (see Figure 6(a)). However, this value
varies between 0 and 3 for natural Malan loess.
Figure 5 Measured and predicted volumetric water
contents for remoulded Malan loess soils
442 J. Cent. South Univ. (2018) 25: 432–447
Similar to natural Malan loess, physical
properties including Atterberg limits (i.e. liquid
limit, plastic limit and plastic index) and GSD (i.e.
contents of clays, silts and sands) were measured
for most of the disturbed soils, the details are
summarized in Table 3. The best correlations
between the BRUTSAERT model parameters (i.e.
ab and θr) and soil physical properties (i.e. ρd, Psand
and wP) were obtained as Eqs. (12) and (13), where
fi, ri, si and ti are constants. Their values are:
f1=0.0002, r1=2.903, s1=0.092, t1=0.429, f2=0.0001,
r2=2.258, s2=0.091 and t2=0.442 for the available
SWCC data. These values and the best correlations
are then used to estimate the BRUTSAERT model
parameters for all of the remoulded loess soil
specimens from their physical properties (i.e. ρd,
Psand and wP). The estimated model parameters (i.e.
abp and θrp) are shown in Figures 6(b)–(c) in
comparison to the best-fit values (i.e. ab and θr).
There is reasonable agreement between abp and ab
as well as θrp and θr (R2=0.71 and 0.76 for both
parameters, respectively), which suggests that ab
and θr for remoulded Malan loess can be estimated
from soil physical properties through the best
correlations obtained in the present study.
a b  f1 exp( r1  d  s1 Psand  t1wp ) (12)
 r  f 2 exp(r2  d  s 2 Psand  t 2 wp ) (13)
A simple method is suggested for predicting
the SWCC for remoulded Malan loess from soil
physical properties. The predicted SWCC is
presented in the form of the BRUTSAERT equation
and the four parameters (i.e. abp, nbp, θsp and θrp) can
be determined following simple procedures. θsp can
be calculated from ρd and Gs through the volume-
mass relations and abp and θrp can be determined
from soil physical properties (i.e. ρd, Psand and wP)
through the best correlations (i.e. Eqs. (12) and
Figure 6 Estimated model parameters in comparison to
best-fit values for remoulded Malan loess soil specimens:
Table 3 Soil physical properties of disturbed Malan
(a) Best-fit values of nb; (b) abp vs ab; (c) θrp vs θr
loess soils
Total number Soil property Average
Soil property (13)). In spite of the value of nb falling within a
of data sets variation value
ρd 44 [1.16, 1.88] 1.55 narrow range, between 1 and 2, for remoulded
Psand/% 30 [0.5, 13] 4.0 Malan loess (see Figure 6(a)), one measured data
Psilt/% 30 [67, 94] 82 point is suggested to be used to determine the value
of nbp. Such a method for predicting the SWCC for
Pclay/% 30 [5, 30] 14
remoulded Malan loess using one measured data
wL/% 38 [23.9, 31.0] 27.6
point is referred to as one-point method.
wP/% 38 [15.5, 19.5] 17.6
In the proposed one-point methods for both
IP 38 [7.8, 12.3] 10.1 natural and remoulded Malan loess, θsp can be
J. Cent. South Univ. (2018) 25: 432–447
determined through the volume-mass relations and
abp and θrp are suggested to be determined through
the best correlations obtained in the present study.
One measured data point along with the values of
θsp, abp and θrp that have been already determined is
suggested to be used to determine the value of nbp.
The measured data point is suggested to be within
the transition zone since nb is strongly related to the
rate of water escaping from the soil in the transition
zone. In other words, the measured soil suction
should be between the air-entry value and residual
suction value. This suction range will be further
discussed in later section.
5 Validation of proposed one-point
methods
In this section, the proposed one-point
443
methods are validated using the measured SWCC
data reported in the literature. In total, 20 sets of
SWCC data measured using pressure plate, pressure
membrane, GCTS soil-water characteristic cell or
centrifuge were used. The soils tested are mostly
distributed in Shaanxi and Gansu Province and their
physical properties collected from the literature are
summarized in Table 4 and Table 5, for natural and
remoulded Malan loess, respectively. The
BRUTSAERT model parameters (i.e. abp and θrp)
are estimated from soil physical properties (i.e. ρd,
Psand, Pclay, wP and IP) using the best correlations (i.e.
Eqs. (9), (11), (12) and (13)) along with the
constants (i.e. gi, bi, ci, di, fi, ri, si and ti) obtained in
the present study. The value of θsp for each soil
specimen is calculated from ρd and Gs through the
volume–mass relations. The value of nbp for each
soil specimen is determined by substituting the

Table 4 Soil physical properties and estimated values of BRUTSAERT model parameters for natural Malan loess soils
Natural loess Location Apparatus ρd Gs Psilt Pclay wL wP IP θsp θrp abp nbp
N1 Luochuan, S Centrifuge 54.2 16.3 22.7 1.80
N2 Luochuan, S Centrifuge 1.24 2.7 25.0 30.7 17.1 13.6 54.2 16.3 22.7 1.44
N3 Luochuan, S Centrifuge 54.2 16.3 22.7 0.60
N4 Yongjing, G Pressure plate 1.40 2.6 66.5 30.3 30.7 18.4 12.3 45.8 20.0 36.8 2.43
N5 Qianyang, S Pressure plate 1.44 2.7 64.0 26.5 38.0 18.6 19.4 46.8 15.7 43.7 0.99
N6 Binxian, S Pressure plate 1.30 2.7 64.5 26.0 37.1 20.3 16.8 51.8 16.1 28.2 1.02
N7 Tongchuan, S Pressure plate 1.20 2.7 64.5 28.2 36.0 19.2 16.8 55.7 17.4 20.8 1.17
N8 Baishui, S Pressure plate 1.27 2.7 62.4 29.2 33.3 19.1 14.2 53.1 18.7 25.0 1.32
N9 Heyang, S Pressure plate 1.18 2.7 66.7 25.8 32.2 18.6 13.6 56.2 16.8 19.2 1.26
N10 Qishan, S Pressure plate 1.25 2.7 63.0 28.0 35.5 18.0 17.5 53.5 17.0 24.9 1.09
Note: G means Gansu province; S means Shaanxi province.

Table 5 Soil physical properties and estimated values of BRUTSAERT model parameters for remoulded Malan loess
soils
Remoulded loess Location Apparatus ρd Gs Psilt Pclay wL wP IP θs θr ab nb
R1 Lanzhou, G Pressure plate 1.43 2.7 94.4 5.1 27.8 17.7 10.1 47.0 6.5 26.1 0.90
R2 Lvliang, Sh Pressure plate 1.65 2.7 82.2 16.5 26.0 16.1 9.9 38.9 5.8 27.1 1.13
R3 1.51 2.7 80.0 19.0 28.0 18.0 10.0 44.1 9.5 39.7 3.08
Lanzhou, G Pressure membrane
R4 1.39 2.55 81.0 18.0 28.0 18.0 10.0 45.2 7.2 28.0 1.82
R5 Centrifuge 1.2 54.7 11.1 38.2 0.65
Xi’an, S 2.65 66.5 30.3 30.7 18.4 12.3
R6 Centrifuge 1.4 47.2 17.4 68.2 1.00
R7 Xi’an, S GCTS 1.2 2.6 30.9 17.6 13.3 53.8 14.1 49.2 0.79
Tensiometer
R8 Lanzhou, G 1.8 2.7 83.7 8.4 24.8 15.5 9.3 33.3 11.3 59.4 1.82
Pressure membrane
R9 Lanzhou, G Pressure plate 1.6 2.7 82.0 12.5 24.4 16.2 8.2 40.4 8.1 37.1 1.00
R10 Pressure membrane 1.45 2.7 29.8 19.5 10.3 46.3 16.0 63.4 1.20
Note: G means Gansu province; S means Shaanxi province and Sh means Shanxi province.
444
values of abp, θrp and θsp along with one measured
data point into the BRUTSAERT equation. The
estimated values of abp, nbp, θsp and θrp required for
predicting the SWCC are summarized in Tables 4
and 5.
The results of validation studies are presented
by providing comparisons between the measured
volumetric water contents and that predicted using
the proposed one-point methods at identical suction
values (see Figures 7 and 8). There is a relatively
good agreement between two sets of volumetric
water contents (i.e. R2=0.95 and 0.89 for natural and
remoulded Malan loess soils, respectively). These
results suggest that the proposed one-point methods
can provide relatively reliable prediction of the
SWCC for natural and remoulded Malan loess in
the Loess Plateau of China.
From the validation studies, it is found that the
one measured data point required for determining
Figure 7 Comparison between measured volumetric
water contents and that predicted using proposed one-
point method for natural Malan loess soils
Fig. 8 Comparison between measured volumetric water
contents and that predicted using proposed one-point
method for remoulded Malan loess soils
J. Cent. South Univ. (2018) 25: 432–447
the value of nbp should be in the suction range
between 25 to 100 kPa for natural Malan loess,
while between 100 to 500 kPa for remoulded Malan
loess. This indicates that natural loess has the
transition zone in lower suction range than that of
remoulded loess. This also can be seen from the
measured SWCCs which are used for validation of
the proposed methods (see Figure 9). Natural loess
has a higher air-entry value than remoulded loess,
as seen in the figure. Once the air-entry value is
exceeded, natural loess has a relatively steeper
desorption rate than remoulded loess; however, they
tend to have the same desorption rate at high
suction values. As discussed earlier, this can be
attributed to the difference in microstructure
between them. In general, remoulded loess has
more homogenous structure than natural loess,
which contributes to a gentle desorption rate in the
transition zone of remoulded loess.
Figure 9 Measured SWCCs of natural and remoulded
Malan loess soils used for validation studies
From the results of validation studies, the
predicted SWCCs for natural loess provide a better
comparison with the measured data than remoulded
loess, which is evidenced by the R2 of both
validation studies (i.e. 0.95 and 0.89 for natural and
remoulded loess, respectively). The variation in soil
structure of remoulded loess soils is not considered
in the proposed method, which is thought to
contribute to such a little inconsistency between the
predicted and measured SWCCs for remoulded
loess soils. In other words, soils compacted at dry
and wet sides of optimum water content have
different structures (i.e. flocculated and dispersed
type) in spite of the same soil physical properties,
which would contribute to different SWCC
J. Cent. South Univ. (2018) 25: 432–447
behaviour. For this reason, more experimental
results for remoulded loess soils are required for
calibration of the constants (i.e. fi, ri, si and ti) with
respect to soil structure, such that the SWCC can be
predicted using the proposed method taking account
of the influence of the soil structure.
6 Conclusions
The measured SWCC data of natural and
remoulded Malan loess soils were fitted with the
BRUTSAERT equation. The best correlations
between the model parameters and soil physical
properties were obtained, upon which one-point
methods are proposed for predicting the SWCC
from physical properties for natural and remoulded
Malan loess. The predicted SWCC is presented in
the form of the BRUTSAERT equation. Model
parameters abp and θrp are suggested to be estimated
from soil physical properties (i.e. ρd, Psand, Pclay, wP
and IP) using the best correlations obtained in the
present study. One measured data point is suggested
to be used for estimating parameter nbp. Parameter
θsp can be determined from ρd and Gs through the
volume–mass relations. The proposed one-point
methods are validated using the measured SWCC
data reported in the literature. The relatively good
agreement between the predicted SWCCs and
measured data suggests that the proposed methods
can provide reasonable prediction of the SWCC for
natural and remoulded Malan loess. The measured
data point should be within the transition zone; the
measured suction is suggested between 25 to 100
kPa for natural loess, while between 100 to 500 kPa
for remoulded loess. However, more experimental
results on remoulded loess are required for
calibration of the constants in the best correlations
with respect to soil structure, such that the SWCC
of remoulded loess can be predicted using the
proposed method taking account of the influence of
soil structure.
Acknowledgement
The first author gratefully acknowledges her
appreciation to the Chinese Scholarship Council,
which funded her Joint PhD research program. The
third author thanks the support from Natural
Sciences and Engineering Research Council of
Canada (NSERC) for his research programs.
445
References
[1] LIU Dong-sheng, ZHANG Zong-hu. Chinese loess [J]. Acta
Geologica Sinica, 1962, 42(1): 1–18. (in Chinese)
[2] DIJKSTRA T A, ROGERS C D F, SMALLEY I J,
DERBYSHIRE E, LI Y, MENG X M. The loess of
north-central China: Geotechnical properties and their
relation to slope stability [J]. Engineering Geology, 1994,
36(3): 153–171.
[3] LI P, VANAPALLI S K, LI T L. Review of collapse
triggering mechanism of collapsible soils due to wetting [J].
Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering,
2016, 8: 256–274.
[4] MITCHELL J K, SOGA K. Fundamentals of soil behavior
[M]. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1976.
[5] GAO Guo-rui. Classification for microstructure of loess and
its collapsibility [J]. Chinese Science, 1980, (12): 1203–1212.
(in Chinese)
[6] DIJKSTRA T A, SMALLEY I J, ROGERS C D F. Particle
packing in loess deposits and the problem of structure
collapse and hydroconsolidation [J]. Engineering Geology,
1995, 40: 49–64.
[7] van GENUCHTEN M T. A closed-form equation for
predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils [J].
Soil Science Society of America Journal, 1980, 44(5):
892–898.
[8] VANAPALLI S K, FREDLUND D G, PUFAHL D E,
CLIFTON A W. Model for the prediction of shear strength
with respect to soil suction [J]. Canadian Geotechnical
Journal, 1996, 33(3): 379–392.
[9] MA S K, HUANG M S, HU P, YANG C. Soil-water
characteristics and shear strength in constant water content
triaxial tests on Yunnan red clay [J]. Journal of Central South
University, 2013, 20: 1412–1419.
[10] ZHONG Z L, LIU Y X, LIU X R, LI X Y, WANG S.
Influence of moisture content on shearing strength of
unsaturated undisturbed quaternary system middle
Pleistocene [J]. Journal of Central South University, 2015, 22:
2776–2782.
[11] VANAPALLI S K, FREDLUND D G, PUFAHL D E. The
influence of soil structure and stress history on the soil-water
characteristics of a compacted till [J]. Géotechnique, 1999, 2:
143–159.
[12] YANG H, RAHARDJO H, LEONG E C, FREDLUND D G.
Factors affecting drying and wetting soil-water characteristic
curves of sandy soils [J]. Canadian Geotechnical Journal,
2004, 41: 980–920.
[13] WHEELER S J, SHARMA R J, BUISSON M S R. Coupling
of hydraulic hysteresis and stress-strain behavior in
unsaturated soils [J]. Géotechnique, 2003, 53(1): 41–54.
[14] GALLIPOLI D, WHEELER S J, KARSTUNEN M.
Modelling the variation of degree of saturation in a
deformable unsaturated soil [J]. Géotechnique, 2003, 53(1):
105–112.
[15] HU R, CHEN Y F, LIU H H, ZHOU C B. A water retention
curve and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity model for
deformable soils: consideration of the change in pore-size
446
distribution [J]. Géotechnique, 2013, 63(16): 1389–1405.
[16] SIMMS P H, YANFUL E K. Measurement and estimation of
pore shrinkage and pore distribution in a clayey till during
soil-water characteristic curve tests [J]. Canadian
Geotechnical Journal, 2001, 38(4): 741–754.
[17] ZAPATA C E, HOUSTON W N, HOUSTON S L, WALSH K
D. Soil-water characteristic curve variability [J]. Advances in
Unsaturated Geotechnics, 2000, 99: 84–124.
[18] PERERA Y Y, ZAPATA C E, HOUSTON W N, HOUSTON
S L. Prediction of the soil-water characteristic curve based
on grain-size-distribution and index properties [J]. Advances
in Pavement Engineering, 2005, 130: 49–60.
[19] FREDLUND D G, RAHARDJO H. Soil mechanics for
unsaturated soils [M]. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1993.
[20] BURGER C A, SHACKELFORD C D. Soil-water
characteristic curves and dual porosity of sand-diatomaceous
earth mixtures [J]. Journal of Geotechnical and
Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2001, 127(9): 790–800.
[21] ELKADY T Y, DAFALLA M A, AL-MAHBASHI A M,
AL-SHAMRANI M. Evaluation of soil water characteristic
curves of sand-clay mixtures [J]. International Journal of
Geomate, 2013, 4(2): 528–532.
[22] LI X, LI J H, ZHANG L M. Predicting bimodal soil-water
characteristic curves and permeability functions using
physically based parameters [J]. Computers and Geotechnics,
2014, 57: 85–96.
[23] NG C W W, SADEGHI H, HOSSEN S B, CHIU C F,
ALONSO E E, BAGHBANREZVAN S. Water retention and
volumetric characteristics of intact and re-compacted loess
[J]. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 2016,
dx.doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2015-0364.
[24] GITIRANA G DE F N jr, FREDLUND D G. Soil-water
characteristic curve equation with independent properties [J].
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering,
2004, 130(2): 209–212.
[25] ZHANG L, CHEN Q. Predicting bimodal soil-water
characteristic curves [J]. Journal of Geotechnical and
Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2005, 131(5): 666–670.
[26] SATYANAGA A, RAHARDJO H, LEONG E C, WANG J Y.
Water characteristic curve of soil with bimodal grain-size
distribution [J]. Computers and Geotechnics, 2013, 48:
51–61.
[27] FREDLUND D G, RAHARDJO H, FREDLUND M D.
Unsaturated soil mechanics in engineering practice [M]. New
York: John Wiley & Sons, 2012.
[28] WILLIAMS R D, AHUJA L R, NANEY J W. Comparison of
methods to estimate soil water characteristics from soil
texture, bulk density, and limited data [J]. Soil Science, 1992,
153(3): 172–184.
[29] ARYA L M, PARIS J F. A physicoempirical model to predict
the soil moisture characteristic from particle-size distribution
and bulk density data [J]. Soil Science Society of America
Journal, 1981, 45(6): 1023–1030.
[30] HAVERKAMP R T, PARLANGE J Y. Predicting the
water-retention curve from particle-size distribution: 1.
Sandy soils without organic matter [J]. Soil Science, 1986,
142(6): 325–339.
[31] SIMMS P H, YANFUL E K. A pore-network model for
hydromechanical coupling in unsaturated compacted clayey
J. Cent. South Univ. (2018) 25: 432–447
soils [J]. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 2005, 42(2):
499–514.
[32] FREDLUND M D. The role of unsaturated soil property
functions in the practice of unsaturated soil mechanics [D].
Saskatchewan: University of Saskatchewan, 2000.
[33] FREDLUND D G, XING A. Equations for the soil-water
characteristic curve [J]. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 1994,
31: 521–532.
[34] GUPTA S, LARSON W E. Estimating soil water retention
characteristics from particle size distribution, organic matter
percent, and bulk density [J]. Water Resources Research,
1979, 15(6): 1633–1635.
[35] RAWLS W J, BRAKENSIEK D L, SAXTONN K E.
Estimation of soil water properties [J]. Transactions of the
ASAE, 1982, 25(5): 1316–1320.
[36] AHUJA L R, NANEY J W, WILLIAMS R D. Estimating soil
water characteristics from simpler properties or limited data
[J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 1985, 49(5):
1100–1105.
[37] RAWLS W J, GISH T J, BRAKENSIEK D L. Estimating
soil water retention from soil physical properties and
characteristics [J]. Advances in Soil Science, 1991, 16:
213–234.
[38] LU Jing, CHENG Bin. Research on soil-water characteristic
curve of unsaturated loess [J]. Chinese Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering, 2007, 29(10): 1591–1592. (in
Chinese)
[39] CHU Feng, SHAO Sheng-jun, CHEN Cun-li. Experimental
research on influences of dry density and vertical stress on
soil-water characteristic curves of intact unsaturated loess [J].
Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2014,
33(2): 413–420. (in Chinese)
[40] BROOKS R H, COREY A T. Hydraulic properties of porous
media and their relation to drainage design [J]. Transactions
of the ASAE, 1964, 7(1): 26–28.
[41] CAMPBELL G S. A simple method for determining
unsaturated conductivity from moisture retention data [J].
Soil science, 1974, 117(6): 311–314.
[42] AUBERTIN M, MBONIMPA M, BUSSIÈRE B, CHAPUIS
R P. A model to predict the water retention curve from basic
geotechnical properties [J]. Canadian Geotechnical Journal,
2003, 40(6): 1104–1122.
[43] RAWLS W J, BRAKENSIEK D L. Prediction of soil water
properties for hydrologic modeling [J]. American Society of
Civil Engineers, 1985: 293–299.
[44] TOMASELLA J, HODNETT M G. Estimating soil water
retention characteristics from limited data in Brazilian
Amazonia [J]. Soil Science, 1998, 163(3): 190–202.
[45] TINJUM J M, BENSON C H, BLOTZ L R. Soil-water
characteristic curves for compacted clays [J]. Journal of
Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 1997,
123(11): 1060–1069.
[46] TOMASELLA J, HODNETT M G, ROSSATO L.
Pedotransfer functions for the estimation of soil water
retention in Brazilian soils [J]. Soil Science Society of
America Journal, 2000, 64(1): 327–338.
[47] WANG Tie-hang, LU Jing, YUE Cai-kun. Soil-water
characteristic curve for unsaturated loess considering
temperature and density effect [J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics,
J. Cent. South Univ. (2018) 25: 432–447
2008, 29(1): 1–5. (in Chinese)
[48] GHANBARIAN-ALAVIJEH B, LIAGHAT A, HUANG G H,
VAN GENUCHTEN M T. Estimation of the van Genuchten
soil water retention properties from soil textural data [J].
Pedosphere, 2010, 20(4): 456–465.
[49] COSBY B J, HORNBERGER G M, CLAPP R B, GINN T. A
statistical exploration of the relationships of soil moisture
characteristics to the physical properties of soils [J]. Water
Resources Research, 1984, 20(6): 682–690.
[50] MADANKUMAR N. Prediction of soil moisture
characteristics from mechanical analysis and bulk density
data [J]. Agricultural Water Management, 1985, 10(4):
305–312.
[51] CHIN K B, LEONG E C, RAHARDJO H. A simplified
method to estimate the soil-water characteristic curve [J].
Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 2010, 47(12): 1382–1400.
[52] BRUTSAERT W. Some methods of calculating unsaturated
permeability [J]. Transactions of the ASAE, 1967, 10(3):
400–404.
[53] SILLERS W S. The mathematical representation of the
soil-water characteristic curve [D]. Saskatchewan: University
of Saskatchewan, 1997.
[54] SILLERS W S, FREDLUND D G, ZAKERZADEH N.
Mathematical attributes of some soil-water characteristic
curve models [J]. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering,
2001, 19: 243–283.
[55] ASTM-D6836. Standard test methods for determination of
the soil water characteristic curve for desorption using
hanging column, pressure extractor, chilled mirror
hygrometer, or centrifuge [S]. West Conshohocken: Annual
Book of ASTM Standards, 2008.
[56] ASSALLAY A M, ROGERS C D F, SMALLEY I J.
Formation and collapse of metastable particle packings and
open structures in loess deposits [J]. Engineering Geology,
1997, 48(1): 101–115.
[57] HU Zai-qiang, SHEN Zhu-jiang, XIE Ding-yi. Research on
structural behaviour of unsaturated loess [J]. Chinese Journal
of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2000, 19(6): 775–779.
(in Chinese)
中文导读
基于物理特征的马兰黄土土–水特征曲线的预测方法
摘要：总结了已有的预测土–水特征曲线的方法；评价了已有的黄土土–水特征曲线的研究；提出并验
证了基于物理特征预测原状及重塑马兰黄土脱湿土–水特征曲线的一点法；比较了原状和重塑马兰黄
土的土–水特征曲线。
关键词：土–水特征曲线；马兰黄土；原状黄土；重塑黄土；一点法；物理特征
447
[58] JIANG M J, HU H J, PENG J B, LEROUEIL S.
Experimental study of two saturated natural soils and their
saturated remoulded soils under three consolidated undrained
stress paths [J]. Frontiers of Architecture and Civil
Engineering in China, 2011, 5(2): 225–238.
[59] YAO Zhi-hua, CHEN Zheng-han, HUANG Xue-feng,
ZHANG Shi-jing, YANG Xiao-hui. Hydraulic conductivity
of unsaturated undisturbed and remolded Q3 loess [J].
Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2012, 34(6):
1020–1027. (in Chinese)
[60] WEI Feng, YAO Zhi-hua, SU Li-hai, BAO Liang-liang,
FANG Xiang-wei. Study on water holding capacity of
unsaturated undisturbed and remolded loess of Q3 [J].
Geotechnical Investigation & Surveying, 2015(8): 1–6. (in
Chinese)
[61] ZHANG Nan, JI Bo-xun. Matrix suction changes of
unsaturated loess [J]. Jilin Geology, 2012, 31(2): 137–142.
(in Chinese)
[62] YUAN Zhong-xia, WANG Lan-min, YAN Geng-sheng.
Study on soil-water characteristic curves of loess [J].
Geotechnical Investigation & Surveying, 2012(5): 10–14. (in
Chinese)
[63] JIANG M J, ZHANG F G, HU H J, CUI Y J, PENG J B.
Structural characterization of natural loess and remolded
loess under triaxial tests [J]. Engineering Geology, 2014, 181:
249–260.
[64] SMALLEY I J. “In-situ” theories of loess formation and the
significance of the calcium-carbonate content of loess [J].
Earth-Science Reviews, 1971, 7(2): 67–85.
[65] SUN D A, SHENG D C, XU Y F. Collapse behaviour of
unsaturated compacted soil with different initial densities [J].
Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 2007, 44: 673–686.
[66] ZHAN L T, YANG Y B, CHEN R, NG C W W, CHEN Y M.
Influence of clod size and water content on gas permeability
of a compacted loess [J]. Canadian Geotechnical Journal,
2014, 51(12): 1468–1474.
(Edited by YANG Hua)