Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:02:50.605Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The physical significance of the shrinkage coefficient of clays and soils

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

F. Hardy
F. Hardy
Affiliation:
Imperial Department of Agriculture in the British West Indies.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. The investigation described is a continuation of the researches of certain workers in the British West Indies on the significance of the shrinkage coefficient of clays and soils. A brief outline of these researches and their results is given.

2. Tempany's hypothesis, which explains shrinkage as due to contraction consequent on loss of water by evaporation from the saturated gel-skeleton that ramifies throughout a mass of soil at its point of maximum plasticity, is criticised on the grounds that it does not completely fit the facts. In particular, it fails to account for the abnormally low shrinkage coefficients exhibited by lateritic soils, notably the red upland soil of Barbados. Mason explained this abnormality by assuming that kneading does not entirely destroy aggregation of soil particles, which is especially well marked in the Barbados red soil. The writer demonstrated, however, that soils of similar colloid content, and belonging to one and the same geological type, but exhibiting different degrees of aggregation, possess similar shrinkage coefficients. A different hypothesis to explain soil shrinkage was therefore sought.

3. The hypothesis finally accepted is based on the belief that colloidal gels possess a reticulate structure. At the point of saturation, a hydrogel probably contains water in two phases. The first of these is adsorbed in the walls of the gel; it has been shown by Wilsdon, in the case of soil colloids, to represent the moisture content at the hygroscopic coefficient stage. The second phase fills the vesicles of the gel, and is a crystalline phase.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , July 1923 , pp. 243 - 264
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1923

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

(1) If a be the linear coefficient, and C the cubical coefficient of shrinkage, thenGoogle Scholar
(2)See Auchinleck, . West Ind. Bul. 1912, 12, 50.Google Scholar
(3)West Ind. Bul., footnote by Tempany.Google Scholar
(3a)West Ind. Bul. pp. 54, 55.Google Scholar
(4)Journ. Agric. Sci. 1917, 8, 312.Google Scholar
(5)West Ind. Bul. 1922, 19, 125.Google Scholar
(6)Hardy, F.West Ind. Bul. 1922, 19, 189.Google Scholar
(7)Tempany, . West Ind. Bul. 1915, 15, 69.Google Scholar
(8)Harrison, and Jukes-Browne, . Geol. of Barbados. Expln. of map, 1890.Google Scholar
(9)Bul. Mus. Roy. Hist. Nat. Belg. 1884, 3, 273. See Spencer, Quart. J. Geol. Soc. London, 1901, 57, 490, and Brown, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 1913, p. 584.Google Scholar
(10)Hardy, F.West Ind. Bul. 1921, 19, 86.Google Scholar
(11)Harrison, and Jukes-Browne, . Quart. J. Geol. Soc. London, 1891, 47, 197, Pt I.Google Scholar
(12)Harrison, . Quart. J. Geol. Soc. London 1920, 75, 158, and West Ind. Bul. 1920, 18, 77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(13)See Section 3, Discussion.Google Scholar
(14)See Tempany's shrinkage curves. Journ. Agric. Sci. 1917, 8, 320.Google Scholar
(15) The origin of red soils has been investigated by Manasse in Sienna (C.A. 1917, 11, 1510), who proved that a large part of the Al2O3, almost all the Fe2O3, and a small proportion of the SiO2 are present as colloidal material. According to Wiegner (C.A. 1917, 11, 1707) tropical red soils contain colloidal Al2O3 and Fe2O3, whereas tropical yellow soils contain colloidal Al2O3 and SiO2 chiefly. The Dominica red soil (D2) would thus appear to be related to the first group, and the Barbados orange-red soil to the second. Highly dispersed Fe2O3, however, is known to possess a yellow colour, whilst the less-highly dispersed substance has a deep red tint. (See Weiser, , C.A. 1920, 14, 2738; Yoe, C.A. 1921, 15, 2026 and Bradmeld, J. Amer. Chem. Soc. 1922, p. 965.)Google Scholar
(15a) Comber's experiments (Journ. Agric. Sci. 1920, 10, 425 and Journ. Agric. Sci. 1921, 11, 450), identify the major colloidal component of siliceous soils as SiO2. His quantitative test for clay “fatness” (Journ. Soc. Chem. Ind. 1922, 41, 77), further supports this conclusion.Google Scholar
(16)Rohland, . See Searle, Third. Kept. Colloid. Chem. London, Dept. Sci. and Indus. Res. 1920, p. 133. Also Atterburg, Int. Mitt. Bodenk. 1911, p. 37.Google Scholar
(17)Reis, . Clays, 1908, p. 119.Google Scholar
(18)Bingham, . Fluidity and Plasticity, 1922, Chap. VIII.Google Scholar
(19)Wilson, R. E. and Hall, . Journ. Indus. Engin. Chem. 1922, 14, 1120. Also, Bingham, Bruce and Wolbach. Journ. Indus. Engin. Chem. p. 1014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(20) See Bancroft, . Applied Colloid Chem. 1921, pp. 154–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(21)Trouton, . Proc. Roy. Soc. A, 1905, 77, 292.Google Scholar
(22)Journ. Agric. Sci. 1920, 10, 425.Google Scholar
(23)Journ. Agric. Sci. 1921, 11, 450.Google Scholar
(24)Searle, . Third Kept. Colloid Chem. 1920, p. 126.Google Scholar
(25) See, for example, Spurrier, , Journ. Amer. Ceram. Soc. 1918, 1, 710. Also, Journ. Amer. Ceram. Soc. 1922, 5, 34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(26) For example, Ashley, , U.S. Geol. Survey, Bul. 388, 1909.Google Scholar
(27)Mem. Dept. Ag. India, Ag. Res. Inst. Pusa, Chem. Ser. 6, 3, 03, 1921.Google Scholar
(27a) The effect on plasticity of adding solutes to clays has been extensively investigated by ceramists. The main facts are summarised by Searle (Third Rept. Colloid Chem. 1920, pp. 125, 126, etc.). If a plastic clay owes its properties to interactions between film tension, imbibition force, and osmotic pressure, the addition of a solute may bring about an increase or a decrease in plasticity in accordance with the specific effects which the added substance exerts on these factors. Solutes already present in a clay must not be left out of account, nor should one ignore the possibility of peptisation which might lead to partial disintegration of the colloid, nor the specific action which hydrogen-ion is believed to exert in swelling phenomena. (See Smith, Journ. Amer. Chem. Soc. 1921, 43, 1350; Henderson, Journ. Amer. Chem. Soc. 1918, 40, 858; the work of Procter, Fischer, Lloyd, etc., on the relation between swelling and reaction in proteins, which are ampholytes.) O. Arrhenius (Journ. Amer. Chem. Soc. 1922. 44, 521), has shown that certain clays are also amphoteric; nevertheless, reaction appears not markedly to influence the mobility factor in plasticity (Wilson and Hall, Journ. Indus. Engin. Chem. 1922, 14 1120).Google Scholar
(28)West Ind. Bul. 1922, 19, 128.Google Scholar
(29)Bayliss, . Second Rept. Colloid Chem. 1918, p. 117.Google Scholar
(30)Procter, . First Rept. Colloid Chem. 1917, p. 5.Google Scholar
(31) Quoted by Bayliss, , Principles of Gen. Physiol. 1920, p. 101. See also Bartell and Sims, Journ. Amer. Chem. Soc. 1922, 44, 289, for a general discussion of swelling.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(32)Bayliss, . Principles of Gen. Physiol. p. 100.Google Scholar
(33) Experiments with Laminaria.Google Scholar
(34) Cited by Wilson, , Third Rept. Colloid Chem. 1920, p. 59. Patrick and Grimm (Journ. Amer. Chem. Soc. 1921, 43, 2144), have recently determined the heat of swelling of silica hydrogel in water.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(35) Rept. of Discussion by Faraday Soc. and Phys. Soc. London, Oct. 1920. Dept. Sci. Indus. Res. Section 11, 1921.Google Scholar
(36)Dept. Sci. Indus. Res. p. 38, Hatschek.Google Scholar
(37)Dept. Sci. Indus. Res. p. 51. See also Harrison, Dept. Sci. Indus. Res. p. 57, and Zsigmondy, Z. Physk. Chem. 1921, 98, 14. See C.A. 1921, 15, 2571.Google Scholar
(38) See Barratt, , Discussion Rept. p. 50, and Anderson, Discussion Rept. p. 56. Also Bogue, Journ. Amer. Chem. Soc. 1922, 44, 1343, for a survey of the theories of the structure of elastic gels.Google Scholar
(39)Zsigmondy, . Discussion Report, p. 51. Also Bradford, Discussion Report p. 45.Google Scholar
(40) Babratt, loc. cit. See also Barratt, , Chem. Age. 1920, 3, 473.Google Scholar
(41)Discussion Rept. p. 58.Google Scholar
(42) See Rtdeal, . Discussion Rept. p. 55.Google Scholar
(43)Journ. Amer. Chem. Soc. 1921, 43, 1844.Google Scholar
(44)Soil Sci. 1921, 12, 209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(45) See Smith, , Journ. Amer. Chem. Soc. 1921, 43, 1350, who explains the swelling of gelatine as a result of osmosis. Also Tolman and Stearn, Journ. Amer. Chem. Soc. 1913, 35, 317; and 1918, 40, 264. An account of the relation between osmotic pressure and swelling in colloidal gels is given by Wo. Ostwald, Handbook of Colloid Chem. 1918, p. 261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(46) The researches of Parker (Soil Sci. 1921, 12, 209; and Soil Sci. 1922, 13, 43) lend some support to this view.Google Scholar
(47)Bogue, (Journ. Amer. Chem. Soc. 1922, 44, 1343) has suggested that gelatine gels contain water in two distinct phases. According to Von Schroeder (see Bancroft, Applied Colloid Chem. p. 75) the ratio between gel water and vesicular water in a fully swollen gelatine gel is approximately 1 to 1·5. The total bound water which dry gelatine can absorb is about seven or eight times its own volume (Smith, Journ. Amer. Chem. Soc. 1921, 43, 1350), whereas soil colloids probably absorb less than their own volume of water.Google Scholar
(48)Geller, . Journ. Amer. Ceram. Soc. 1921, 4, 282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(49) Van Bemmelen, cited by Bancroft, , Applied Colloid Chem. pp. 246–249, and by Zsigmondy, Chem. of Colloids, 1917, pp. 142–152.Google Scholar
(50)Cornell Univ. Ag. Exp. Sta. Mem. 21, 1919, p. 501. Miller (Chem. Met. Engin. 1920, 23; C.A. 1921, 15, 969), gives the figure 41 per cent, as the approximate amount of water adsorbed as vapour by colloidal silica.Google Scholar
(51)Bancroft, . Op. cit. p. 243.Google Scholar
(52)Bancroft, . Op. cit. p. 249.Google Scholar
(53) In view of the possibility of porosity in oven-dried blocks of kneaded clay being partly due to the emptying of the vesicles of the semi-rigid colloid structure during loss of water, the relationship between pore space and shrinkage deduced by Tempany (Journ. Agric. Sci. 1917, 7, 312, Pt II) would appear to be irrelevant, or to require a different explanation.Google Scholar
(54)Beaumont, . Cornell Univ. Mem. 21, 1919, pp. 505–507.Google Scholar
(55)Moore, , Fry, and Middleton, . Journ. Ind. Engin. Chem. 1921, 13, 527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(56) In a letter to the writer (01 1922) Dr Tempany admits difficulty in correlating shrinkage coefficient with colloid content as determined by degree of adsorption of ammonium-ion, in certain Mauritius soils. He assigns the difficulty to a “peculiarity in these soils,” but does not state their geological relationships, beyond indicating that they contain “very large quantities of easily-solubleiron.” The soils thus resemble the red lateritic soils examined by the writer.Google Scholar
(57)Journ. Amer. Chem. Soc. 1922, 44, 373.Google Scholar
(58) See Bul. Geol. Soc. Amer. 1920, 31, 401; and Rept. of Committee controlling researches on the geology of sediments, U.S. Geol. Survey, Appendix C, Apr. 1922.Google Scholar
(59)Hatschek, . Introd. to Phys. and Chem. of Colloids, 1922, p. 130.Google Scholar