Loading…

Probability Distribution of Soil Suction of Engineered Turf Cover and Compacted Clay Cover

It is unlikely to predict the distribution of soil suction in the field deterministically. It is well established that there are various sources of uncertainty in the measurement of matric suction, and the suction measurements in the field are even more critical because of the heterogeneities in the...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:E3S web of conferences 2023-01, Vol.382, p.24002
Main Authors: Alam, Md Jobair Bin, Aggarwal, Maalvika
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2552-159e0f3ae1967fe5e7bc93148425059c5dd46ae166fccdc63ac87a0c8212595c3
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page 24002
container_title E3S web of conferences
container_volume 382
creator Alam, Md Jobair Bin
Aggarwal, Maalvika
description It is unlikely to predict the distribution of soil suction in the field deterministically. It is well established that there are various sources of uncertainty in the measurement of matric suction, and the suction measurements in the field are even more critical because of the heterogeneities in the field conditions. Hence it becomes necessary to probabilistically characterize the suction in the field for enhanced reliability. The objective of this study was to conduct a probabilistic analysis of measured soil suction of two different test landfill covers, compacted clay cover (CC) and engineered turf cover (ETC), under similar meteorological events. The size of the two test landfill covers was 3 m × 3 m (10 ft. × 10 ft.) and 1.2 m (4ft.) in depth. The covers were constructed by excavating the existing subgrade, placing 6-mil plastic sheets, and backfilling the excavated soil, followed by layered compaction. Then the covers were instrumented identically with soil water potential sensors up to specified depths. One of the covers acted as the CC, and the other cover was ETC. In ETC, engineered turf was laid over the compacted soil. The engineered turf consisted of a structured LLDPE geomembrane overlain by synthetic turf (polyethylene fibers tufted through a double layer of woven polypropylene geotextiles). The sensors were connected to an automated data logging system and the collected data were probabilistically analyzed using the R program. There were significant inconsistencies in the descriptive statistical parameters of the measured soil suction at both covers under the same climatic conditions. Soil suction measured in the field ranged between almost 12 to 44 kPa in ETC, while it was in the range of almost 1 to 2020 kPa in the CC. The histogram and quantile-quantile (Q-Q) plot showed the data to be non-normally distributed in the field. A heavy-tailed leptokurtic (Kurtosis=13) distribution of suction was observed in the ETC with substantial outliers. In contrast, the suction distribution in CC was observed skewed to the right containing a thinner tail indicating an almost platykurtic distribution. The distribution of suction in the field under engineered turf was observed to be reasonably consistent with time compared to bare soil under the same meteorological events. The results obtained from this study revealed the engineered turf system to be an effective barrier to inducing changes in soil suction against climatic events.
doi_str_mv 10.1051/e3sconf/202338224002
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_bd6e2f43133941579929436fd2d0a6e8</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_bd6e2f43133941579929436fd2d0a6e8</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>2819449270</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2552-159e0f3ae1967fe5e7bc93148425059c5dd46ae166fccdc63ac87a0c8212595c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNUU1Lw0AQDaJgqf0HHgKeY3dnP5I9SqxaKCi0Xrwsm_0oW9Js3SRC_73RVOlp3sx7vJnhJcktRvcYMTy3pNWhcXNAQEgBQBGCi2QCwPMMA4XLM3ydzNp2hxDCwAqK6CT5eIuhUpWvfXdMH33bRV_1nQ9NGly6Dr5O173-6xfN1jfWRmvSTR9dWoYvG1PVmAHtD0p3A1HW6jgSN8mVU3VrZ6c6Td6fFpvyJVu9Pi_Lh1WmgTHIMBMWOaIsFjx3ltm80oJgWlBgiAnNjKF8YDl3WhvNidJFrpAuYHhCME2myXL0NUHt5CH6vYpHGZSXv4MQt1LFzuvayspwC44STIigmOVCgKCEOwMGKW6Lwetu9DrE8NnbtpO70MdmOF9CgQWlAnI0qOio0jG0bbTufytG8icUeQpFnodCvgEsU386</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2819449270</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Probability Distribution of Soil Suction of Engineered Turf Cover and Compacted Clay Cover</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><creator>Alam, Md Jobair Bin ; Aggarwal, Maalvika</creator><contributor>Bardanis, M.</contributor><creatorcontrib>Alam, Md Jobair Bin ; Aggarwal, Maalvika ; Bardanis, M.</creatorcontrib><description>It is unlikely to predict the distribution of soil suction in the field deterministically. It is well established that there are various sources of uncertainty in the measurement of matric suction, and the suction measurements in the field are even more critical because of the heterogeneities in the field conditions. Hence it becomes necessary to probabilistically characterize the suction in the field for enhanced reliability. The objective of this study was to conduct a probabilistic analysis of measured soil suction of two different test landfill covers, compacted clay cover (CC) and engineered turf cover (ETC), under similar meteorological events. The size of the two test landfill covers was 3 m × 3 m (10 ft. × 10 ft.) and 1.2 m (4ft.) in depth. The covers were constructed by excavating the existing subgrade, placing 6-mil plastic sheets, and backfilling the excavated soil, followed by layered compaction. Then the covers were instrumented identically with soil water potential sensors up to specified depths. One of the covers acted as the CC, and the other cover was ETC. In ETC, engineered turf was laid over the compacted soil. The engineered turf consisted of a structured LLDPE geomembrane overlain by synthetic turf (polyethylene fibers tufted through a double layer of woven polypropylene geotextiles). The sensors were connected to an automated data logging system and the collected data were probabilistically analyzed using the R program. There were significant inconsistencies in the descriptive statistical parameters of the measured soil suction at both covers under the same climatic conditions. Soil suction measured in the field ranged between almost 12 to 44 kPa in ETC, while it was in the range of almost 1 to 2020 kPa in the CC. The histogram and quantile-quantile (Q-Q) plot showed the data to be non-normally distributed in the field. A heavy-tailed leptokurtic (Kurtosis=13) distribution of suction was observed in the ETC with substantial outliers. In contrast, the suction distribution in CC was observed skewed to the right containing a thinner tail indicating an almost platykurtic distribution. The distribution of suction in the field under engineered turf was observed to be reasonably consistent with time compared to bare soil under the same meteorological events. The results obtained from this study revealed the engineered turf system to be an effective barrier to inducing changes in soil suction against climatic events.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2267-1242</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 2555-0403</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2267-1242</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1051/e3sconf/202338224002</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Les Ulis: EDP Sciences</publisher><subject>Clay ; Climatic conditions ; Compacted soils ; Data collection ; Data logging ; engineered turf ; Geotechnical fabrics ; instrumentation ; Kurtosis ; Landfill ; landfill cover ; Landfills ; Low density polyethylenes ; Matric suction ; Moisture content ; Outliers (statistics) ; Polypropylene ; Probabilistic analysis ; Probability distribution ; Sensors ; Soil compaction ; Soil conditions ; Soil layers ; Soil suction ; Soil water ; Soil water potential ; Statistical analysis ; Turf ; unsaturated soil ; Waste disposal sites ; Water potential</subject><ispartof>E3S web of conferences, 2023-01, Vol.382, p.24002</ispartof><rights>2023. This work is licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2552-159e0f3ae1967fe5e7bc93148425059c5dd46ae166fccdc63ac87a0c8212595c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2819449270?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>309,310,314,780,784,789,790,23930,23931,25140,25753,27924,27925,37012,44590</link.rule.ids></links><search><contributor>Bardanis, M.</contributor><creatorcontrib>Alam, Md Jobair Bin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aggarwal, Maalvika</creatorcontrib><title>Probability Distribution of Soil Suction of Engineered Turf Cover and Compacted Clay Cover</title><title>E3S web of conferences</title><description>It is unlikely to predict the distribution of soil suction in the field deterministically. It is well established that there are various sources of uncertainty in the measurement of matric suction, and the suction measurements in the field are even more critical because of the heterogeneities in the field conditions. Hence it becomes necessary to probabilistically characterize the suction in the field for enhanced reliability. The objective of this study was to conduct a probabilistic analysis of measured soil suction of two different test landfill covers, compacted clay cover (CC) and engineered turf cover (ETC), under similar meteorological events. The size of the two test landfill covers was 3 m × 3 m (10 ft. × 10 ft.) and 1.2 m (4ft.) in depth. The covers were constructed by excavating the existing subgrade, placing 6-mil plastic sheets, and backfilling the excavated soil, followed by layered compaction. Then the covers were instrumented identically with soil water potential sensors up to specified depths. One of the covers acted as the CC, and the other cover was ETC. In ETC, engineered turf was laid over the compacted soil. The engineered turf consisted of a structured LLDPE geomembrane overlain by synthetic turf (polyethylene fibers tufted through a double layer of woven polypropylene geotextiles). The sensors were connected to an automated data logging system and the collected data were probabilistically analyzed using the R program. There were significant inconsistencies in the descriptive statistical parameters of the measured soil suction at both covers under the same climatic conditions. Soil suction measured in the field ranged between almost 12 to 44 kPa in ETC, while it was in the range of almost 1 to 2020 kPa in the CC. The histogram and quantile-quantile (Q-Q) plot showed the data to be non-normally distributed in the field. A heavy-tailed leptokurtic (Kurtosis=13) distribution of suction was observed in the ETC with substantial outliers. In contrast, the suction distribution in CC was observed skewed to the right containing a thinner tail indicating an almost platykurtic distribution. The distribution of suction in the field under engineered turf was observed to be reasonably consistent with time compared to bare soil under the same meteorological events. The results obtained from this study revealed the engineered turf system to be an effective barrier to inducing changes in soil suction against climatic events.</description><subject>Clay</subject><subject>Climatic conditions</subject><subject>Compacted soils</subject><subject>Data collection</subject><subject>Data logging</subject><subject>engineered turf</subject><subject>Geotechnical fabrics</subject><subject>instrumentation</subject><subject>Kurtosis</subject><subject>Landfill</subject><subject>landfill cover</subject><subject>Landfills</subject><subject>Low density polyethylenes</subject><subject>Matric suction</subject><subject>Moisture content</subject><subject>Outliers (statistics)</subject><subject>Polypropylene</subject><subject>Probabilistic analysis</subject><subject>Probability distribution</subject><subject>Sensors</subject><subject>Soil compaction</subject><subject>Soil conditions</subject><subject>Soil layers</subject><subject>Soil suction</subject><subject>Soil water</subject><subject>Soil water potential</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Turf</subject><subject>unsaturated soil</subject><subject>Waste disposal sites</subject><subject>Water potential</subject><issn>2267-1242</issn><issn>2555-0403</issn><issn>2267-1242</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNpNUU1Lw0AQDaJgqf0HHgKeY3dnP5I9SqxaKCi0Xrwsm_0oW9Js3SRC_73RVOlp3sx7vJnhJcktRvcYMTy3pNWhcXNAQEgBQBGCi2QCwPMMA4XLM3ydzNp2hxDCwAqK6CT5eIuhUpWvfXdMH33bRV_1nQ9NGly6Dr5O173-6xfN1jfWRmvSTR9dWoYvG1PVmAHtD0p3A1HW6jgSN8mVU3VrZ6c6Td6fFpvyJVu9Pi_Lh1WmgTHIMBMWOaIsFjx3ltm80oJgWlBgiAnNjKF8YDl3WhvNidJFrpAuYHhCME2myXL0NUHt5CH6vYpHGZSXv4MQt1LFzuvayspwC44STIigmOVCgKCEOwMGKW6Lwetu9DrE8NnbtpO70MdmOF9CgQWlAnI0qOio0jG0bbTufytG8icUeQpFnodCvgEsU386</recordid><startdate>20230101</startdate><enddate>20230101</enddate><creator>Alam, Md Jobair Bin</creator><creator>Aggarwal, Maalvika</creator><general>EDP Sciences</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20230101</creationdate><title>Probability Distribution of Soil Suction of Engineered Turf Cover and Compacted Clay Cover</title><author>Alam, Md Jobair Bin ; Aggarwal, Maalvika</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2552-159e0f3ae1967fe5e7bc93148425059c5dd46ae166fccdc63ac87a0c8212595c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Clay</topic><topic>Climatic conditions</topic><topic>Compacted soils</topic><topic>Data collection</topic><topic>Data logging</topic><topic>engineered turf</topic><topic>Geotechnical fabrics</topic><topic>instrumentation</topic><topic>Kurtosis</topic><topic>Landfill</topic><topic>landfill cover</topic><topic>Landfills</topic><topic>Low density polyethylenes</topic><topic>Matric suction</topic><topic>Moisture content</topic><topic>Outliers (statistics)</topic><topic>Polypropylene</topic><topic>Probabilistic analysis</topic><topic>Probability distribution</topic><topic>Sensors</topic><topic>Soil compaction</topic><topic>Soil conditions</topic><topic>Soil layers</topic><topic>Soil suction</topic><topic>Soil water</topic><topic>Soil water potential</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Turf</topic><topic>unsaturated soil</topic><topic>Waste disposal sites</topic><topic>Water potential</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Alam, Md Jobair Bin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aggarwal, Maalvika</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>E3S web of conferences</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Alam, Md Jobair Bin</au><au>Aggarwal, Maalvika</au><au>Bardanis, M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Probability Distribution of Soil Suction of Engineered Turf Cover and Compacted Clay Cover</atitle><jtitle>E3S web of conferences</jtitle><date>2023-01-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>382</volume><spage>24002</spage><pages>24002-</pages><issn>2267-1242</issn><issn>2555-0403</issn><eissn>2267-1242</eissn><abstract>It is unlikely to predict the distribution of soil suction in the field deterministically. It is well established that there are various sources of uncertainty in the measurement of matric suction, and the suction measurements in the field are even more critical because of the heterogeneities in the field conditions. Hence it becomes necessary to probabilistically characterize the suction in the field for enhanced reliability. The objective of this study was to conduct a probabilistic analysis of measured soil suction of two different test landfill covers, compacted clay cover (CC) and engineered turf cover (ETC), under similar meteorological events. The size of the two test landfill covers was 3 m × 3 m (10 ft. × 10 ft.) and 1.2 m (4ft.) in depth. The covers were constructed by excavating the existing subgrade, placing 6-mil plastic sheets, and backfilling the excavated soil, followed by layered compaction. Then the covers were instrumented identically with soil water potential sensors up to specified depths. One of the covers acted as the CC, and the other cover was ETC. In ETC, engineered turf was laid over the compacted soil. The engineered turf consisted of a structured LLDPE geomembrane overlain by synthetic turf (polyethylene fibers tufted through a double layer of woven polypropylene geotextiles). The sensors were connected to an automated data logging system and the collected data were probabilistically analyzed using the R program. There were significant inconsistencies in the descriptive statistical parameters of the measured soil suction at both covers under the same climatic conditions. Soil suction measured in the field ranged between almost 12 to 44 kPa in ETC, while it was in the range of almost 1 to 2020 kPa in the CC. The histogram and quantile-quantile (Q-Q) plot showed the data to be non-normally distributed in the field. A heavy-tailed leptokurtic (Kurtosis=13) distribution of suction was observed in the ETC with substantial outliers. In contrast, the suction distribution in CC was observed skewed to the right containing a thinner tail indicating an almost platykurtic distribution. The distribution of suction in the field under engineered turf was observed to be reasonably consistent with time compared to bare soil under the same meteorological events. The results obtained from this study revealed the engineered turf system to be an effective barrier to inducing changes in soil suction against climatic events.</abstract><cop>Les Ulis</cop><pub>EDP Sciences</pub><doi>10.1051/e3sconf/202338224002</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2267-1242
ispartof E3S web of conferences, 2023-01, Vol.382, p.24002
issn 2267-1242
2555-0403
2267-1242
language eng
recordid cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_bd6e2f43133941579929436fd2d0a6e8
source Publicly Available Content Database
subjects Clay
Climatic conditions
Compacted soils
Data collection
Data logging
engineered turf
Geotechnical fabrics
instrumentation
Kurtosis
Landfill
landfill cover
Landfills
Low density polyethylenes
Matric suction
Moisture content
Outliers (statistics)
Polypropylene
Probabilistic analysis
Probability distribution
Sensors
Soil compaction
Soil conditions
Soil layers
Soil suction
Soil water
Soil water potential
Statistical analysis
Turf
unsaturated soil
Waste disposal sites
Water potential
title Probability Distribution of Soil Suction of Engineered Turf Cover and Compacted Clay Cover
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T04%3A48%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Probability%20Distribution%20of%20Soil%20Suction%20of%20Engineered%20Turf%20Cover%20and%20Compacted%20Clay%20Cover&rft.jtitle=E3S%20web%20of%20conferences&rft.au=Alam,%20Md%20Jobair%20Bin&rft.date=2023-01-01&rft.volume=382&rft.spage=24002&rft.pages=24002-&rft.issn=2267-1242&rft.eissn=2267-1242&rft_id=info:doi/10.1051/e3sconf/202338224002&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_doaj_%3E2819449270%3C/proquest_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2552-159e0f3ae1967fe5e7bc93148425059c5dd46ae166fccdc63ac87a0c8212595c3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2819449270&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true