LAB #6: HYDRAULIC

CONDUCTIVITY
Heather Tat

Professor Alexandra Wayllace

Section C, Group 1

Heather Tat
February 28, 2017
Executive Summary
On February 14, 2017, a sample of soil underwent the constant head test and falling head test to determine
the soil’s hydraulic conductivity. The tests were conducted according to ASTM standard D2434.
For the constant head test, water is allowed to move through an already saturated soil specimen under a
stable head condition while determining and recording the time required for a certain quantity of water to
pass through the specimen. Through this test method, the soil was found to have a hydraulic conductivity
of ***
For the falling head test, water is allowed to move through the same already-saturated soil specimen from
the constant head test. The water is allowed to move under a falling head condition, while the time
required for a certain quantity of water to pass through the soil sample is measured and recorded. Through
this test method, the soil was found to have a hydraulic conductivity of ****.

Introduction & Background

The purpose of this laboratory is to utilize both constant and falling head tests to assess the hydraulic
conductivity, k, of a given soil sample. The constant, k, is known also as the coefficient of permeability. It
indicates the ease of which water will flow through a given soil. The greater the value of k, the greater the
flow will be for a given area and gradient. The constant head test is most suitable for granular soils.
Although the falling head test can be used for both fine grained and coarse grained soils, it is best for fine
grained soils.
The hydraulic conductivity is a critical component of Darcy’s law, where q= kiA. The variable q is the
flow rate of water, A is the cross sectional area, and i is the gradient (Liu 271). There are multiple factors
that affect the permeability of a soil, including the viscosity of its water, the size and shape of the soil
particles, the degree of saturation, and the void ratio. For soils, the permeability is inversely proportional
to the soil density and it is directly proportional to void ratio.
Applications of the permeability constant and Darcy’s law are widespread in the field of engineering.
Knowledge of a soil’s permeability is critical for any engineering project where flow of water through the
soil is a matter of concern. This includes seepage through or under a dam, water in soil under buildings,
and drainage from subgrades or backfills.

Materials

 Timer  Permeability Apparatus: Large cylinder

 Balance (±0.01g) (3 in. inner diameter) w/ adjustable
 Soil Sample (ASTM Method D422) valves and rubber plug
 2 Coarse Mesh Circles  Cylinder Base
 2 Fine Mesh Circles  Container for drainage
 Thermometer (±1˚F or 0.5˚C)  Two tightening clamps
 Water Basin  Screwdriver
 Cylinder to hold soil sample (3 in. inner  Water
diameter)
Methods
According to ASTM Standard D2434
Measuring Hydraulic Conductivity Using the Constant Head Test
A previously prepared sample of soil is prepared according to ASTM Standard D422. Place the fine mesh
circle on top of a coarse mesh circle. Place the two at the bottom of the cylinder base. Attach the soil
sample cylinder. On top of the soil sample cylinder, place the coarse circle mesh and then the fine circle
mesh. Use a rubber tightening clamp and a screwdriver to tighten the connection between the cylinder and
the base. Then attach the large cylinder with adjustable valves on top of the soil cylinder. Again, use a
rubber tightening clamp and a screwdriver to tighten the connection between the soil cylinder and the
large cylinder. Ensure all cylinders are level and check connections to ensure that there are no areas
susceptible to leaks. Place the apparatus on top of a container for drainage. Bring the apparatus to a sink
and open all valves. Fill the large cylinder with water and allow for all the water to drain through the soil
to ensure that the soil is fully saturated. Once all the water has drained, close the top valve with a rubber
stopper. Set the straw valve in the large cylinder to a known height. Record the constant head difference
between the bottom tip of the straw valve to the surface of the water. Open the valve for four different
trials. Use these four time intervals (in seconds) for each of the four trials: 39.1, 40.9, 52.0, 68.0. For each
trial record the initial and final head level in cm and the length above the specimen container (y1) in cm.

Measuring Hydraulic Conductivity Using the Falling Head Test

Using the same apparatus from the constant head test. Close the valves and refill the large cylinder with
water. Check the cylinders are level and check connections to ensure that there are no areas susceptible to
leaks. Pull the straw valve until it is above the water level. Record the initial head height. Open the valve
on the large cylinder and allow for the water to flow for 38.1 seconds. Close the valve and record the final
head value. Repeat this for a second trial, except allow the water to flow for 43.3 seconds.

Experimental Set-Up

Equations

[1] 𝑞 = 𝑘𝑖𝐴
[2] 𝑣 = 𝑘𝑖
[3] 𝑞 = 𝑄/𝑡
∆ℎ ℎ𝑝𝐴 +𝐿
[4] 𝑖= 𝐿
=( 𝐿
)
𝑄𝐿 𝑎𝐿 ℎ
[5] 𝑘 = 𝐴𝑡ℎ = 𝑘(𝑓𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑑) = ln(ℎ1 )
𝐴𝑡 2
Where:
q= flow rate of water T= time required for quantity Q to be
A=cross sectional area of soil discharged during test, s
i=imposed gradient(slope) h=head during test, cm
v=discharge velocity a=cross sectional area of standpipe, cm2
Q=quantity 9volume) of water discharged k=coefficient of permeability, cm/s
during test, cm3 h1= initial hydraulic head, cm
L= length between manometer outlets, cm h2= final hydraulic head, cm

Data/Results
Soil Name: LLP1
Table 1: Experiment Characteristics/Measurements
Total Density of
Soil Sample, ρ 1.32
(g/cc)
Diameter of the
specimen, Ds 7.62
(cm)
Diameter of the
Inner Tube, Di 0.95
(cm)
Inner Diameter
of Reservoir,Dr 7.55
(cm)
Area of the Soil,
45.60
As (cm2)
Area of the
Reservoir, Ar 44.06
(cm2)
Length of the
Specimen, L 6.4
(cm)

Table 2: Constant Head Test

Flow Rate, q

Specimen, L
Discharged,
Head, hlevel,o

y, kch (cm/s)
Test Time, t

Conductivit
Velosity, vD
Final Head,

change, ∆h

Quantity of

Container,

Gradient, i
hlevel,f (cm)

Discharge
Specimen

Hydarulic

Hydarulic
Length of
(unitless)
Original

Q (cm3)

Length
(cm3/s)

y1 (cm)
Height

(cm/s)
above
water
Trial
(cm)

(cm)

(cm)

the
(s)

39. 2.81 0.0639 0.01066

1 42.50 40.00 38.37 110.15 30.8 6.4 5.995
1 7 4 5

40. 2.15 0.0489 0.00914

2 33.50 31.50 34.22 88.12 26.6 6.4 5.347
9 5 0 5
 1.69 0.0384 0.00831
3 28.50 26.50 29.62 88.12 52 22.0 6.4 4.628
5 6 0

1.29 0.0294 0.00835

4 24.50 22.50 22.52 88.12 68 14.9 6.4 3.519
6 1 8

Figure 1: Constant Head Test Graph

Constant Head Test y = 0.0136x - 0.0209

R² = 0.9422
0.07000

0.06000
Discharge Velocity, v (cm/s)

0.05000

0.04000

0.03000

0.02000

0.01000

0.00000
0.000 1.000 2.000 3.000 4.000 5.000 6.000 7.000
Hydraulic Gradient, i

Table 3: Falling Head Test

Ratio of viscosity, η/η20
temperature, kfh (cm/s)
Original Head, h1 (cm)

Permeability at room

Permeabiltiy at 20°C,

Permeability at 20°C,
Temperature, T (°C)
Final Head, h2 (cm)

k@20 (cm/s)

k@20 (cm/s)
Time, t (s)

(unitless)
Trial

1 20 18 38.1 20 0.017080 1 0.017080

0.017468
2 17 15 43.3 20 0.017855 1 0.017855

Table 4: Final Results

Constant Head Test Falling Head Test

Hydraulic Hydraulic
Conductivity 0.00912 cm/s Conductivity 0.0175 cm/s
Standard Deviation: 0.00593
Discussion
As outlined in ASTM D2434, the standard yielded hydraulic conductivities of the same soil samples from
two different tests: the constant head test and the falling head test. The data that resulted from this
laboratory was found to be reasonable, with the results being fairly precise. Because the actual hydraulic
conductivity of the soil was not given, it cannot be determined for sure if the results were accurate.
Despite high precision, multiple sources of error could have skewed the data and lead some of the values
to be less accurate. A major error that occurred was the delay in starting and ending the timer whilst
conducting both the constant and falling head test. The delay may have affected the flow rate calculations,
and thus the hydraulic conductivity calculations. In the falling head test, there was difficulty in retaining
the head level constant once the valve on the large cylinder was closed. Furthermore, because only the
water ran through the soil completely once during the constant head test, not all of the soil may have been
completely saturated. This would have allowed for the water to fall through the soil specimen at a faster
rate than intended. To improve this in future labs, the soil should have water run through at least twice to
ensure complete saturation. Despite these sources of error, the results were still fairly precise.
Conclusion

The soil sample was found to have a hydraulic conductivity of 0.00912 cm/s with the constant head
test and 0.0175 cm/s with the falling head test. The standard deviation of the tests is 0.00593
which indicates a higher precision between the two. Despite possible errors that may have
skewed the data slightly, the findings are reasonably reliable.
Through taking advantage of both the constant and falling head test in calculating a soil’s
hydraulic conductivity, one gains a greater understanding of Darcy’s law in practice, as well as
how permeability affects fluid movement in soil. Utilizing the concept of permeability is
significant in real-world engineering applications such as seepage and drainage around civil
structures. By taking into account the type of soil present in the ground and its hydraulic
conductivity, engineers can best design arrangements that prevent structural deformation or
failure.

References

Liu C, Evett J B. 2009. Permeability Test for Granular Soils (Constant-head Method). Soil
Properties: Testing, Measurement, and Evaluation. 6th Ed: 251-264.

Liu C, Evett J B. 2009. Permeability Test for Fine-Grained and Granular Soils (Falling-Head
Method). Soil Properties: Testing, Measurement, and Evaluation. 6th Ed: 271-278.