Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T07:30:55.371Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Prediction of cation exchange capacity from soil index properties

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 July 2018

Y. Yukselen  and
A. Kaya
Y. Yukselen
Affiliation:
Dokuz Eylul University, Department of Civil Engineering, Kaynaklar Kampus, Buca-Izmir 35160, Turkey
A. Kaya*
Affiliation:
Hawaii Department of Transportation, Materials Testing and Research Branch, 2530 Likelike Highway, Honolulu, Hawaii 9681, USA
*
*E- mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In many areas of geotechnical engineering it is necessary to have an estimate of the cation exchange capacity (CEC) of a soil in order to allow preliminary design estimates. Standard methods of CEC determination are time-consuming and involve several steps (e.g. displacement of the saturating cation requires several washings with alcohol). Therefore, a rapid method of CEC estimation would be very useful. During preliminary site investigations, the soil engineering parameters can be estimated from the considerable number of correlations available in the literature. In this study, relationships between CEC and various other soil engineering properties have been investigated, resulting in a quick method for estimating CEC.

Simple correlations were developed between CEC and specific surface area (SSA), soil organic matter (OM), clay fraction (CF), activity (A), Atterberg limits (liquid (LL), plastic (PL), and shrinkage (SL)), and modified free swell index (MFSI) of the soils. Strong correlations are observed between the CEC values and those for ethylene glycol monoethyl ether (EGME) uptake and methylene blue (MB) titration. However, no significant correlation was found between CEC and N2_SSA. No unique relationship was seen between CEC and CF (r2 <0.5). No relationship was observed between CEC and OM in this study. The best correlation coefficient between the CEC and Atterberg limits exists between CEC and LL (r2 = 0.61). No significant relationship was seen between CEC and PL or SL. The correlation coefficient between CEC and MFSI was 0.65. Multiple linear regression analyses were developed to investigate the contributions of different soil parameters to CEC. These analyses show that EGME_SSA, in combination with LL, accounted for 91% of the variation in CEC. Correlations between CEC and EGME_SSA, MB_SSA and LL appear to be sufficiently good to enable an indication of CEC to be estimated from these parameters.

Keywords

cation exchange capacityspecific surface areaclay fractionorganic matterAtterberg limitsswell index
Type
Research Article
Information
Clay Minerals , Volume 41 , Issue 4 , December 2006 , pp. 827 - 837
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 2006

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

Branauer, S., Emmett, P.H. & Teller, E. (1938) Adsorption of gases in multi-molecular layers. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 60, 309–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cerato, A.B. (2001) Influence of specific surface area on geotechnical characteristics of fine-grained soils. M.Sc. thesis, Massachusetts University, Amherst, USA.Google Scholar
Cerato, A.B. & Lutenegger, A.J. (2002) Determination of surface area of fine-grained soils by the ethylene glycol monoethyl ether (EGME) method. Geotechnical Testing Journal, 25, 1–7.Google Scholar
Chapman, H.D. (1965) Cation exchange capacity. Pp. 891–901 in: Methods of Soil Analyses –Chemical and Microbiological Properties (Black, J.A., editor). Agronomy, 9.Google Scholar
Churchman, G J. & Burke, C M. (1991) Properties of subsoils in relation to various measures of surface area and water content. Journal of Soil Science, 42, 463–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cihacek, L.J. & Bremner, J.M. (1979) A simplified ethylene glycol monoethyl ether procedure for assessment of soil surface area. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 43, 821–822.Google Scholar
Curtin, D. & Smillie GW. (1976) Estimation of components of soil cation exchange capacity from measurements of specific surface and organic matter. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 40, 461–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farrar, D.M. & Coleman, J. (1967) The correlation of surface area with other properties of nineteen British clay soils. Journal of Soil Science, 18, 118–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holtz, R.D. & Kovacs, W.D. (1981) An Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, pp. 34–40.Google Scholar
Kariuki, P.C. & Meer, F.V.D. (2004) A unified swelling potential index for expansive soils. Engineering Geology, 72, 1–8.Google Scholar
Locat, J., Lefebvre G & Ballivy G (1984) Mineralogy, chemistry, and physical properties –interrelation ships of some sensitive clays from eastern Canada. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 21, 530–540.Google Scholar
Manrique, L.A., Jones, C.A. & Dyke, P.T. (1991) Predicting cation exchange capacity from soil physical and chemical properties. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 55, 787–794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nettleton, W.D. & Brasher, B.R. (1983) Correlation of clay minerals and properties of soils in the western United States. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 47, 1032–1036.Google Scholar
Newman, A.C.D. (1983) The specific surface area of soils determined by water sorption. Journal of Soil Science, 34, 23–32.Google Scholar
Ohtsubo, M., Takayama, M. & Egashira, K. (1983) Relationships of consistency limits and activity to some physical and chemical properties of Ariake marine clays. Soils and Foundations, 23, 38–46.Google Scholar
Petersen, L.W., Moldrup, P., Jacobsen, O.H. & Rolston, D.E. (1996) Relations between specific surface area and soil physical and chemical properties. Soil Science, 161, 9–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phelps, G.W. & Harris, D.L. (1968) Specific surface and dry strength by methylene blue adsorption. Ceramic Bulletin, 47, 1146–1150.Google Scholar
Santamarina, J.C., Klein, K.A., Wang, Y.H. & Prencke, E. (2002) Specific surface: determination and relevance. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 39, 233–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sivapullaiah, P.V., Sitharam, T.G. & Rao, K.S.S. (1987) Modified free swell index for clays. Geotechnical Testing Journal, GTJODJ, 10, 80–85.Google Scholar
Smith, C.W., Hadas, A., Dan, J. & Koyumdjisky, H. (1985) Shrinkage and Atterberg limits in relation to other properties of principal soil types in Israel. Geoderma, 35, 47–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tan, K.H. & Dowling, P.S. (1984) Effect of organic matter on CEC due to permanent and variable charges in selected temperate region soils. Geoderma, 32, 89–101.Google Scholar
Thompson, M.L., Zhang, H., Kazemi, M. & Sandor JA. (1989) Contribution of organic matter to cation exchange capacity and specific surface area of fractionated soil materials. Soil Science, 148, 250–257.Google Scholar
Tiller, K.G. & Smith, L.H. (1990) Limitations of EGME retention to estimate the surface areas of soils. Australian Journal of Soil Research, 28, 1–26.Google Scholar
Uehara, G. (1982) Soil Science for the Tropics. Proceedings of the ASCE Geotechnical Engineering Division Specialty Conference. Engineering and Construction in Tropical and Residual Soils, Hawaii, pp. 13–26.Google Scholar
Yílmaz, I. (2006) Indirect estimation of the swelling percent and a new classification of soils depending on liquid limit and cation exchange capacity. Engineering Geology, 85, 295–301.Google Scholar
Yukselen, Y. & Kaya, A. (2006) Comparison of methods for determining specific surface area of soils. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, 132, 931–936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar