Evaluation of time response of GMS for soil suction measurement
The Granular Matrix Sensor (GMS) is an indirect method for soil suction measurement. Since GMS is comparatively inexpensive, robust and usually provide continuous soil suction data, it is a natural candidate for civil engineering practice. The sensor has been used mainly for irrigation purposes, and...
Main Authors: | , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
EDP Sciences
2021-01-01
|
Series: | MATEC Web of Conferences |
Online Access: | https://www.matec-conferences.org/articles/matecconf/pdf/2021/06/matecconf_PanAm-Unsat2021_01014.pdf |
id |
doaj-221f91b878b947f08877b0c7e844e149 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-221f91b878b947f08877b0c7e844e1492021-05-04T12:21:53ZengEDP SciencesMATEC Web of Conferences2261-236X2021-01-013370101410.1051/matecconf/202133701014matecconf_PanAm-Unsat2021_01014Evaluation of time response of GMS for soil suction measurementVettorello Danilo L.0Marinho Fernando A. M.1Universidade de São Paulo, Instituto de GeociênciasUniversidade de São Paulo, Instituto de Geociências, Departamento de Geologia Sedimentar e AmbientalThe Granular Matrix Sensor (GMS) is an indirect method for soil suction measurement. Since GMS is comparatively inexpensive, robust and usually provide continuous soil suction data, it is a natural candidate for civil engineering practice. The sensor has been used mainly for irrigation purposes, and also for some civil engineering activities. Questions about its effectiveness and reliability are still posed, making studies about this topic desirable. This study presents a laboratory comparison between Watermark and an ordinary tensiometer during an equilibrium period and for a wetting procedure performed in a compacted sandy silt soil (residual soil of gneiss). The results yielded that GMS may provide tensiometer equivalent suction values in a context of no significant water content variation. However, it takes a longer time to obtain stabilized suction values. During the wetting procedure, GMS presented a delay of about 2 h in detecting water while tensiometer detection was almost instantaneous.https://www.matec-conferences.org/articles/matecconf/pdf/2021/06/matecconf_PanAm-Unsat2021_01014.pdf |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Vettorello Danilo L. Marinho Fernando A. M. |
spellingShingle |
Vettorello Danilo L. Marinho Fernando A. M. Evaluation of time response of GMS for soil suction measurement MATEC Web of Conferences |
author_facet |
Vettorello Danilo L. Marinho Fernando A. M. |
author_sort |
Vettorello Danilo L. |
title |
Evaluation of time response of GMS for soil suction measurement |
title_short |
Evaluation of time response of GMS for soil suction measurement |
title_full |
Evaluation of time response of GMS for soil suction measurement |
title_fullStr |
Evaluation of time response of GMS for soil suction measurement |
title_full_unstemmed |
Evaluation of time response of GMS for soil suction measurement |
title_sort |
evaluation of time response of gms for soil suction measurement |
publisher |
EDP Sciences |
series |
MATEC Web of Conferences |
issn |
2261-236X |
publishDate |
2021-01-01 |
description |
The Granular Matrix Sensor (GMS) is an indirect method for soil suction measurement. Since GMS is comparatively inexpensive, robust and usually provide continuous soil suction data, it is a natural candidate for civil engineering practice. The sensor has been used mainly for irrigation purposes, and also for some civil engineering activities. Questions about its effectiveness and reliability are still posed, making studies about this topic desirable. This study presents a laboratory comparison between Watermark and an ordinary tensiometer during an equilibrium period and for a wetting procedure performed in a compacted sandy silt soil (residual soil of gneiss). The results yielded that GMS may provide tensiometer equivalent suction values in a context of no significant water content variation. However, it takes a longer time to obtain stabilized suction values. During the wetting procedure, GMS presented a delay of about 2 h in detecting water while tensiometer detection was almost instantaneous. |
url |
https://www.matec-conferences.org/articles/matecconf/pdf/2021/06/matecconf_PanAm-Unsat2021_01014.pdf |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT vettorellodanilol evaluationoftimeresponseofgmsforsoilsuctionmeasurement AT marinhofernandoam evaluationoftimeresponseofgmsforsoilsuctionmeasurement |
_version_ |
1721478952343568384 |