Pore-scale permeability estimation of undisturbed granite residual soil: A comparison study by different methods

Que, Yun; Chen, Xian; Jiang, Zhenliang; Cai, Peichen; Xue, Bin; Xie, Xiudong

doi:10.1007/s11368-024-03745-6

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The test site was selected from a densely vegetated GRS slope in the northwest of Fuzhou, China. The surface layer of the slope in the test area contains weeds and the slope is gentle, as shown in Figure 1, and a more detail description can be found in the literature [35]. The schematic diagram of the undisturbed soil sampling process.…”

Section: Undisturbed Soil Sampling and Ct Scanningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Representative slices of X-ray CT images of the soil samples are illustrated in Figure 2. The scanning parameters were set as follows: the working voltage was 450 kV, the current was 63 mA, and the scanning resolution was 0.15 mm [35].…”

Section: Undisturbed Soil Sampling and Ct Scanningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The intricate internal pore architecture of natural soils, exemplified by granite residual soil (GRS) prevalent in the southeast coastal region of China, is subject to a multitude of influences [35]. These soils experience significant alterations owing to factors such as the intrusion of vegetation roots, the formation of animal burrows, and the cyclic impact of moisture variations, among others, causing the generation of macro-pores and sensitivity to the disturbance [35,36]. Therefore, it is difficult to accurately describe the pore characteristics of the interior of the GRS using traditional destructive experimental tests.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Simulating Two-Phase Seepage in Undisturbed Soil Based on Lattice Boltzmann Method and X-ray Computed Tomography Images

Jiang,

Lin,

Chen

et al. 2024

Sensors

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The two-phase seepage fluid (i.e., air and water) behaviors in undisturbed granite residual soil (U-GRS) have not been comprehensively studied due to a lack of accurate and representative models of its internal pore structure. By leveraging X-ray computed tomography (CT) along with the lattice Boltzmann method (LBM) enhanced by the Shan–Chen model, this study simulates the impact of internal pore characteristics of U-GRS on the water–gas two-phase seepage flow behaviors. Our findings reveal that the fluid demonstrates a preference for larger and straighter channels for seepage, and as seepage progresses, the volume fraction of the water/gas phases exhibits an initial increase/decrease trend, eventually stabilizing. The results show the dependence of two-phase seepage velocity on porosity, while the local seepage velocity is influenced by the distribution and complexity of the pore structure. This emphasizes the need to consider pore distribution and connectivity when studying two-phase flow in undisturbed soil. It is observed that the residual gas phase persists within the pore space, primarily localized at the pore margins and dead spaces. Furthermore, the study identifies that hydrophobic walls repel adjacent fluids, thereby accelerating fluid movement, whereas hydrophilic walls attract fluids, inducing a viscous effect that decelerates fluid flow. Consequently, the two-phase flow rate is found to increase with then-enhanced hydrophobicity. The apex of the water-phase volume fraction is observed under hydrophobic wall conditions, reaching up to 96.40%, with the residual gas-phase constituting 3.60%. The hydrophilic wall retains more residual gas-phase volume fraction than the neutral wall, followed by the hydrophobic wall. Conclusively, the investigations using X-ray CT and LBM demonstrate that the pore structure characteristics and the wettability of the pore walls significantly influence the two-phase seepage process.

show abstract

Section: Undisturbed Soil Sampling and Ct Scanningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Undisturbed Soil Sampling and Ct Scanningmentioning

confidence: 99%