HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (3) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Zaher, H. Articles by Ouaki, B. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Zaher, H. Articles by Ouaki, B. Agricola Articles by Zaher, H. Articles by Ouaki, B. Related Collections Structure and Properties Soil Physics Pore-Scale Modeling Macroporous/Aggregated Media

Modeling Aggregate Internal Pressure Evolution following Immersion to Quantify Mechanisms of Structural Stability

^a Division de l'Organisation, des Méthodes et de la Gestion Informatique Ministère de la Pêche Maritime, B.P. 476 Agdal, Rabat, Morocco
^b Dép. des Sols et de Génie Agroalimentaire, Univ. of Laval, QC, Canada G1K 7P4
^c Dép. Génie des Matériaux, Ecole Nationale de l‘Industrie Minérale, B.P. 753 Agdal, Rabat, Morocco

View larger version (21K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Schematic view of the experimental setup to measure internal pressure.

View larger version (57K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Image recorded of individual aggregates in the silty-clay loam soil with (a) no and (b) 24 Mg ha–1 of deinking–secondary sludge applications, or in the clay loam soil with (c) no and (d) 24 Mg ha–1 deinking–secondary sludge application, 3 s after immersion in water.

View larger version (35K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Evolution of the pressure in both soils: (a) silty-clay loam and (b) clay loam, without and with sludge application at different rates.

View larger version (26K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Examples of the best fit lines obtained with Model 1 (air escape) and Model 2 (no air escape) in the silty-clay loam for (a) the control, and for an application of (b) 8, (c) 16, and (d) 24 Mg ha–1 of deinking secondary sludge; (e) application of 18 Mg ha–1 of primary–secondary sludge; (f) represents the 24 Mg ha–1 compost application.

View larger version (26K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Results of the best fit for Model 2, without air escape, as sludge addition increases in the silty-clay loam.

View larger version (33K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Conceptual model of the main factors and properties controlling aggregate stability when an aggregate is suddenly wet. It includes the rate of pressure buildup P(t)], the near saturated hydraulic conductivity (Kns), the potential at the wetting front [hf(t)] and the rate of loss of hydraulic conductivity as water enters the pore space ().

View larger version (23K): [in a new window]   Fig. A1. Evolution of the percentage of air released in the first 8 s following immersion for (a) the silty-clay loam and (b) the clay loam.