Some fall-cone tests

Wood, D. M.

doi:10.1680/geot.1985.35.1.64

Cited by 116 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The deduced K value of 0·47 was significantly less than the value of 0·85 (Wood, 1985) generally used for remoulded inorganic fine-grained soil. This was explained by the significantly higher strain rate dependence of the alum WTR compared with most inorganic soils (see 'High strain rate dependence' section).…”

Section: Geotechnical Research Volume 3 Issuementioning

confidence: 55%

Geotechnics of municipal sludges and residues for landfilling

O’Kelly

2016

Geotechnical Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a comprehensive review of reported field and laboratory investigations and theoretical work concerning the geotechnical behaviour/properties of water treatment residue (WTR), biosolids and sewage sludge materials, which are by-products of municipal water and wastewater treatment processes. After describing the backgrounds to the generation of these materials and various disposal options (with a focus on landfilling), including associated geotechnical issues, their physical, geotechnical index, compaction, undrained strength and effective-stress strength properties are described, including the effects of oxidation, biodegradation and viscous gellike pore fluid for biosolids/sewage sludge material. Characteristic compressibility, consolidation and permeability behaviour/properties are also presented for these materials and linked with microstructure and the chemicals added during the treatment processes. The paper then focuses on various geotechnical issues pertinent to landfill (monofill) disposal of these materials, including undrained strength requirements, design strength, on-site and laboratory strength measurements and water content-strength correlations. Since such correlations are material specific, with the geotechnical properties of biosolids, sewage sludge and WTR materials varying between water/wastewater treatment plants, they cannot be applied more widely with confidence. Alternative approaches to predicting undrained strength are described, including a power-law strength relationship with water content, which can be applied more generally. , 2008a). The type and amount of chemicals added depends on the nature of the source water, but primarily on its turbidity and hardness. The coagulants cause the colloidal particles present to aggregate into flocs (with the polyelectrolyte also acting as a binding agent to increase their inherent shear strength) that are more readily separated out by settling processes, removing not only the impurities but also the chemical additives. NotationThe residue so formed is categorised as aluminium sulfate (alum) or iron WTR material depending on the coagulant salt, with the former being the most widely used coagulant in the water treatment industry. Lime-softening sludge, composed of typically 80-95 wt% calcite (Raghu and Hsieh, 1986), is the result of softening hard water before its distribution as drinking water.Biosolids and sewage sludge materials are highly organic residue by-products of municipal waste water treatment, with the organic fraction originating principally from human faeces (primary sludge) and bacterial biomass (secondary sludge) and the inorganic fraction derived from materials such as soil, sediment and inorganic residuals (Haynes et al., 2009). According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2015), sewage sludge refers to the solids separated out during the treatment processes, whereas biosolids refers to treated sewage sludge material that meets regulatory pollutant-and pathogen-control requirements for land applica...

show abstract

Section: Geotechnical Research Volume 3 Issuementioning

confidence: 55%

Geotechnics of municipal sludges and residues for landfilling

O’Kelly

2016

Geotechnical Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The effect of cone angle on the K factor from equation (1) (and by definition the computed undrained shear strength) has been studied by various researchers (e.g. Houlsby, 1982;Wood, 1985;Brown & Huxley, 1996).…”

Section: Liquid Limitmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of fall cones to determine Atterberg limits: a review

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews the percussion-cup liquid limit, thread-rolling plastic limit (PL) and various fall-cone and other approaches employed for consistency limit determinations on fine-grained soil, highlighting their use and misuse for soil classification purposes and in existing correlations. As the PL does not correspond to a unique value of remoulded undrained shear strength, there is no scientific reason why PL measurements obtained using the thread-rolling and shear-strength-based fall-cone or extrusion methods should coincide. Various correlations are established relating liquid limit values deduced using the percussion-cup and fall-cone approaches. The significance of differences in the strain-rate dependency on the mobilised fall-cone shear strength is reviewed. The paper concludes with recommendations on the standardisation of international codes and the wider use of the fall-cone approach for soft to medium-stiff clays in establishing the strength variability with changing water content and further index parameters.

show abstract

“…Fall cone factor is a constant that is influenced by cone geometry, cone roughness, surrounding soil or sediment, and dynamic effects (Houlsby, 1982;Wood, 1985;Koumoto and Houlsby, 2001;Mahajan and Budhu, 2009). In empirical fall cone experi-ments performed with cones of different angles, Wood (1985) showed that the average cone factor value for the 30° cone is K = 0.85.…”

Section: Fall Cone Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In empirical fall cone experi-ments performed with cones of different angles, Wood (1985) showed that the average cone factor value for the 30° cone is K = 0.85. Koumoto and Houlsby (2001) suggested that undrained shear strength in the fall cone test is dynamic shear strength, which is higher than static undrained shear strength because of the higher strain rates in the fall cone test.…”

Section: Fall Cone Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methods

2011

Proceedings of the IODP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Some fall-cone tests

Cited by 116 publications

References 0 publications

Geotechnics of municipal sludges and residues for landfilling

Geotechnics of municipal sludges and residues for landfilling

Use of fall cones to determine Atterberg limits: a review

Methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About