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 Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Fritton, D. D. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Fritton, D. D. Agricola Articles by Fritton, D. D. Related Collections Structure and Properties Soil Physics Soil Compaction

Fitting Uniaxial Soil Compression Using Initial Bulk Density, Water Content, and Matric Potential

Dep. of Crop and Soil Sciences, Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, PA 16802

View larger version (28K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Bulk density of seven Bucks soil samples from the 0.76- to 1.22-m depth plotted as a function of the applied stress. The legend indicates the initial water content (kg kg–1) for each soil sample. Symbols represent experimental data. The smooth lines are nonlinear regression curves based on Eq. [1] best fit separately (see Table 1 for values of the input data and coefficients) to each individual soil sample.

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Plot of the coefficient n versus the coefficient m (data points) from Eq. [1]. The smooth curve is the best fit (Eq. [8]) for the 120 soil samples. The inset shows greater detail for 0.02 < m < 0.22. The four circled points belong to the soil sample mixture containing one part Hagerstown and four parts sand (1 Hagerstown/4 sand) and are discussed in the text.

View larger version (35K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Bulk density of three Glenelg soil samples from the 0.00- to 0.30-m depth plotted as a function of the applied stress. The data are for an undisturbed core sample (stars) and for two disturbed samples at different initial water contents (triangles and squares). See Table 1 and legends for initial conditions and additional information. The smooth lines result from nonlinear fits based on (a) Eq. [5], (b) Eq. [3] with n1 and n2 as in Eq. [8], (c) Eq. [3] with optimized n1 and n2 values, and (d) Eq. [1]. Optimized values for fits in (a), (b), and (d) are in Table 3, Table 2, and Table 1, respectively, and for (c) are b = –1.43, c = –1.26, cc = 0.00121, f = 0.753, and n2 = 0.165, with all other coefficients set to zero.