CE5101 Lecture 2

Darcy’s Law and Soil

Permeability in
Unsaturated/Saturated Soils
by
Prof Harry Tan
16 Aug 2017 (Rev 24 Aug 2021)

12/11/2023 1
 Outline
• Soil and Ground Water Conditions
• Unsaturated and Saturated Soils
• Balance Equations
• What is Darcy’s Law?
• Permeability (Darcy’s Coefficient of Permeability)
• Lab Measurement of k (Coefficient of Permeability or
hydraulic conductivity)
• Field Measurement of k
• Permeability correlations to CPTu results, based on
Software CPeT-IT (from Geolomiski)

12/11/2023 2
 Soil and Ground Water
• Soil are products of weathering forming:
– Residual Soils (weathered in place)
– Transported Soils (displaced by wind or water)
• Physical weathering produce soil particles of gravels,
sands and silts
• Chemical weathering produce clay minerals – Kaolin, Illite
and Montmorillonite (bentonite)

12/11/2023 3
 Ground water
• All soils are permeable (porous medium) and water flow
through interconnected pores of void spaces
• Saturated soils when voids are completely filled with
ground water
• Unsaturated soils when voids are partially filled with water
and air in the form of occluded bubbles held by tension
capillary stresses

12/11/2023 4
 Ground Water Table
• Pressure of pore water is measured relative to
atmospheric pressure Pa (taken as zero pore pressure)
• The water table (GWT) or phreatic surface is the level at
Pa or zero pore pressure
• Atmospheric pressure = 1 bar or 14.7 psi or 100 kPa)
• Below the WT, the soil is assumed to be fully saturated
(positive pore water pressure)
• Above the WT, the soil is unsaturated (negative pore
water pressure or pore water tension or suction) where
we have capillary water in Vadose Zone

12/11/2023 5
 Unsaturated/Saturated Soils

12/11/2023 6
 Unsaturated/Saturated Soils

12/11/2023 7
 Unsaturated/Saturated Soils

12/11/2023 8
 Unsaturated/Saturated Soils

12/11/2023 9
 Unsaturated/Saturated Soils

12/11/2023 10
 Unsaturated/Saturated Soils

12/11/2023 11
 Unsaturated/Saturated Soils

12/11/2023 12
 Unsaturated/Saturated Soils

12/11/2023 13
 Unsaturated/Saturated Soils
Only K_Fn Both K and SWCC
Required for SS Required for Transient
Flow FEM State Flow FEM

K_Fn SWCC_Fn

12/11/2023 14
 Unsaturated/Saturated Soils

12/11/2023 15
 Unsaturated/Saturated Soils

12/11/2023 16
 Types of GWT
• Hydrostatic
• Seepage
• Perched WT
• Artesian WT

12/11/2023 17
 SUMMARY ON TYPES OF GWT

12/11/2023 18
 Hydrostatic GWT
Above WT, pore water held at negative pressure by
capillary tension; smaller pores give higher capillary rise;
in general degree of saturation decrease with height
u  h2 *  w

unsaturated h2 GWT • Soil is saturated below

GWT
• GWT is dependent on local
Saturated climate; balance of
soil u  h1*  w precipitation, evaporation
and plant evapo-
h1 transpiration
• GWT is also affected by
u  h1 *  w construction activities,
especially excavations

12/11/2023 19
 Hydrostatic GWT
Steady State Pore Pressure
Pwater=Psteady

Steady-state PP

Saturation Ratio, Seff

Active Pore Pressure

Pactive=Seff*Pwater

Total or Active PP
12/11/2023 20
 Hydrostatic GWT

Steady State Pore Pressure Active Pore Pressure

Pwater=Psteady Pactive=Seff*Pwater
21
12/11/2023
 Perched GWT
• Occur locally, contained by soil of low permeability above
normal GWT

Perched WT

Clay lens
GWT

Sandy Soils

12/11/2023 22
 Artesian GWT
Inclined soil layer of high permeability is confined locally by overlying
clayey soil; the pressure in the artesian layer is governed by a higher WT
at a distant location where layer is unconfined

GWT

GWT
Clayey Soils – Cap or
Aquiclude Artesian PWP

Sandy Soils ( Confined Aquifer)

12/11/2023 23
 Artesian – Horizontal Layers
Use Phreatic Control
Phreatic level for Lower Sand Water Conditions Settings
Cluster Phreatic Water Level
Upper Sand Phreatic level for Upper Sand

Interpolate Pore Water Pressure

Clay

Lower Sand Step1

Interpolate Pore Water Pressure

• No Seepage computation for this case.
• Heads and Pore Pressures are computed from
Cluster Phreatic Water Level
assumed cluster water levels and pore pressures in
sandwich Clay layer by Interpolation between the
upper and lower water pressures on Clay/Sand Step2
boundaries.
24
12/11/2023
 Head in Artesian – Horizontal Layers
Use Phreatic Control

12/11/2023 25
 • In Seepage flow analysis, NO Excess pore pressures, so Pwater=Psteady

• Pexcess only applies in UnDrained and Consolidation Analysis

12/11/2023 26
 Pore Water Pressures in Artesian – Horizontal Layers
Use Phreatic Control

Clay Upper Boundary

Clay Lower Boundary

Pactive=Pwater*Seff

12/11/2023 27
Artesian – Horizontal Layers Use Steady-State Seepage
Phreatic level for Lower Sand Water Conditions Settings
Upper Sand Cluster Phreatic Water Level
Phreatic level for Upper Sand

Clay Interpolate Pore Water Pressure

Lower Sand
Step1

Interpolate Pore Water Pressure

Cluster Phreatic Water Level

Step2

Step3 – Set Head on Upper Clay Boundary = +2m

Step4 – Set Head on Lower Clay Boundary = +10m

28
12/11/2023
 Head in Artesian – Horizontal Layers
Use Steady-State Seepage

12/11/2023 29
 Pore Pressures in Artesian – Horizontal Layers
Use Steady-State Seepage

Clay Upper Boundary

Clay Lower Boundary

Pactive=Pwater*Seff
• We get Identical Results compared to Phreatic Settings method
• Thus, proper Phreatic Settings must produce same results as Correct
30
Steady-State Analysis for simple horizontal layered boundary conditions.
 Artesian – Non-Horizontal Layers
Use Flow Control (Steady State Seepage)

Upper Sand

Clay Flow BC Settings

Not activated

Lower Sand Upper Sand

Constant Head = +2m

• For Complex Non-Horizontal layers,

we need to use Steady-State
Seepage Flow FEM models. Constant Head = +10m
For Lower Sand

Closed Flow Boundary

12/11/2023 31
 Boundary Settings by Phreatic or Seepage Flow Analysis
Phreatic Settings

Upper sand water level

Lower sand water level

Seepage Flow Settings

Clay upper boundary Head=+2m

Clay lower boundary Head=+10m

12/11/2023 32
 Heads in Artesian – Non-Horizontal Layers

• Phreatic Method gave Steady-State (SS) Seepage

unrealistic Disjointed Head Method gave realistic Continuous
Distribution in FEM model Head Distribution in FEM model
• But Heads across Cut
Section AA with horizontal
soil layers are approximately
correct 33
 Phreatic or Steady-State PWP in Artesian Results are
identical for the Horizontal Cut Section AA

Clay Upper Boundary

Clay Lower Boundary

Pactive=Pwater*Seff

12/11/2023 34
 IMPORTANCE OF CAPILLARY WATER

12/11/2023 35
 GWT AROUND AN EXCAVATED PIT

12/11/2023 36
 Balance Equations
Fluid Mechanics
1. Balance of Mass (Continuity)
2. Balance of Momentum
3. Balance of Energy (Heat)
• Most physical problems need the 1st two balance
equations
• If heat not important, 3rd equation is ignored for flows in
soils
12/11/2023 37
 Continuity Equation
e
n
1 e
Vv
e
Vs

P vx

x1
x1+vxΔt

12/11/2023 38
12/11/2023 39
 y
H G

C
D

x
E F

A B
z

12/11/2023 40
12/11/2023 41
12/11/2023 42
12/11/2023 43
 Darcy’s Law (Conservation of momentum of
fluid flow)

FD is drag force of soil

skeleton on flowing
water

FD

12/11/2023 44
12/11/2023 45
12/11/2023 46
12/11/2023 47
 Permeability (hydraulic conductivity similar
concepts as thermal or electrical conductivity)

12/11/2023 48
 Permeability

12/11/2023 49
 Permeability
Clay Silt Sand Gravel Cobble
Fine Medium Coarse Fine Medium Coarse Fine Medium Coarse
<0.002
mm 0.002 0.006 0.02 0.06 0.2 0.6 2 6 20 >60

<10-9
m/s 10-8 10-7 10-6 10-5 10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1 1 >1 m/s

50
12/11/2023 51
 Measurements of Permeability
• Laboratory Methods
– Constant head test
– Falling head test
– Hydraulic cell Test
• Field Methods
– Steady state field pumping tests
– Falling head bore hole tests
– Rapid test

12/11/2023 52
 Constant head permeameter
Steady state test

Flow rate q=Q/t

Hydraulic gradient i=h/l
Darcy’s law: v=ki or q=vA = kiA

12/11/2023 53
 Example 1 – Constant head test

Temperature correction due to

effect on viscosity of water η,
which increase with higher
temperature
w
k K

K=absolute permeability in m2

o
C KT
10 1.299
15 1.133
20 1.000
25 0.906
30 0.808
40 0.670

12/11/2023 54
 Falling head permeameter

12/11/2023 55
 Example 2 – Falling head test

12/11/2023 56
 Hydraulic cell permeameter – vertical k

Steady state is assumed when

inflow and outflow < 10% difference

12/11/2023 57
 Example 3 – Hydraulic cell test

12/11/2023 58
PLAXIS MODEL OF CONSTANT HEAD TEST (data of previous slide)

H=75 mm

Sample is 75mm thk and

250mm in diam
K=6E-6 mm/s

Closed Flow Boundary

H=650+75=725mm Datum

V=ki = 6E-6 * 650/75

=5.2E-5 mm/s
Flow Rate = 5.2E-5 * PI*125^2
=2.55 mm3/s at 20 deg C
=2.55/1.1 = 2.39 mm3/s at 15 deg C

59
Hydraulic cell permeameter – horizontal k
Steady state is assumed when
inflow and outflow < 10% difference
Theory – see pumping test

60
 Field Permeability Steady State Pumping Tests in
Confined Aquifer

Confined aquifer: i=dh/dr and A=2πrD

Pumping rate low enough to keep drawdown above top of acquifer
61
 Pumping Test in Confined Aquifer

12/11/2023 62
 Example 4 – Pumping Test in Confined Aquifer

12/11/2023 63
 PLAXIS MODEL OF WELL PUMP TEST (DATA FROM PREVIOUS SLIDE)

H=16.6m
H=12.14m Silt k=2.8E-6 m/s

Sand k=2.8E-4 m/s

DATUM
CLOSED FLOW BDY
Rw=0.5m

Axisymmetric Model
• Dw=1.0m
• Dmodel=100m
• Thk Sand=11.7m
• Thk Silt=7.4m
• GWT=19.1-2.5=16.6m

12/11/2023 64
 PLAXIS MODEL OF WELL PUMP TEST (DATA FROM PREVIOUS SLIDE)

H_loss=0.5m

H=15.05m H=16.11m
Ex4. =15.45m Ex4. =16.18m

H=12.95m
Ex4. =13.03m

12/11/2023 65
 CONFINED ACQUIFER

Ex4. Q=37.4 m3/hr =37.4/3600

=0.011 m3/s

Plaxis Q=2.67E-3 m3/s/rad = 16.7E-3 m3/s

=0.0167 m3/s

12/11/2023 66
 Example 4 – Pumping Test in Confined Aquifer

12/11/2023 67
 Field Permeability Steady State Pumping Tests in
Unconfined Aquifer

Confined aquifer: i=dh/dr and A=2πrD

Pumping rate low enough to keep drawdown above top of acquifer
68
 Field Permeability Steady State Pumping Tests in
Unconfined Aquifer

12/11/2023 69
 Field Permeability Steady State Pumping Tests in Unconfined
Aquifer

12/11/2023 70
 Example 5 Pumping Tests in Unconfined Aquifer

12/11/2023 71
 PLAXIS MODEL OF WELL PUMP TEST (UNCONFINED ACQUIFER)

H=5.86m H=9.5m
Datum
CLOSED FLOW BDY

Rw=0.1m

H=6.97m H=8.34m H=8.83m

Cf EX=6.56m Cf EX=8.54m Cf EX=9.02m

Head Loss =6.97-5.86=1.11m

Sand Input k=3.47E-4 m/s

12/11/2023 72
 UNCONFINED ACQUIFER

Ex5. Q=23.4 m3/hr =23.4/3600

=0.0065 m3/s

Plaxis Q=1.009E-3 m3/s/rad = 6.34E-3 m3/s

=0.00634 m3/s

12/11/2023 73
 Example 5 Pumping Tests in Unconfined Aquifer

12/11/2023 74
 Borehole Tests

12/11/2023 75
 Rapid Field Test

76
12/11/2023
 Use of CPTu for Estimating Good Soil
Parameters for FEM Models
• Soil Type Classification
• Basic Soil Parameters
• Permeability
• Stress History (Pc and OCR values)
• Strengths (Su and Phi’)
• Stiffness (Eoed, Go and Eo)
• Shear Wave Velocity (Vs for E/quake Site Classifications)

77
Useful correlations for interpreting CPTu data

78
12/11/2023 79
12/11/2023 80
 BASIC SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS, USING BASIC PLOTS
• SBT INDEX – SOIL BEHAVIOR TYPE INDEX, I (SBT)

12/11/2023 81
 BASIC SOIL CLASSIFICATION
• USING NORMALIZED PLOTS (Qtn, Fr% and Bq values)
• IMPORTANCE OF SBTn INDEX, Ic (often used in Parameters Correlations)

12/11/2023 82
 ESTIMATES FROM Ic:
• SOIL PERMEABILITY
• SPT N60
Permeabilty k (m/s)

10

09

08

07

06
E-

E-

E-

E-

E-
00

00

00

00

00
1.

1.

1.

1.

1.
0

10

DEPTH (m)
15

20

25

30

35

12/11/2023 83
 What is Normalized SBTn? Need special iterative analysis
Thus need good iterative spreadsheet program to do this efficiently
(Software like CPeT-IT)

12/11/2023 84
 ESTIMATED k_SBTn is strongly correlated to Soil Type based on SBTn
values (see Lunne et al., 1997)

12/11/2023 85
86
 ESTIMATES FROM Ic:
• Eoed (CONSTRAINED MODULUS)
• Go (Shear Modulus at small strain corrs to Eo for HSS Model)
• Su (Undrained Shear Strengths depends on Nkt used)
• Su/Po (Undrained Strength ratio for Clay soils)
• OCR (1D – Pc/Po)

12/11/2023 87
 Use Excel to replot Kv and OCR values

Permeabilty k (m/s)
OCR

10

09

08

07

06
0 1 2 3 4 5

E-

E-

E-

E-

E-
0

00

00

00

00

00
1.

1.

1.

1.

1.
0

5
5

10
10

DEPTH (m)
15

DEPTH (m)
15

20
20

25
25

30
30

35
35

12/11/2023 88
 ESTIMATES FOR Ic:
• Vs (Shear Wave Velocity for BC3 Site Classification)
• Ko (Insitu Earth Pressure at Rest)
• Phi’ (Effective (Drained) Friction Angle)

12/11/2023 89