Evaluation of hydraulic conductivity of lateritic soils using integrated approach: southwestern Nigeria case study

  • Authors

    • A. Fajobi Department of Civil Engineering, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
    • F. Falade Department of Civil Engineering, University of Lagos, Lagos, Nigeria
    • Adekunle Adepelumi Obafemi Awolowo University
    • Olaolu Akindulureni Department of Geology, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria
    2014-12-17
    https://doi.org/10.14419/ijag.v3i1.3552
  • , Geotechnical Tests, Groundwater Seepage, Hydraulic Conductivity, Resistivity, Soil.

  • Abstract

    The source of groundwater seepage problem being experienced by some engineering buildings in a part of southwestern Nigeria was investigated by carrying out comparative study of the hydraulic conductivity (K) of the soil types underlying the area using integrated approaches involving geotechnical and geophysical methods.

    Soil samples were collected from six different towns on which standard geotechnical tests including natural moisture content, grain size distribution, linear shrinkage, specific gravity, liquid and plastic limits, compaction, triaxial and K test were carried out. Also, geophysical data were acquired at seventy-two locations using Schlumberger array with a current electrode spacing of 40m. The resistivity data obtained were subsequently inverted to obtain the subsurface 2D hydraulic conductivity section.

    The results obtained imply that the soil types investigated is semi-pervious with K values ranging from 1.06 x 10-5 to 5.71 x10-5cm/s. These values suggest moderate groundwater flow which might account for the seepage that was observed. Four lithologies (lateritic topsoil, clayey-sand, sandy-clay and fractured/weathered bedrock) were delineated. The geotechnical analysis result suggests the soil investigated could be classified as poorly graded sandy-clay and/or silty-clay. This soil exhibit plasticity index ranging from 12.72 to 19.75%, with specific gravity ranging from 2.47 to 2.73; the maximum dry density (MDD) varies from 1699.5 kg/cm3 to 1915kg/cm3 and the optimum moisture content (OMC) ranges from 12.05% to 16.32%.The result of the t-test results performed implied that at 95% t–confidence level, there is a good correlation between the results obtained from both approaches employed.

    Author Biography

    • Adekunle Adepelumi, Obafemi Awolowo University

  • References

    1. [1] Adepelumi A, Ako BD & Ajayi T (2001) Ground water contamination in the basement complex area of Ile-Ife, Southwestern Nigeria. A case study using the electrical-resistivity geophysical method. Hydrogeology Journal 9, 6-11.

      [2] BS 1377 (1990) Method of test for soil for Civil Engineering purposes. British Standard Institution, London.

      [3] DeGroot DJ, Ostendorf DW & Judge AI (2012) In situ Measurement of Hydraulic Conductivity of Saturated Soils. Geotechnical Engineering Journal of the SEAGS & AGSSEA 43(4), 61-72.

      [4] DIPRO (2012) DIPROâ„¢ version 4.01.Processing and interpretation software for electrical resistivity data. KIGAM, Daejeon, South Korea.

      [5] Das BM (1990) Principles of Geotechnical Engineering, Second Edition, PIOS-KENT Publishing co., Boston.

      [6] Edoga RN (2010) Comparison of Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity Measurement Methods for Samaru-Nigeria Soils. Libyan Agriculture Research Center Journal International 1 (4), 269-273.

      [7] Justine O (2007) Evaluation of Empirical Formulae for determination of Hyraulic Conductivity based on Grain-size analysis. Journal of Amerian Science 3(3).

      [8] Katsube TJ & Hume JP (1987) Permeability determination in crystalline rocks by standard geophysical logs. Geophysics52, 342–352. http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.1442308.

      [9] Kodesová R, Gribb MM & Simunek J (1998) A new CPT method for estimating soil hydraulic properties. Geotechnical Site Characterization, Robertson & Mayne eds., A. A. Balkema, 421-1425

      [10] Kodesová R, Ordway SE, Gribb MM & Simunek J (1999) Estimating soil hydraulic properties with the cone permeameter. Field studies, Soil Science 164, 527-541. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00010694-199908000-00001.

      [11] Matsui T, Kamiide S & Park S (1977) an applicability of resistivity-based high density prospecting to ground survey of mountain tunnel.Tsuchi-to-kiso45, 20–22.

      [12] Nishimaki H, Sekine I, Saito A & Yoshinaka R (1999) Electrical resistivity of a rock and its correlation to engineering properties. Butsuri-tansa 52, 161–171.

      [13] Odong J (2013) Evaluation of Empirical Formulae for Determination of Hydraulic Conductivity based on Grain-Size Analysis. International Journal of Agriculture and Environment 1, 1-8.

      [14] Ogata N, Ohsawa H, Nakano K, Yanagizawa K & Nishigaki M (1992) Relationship among lithology, permeability and resistivity and their application to modelling of hydrogeology. J. Japan Soc. Eng. Geology32, 51–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.5110/jjseg.32.321.

      [15] Olorunfemi MO & Okhue ET (1991) Electrical resistivity investigation of a typical basement complex area- the Obafemi Awolowo University Campus case study. Journal of Mining Geology 27(2), 63-69.

      [16] Pirttijärvi M (2013) DCINV, 1-D interpretation of electrical (DC) soundings, Version 1.5. Geosciences Department, University of Finland, Finland.

      [17] Rahaman MA (1988) Recent advances in the study of basement complex of Nigeria. In :Oluyide PO (Ed), Precambian geology of Nigeria, Geological survey of Nigeria, pp 11-43

      [18] Shevnin V, Delgado-Rodríguez O, Mousatov A & Ryjov A (2006) Estimation of hydraulic conductivity on clay content in soil determined from resistivity data. Geofísica Internacional 45(3), 195-207.

      [19] Simunek J & van Genuchten M Th (1996) estimating unsaturated soil hydraulic properties from tension disk infiltrometer data by numerical inversion, Water Resour. Res. 32(9) 2683-2696. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/96WR01525.

      [20] Sudo H, Tanaka T, Kobayashi T, Kondo T, Miyamoto M & Amagai M (2004) Permeability imaging in granitic rocks based on surface resistivity profiling: Exploration Geophysics 35, 56-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/EG04056.

      [21] Suzuki K (2002) Imaging techniques of geophysical properties for engineering by geophysical exploration. J. Japan Soc. Eng. Geology42 (6), 342–349. http://dx.doi.org/10.5110/jjseg.42.342.

      [22] Xu YF & Dong P (2004) Fractals approach to hydraulic properties in unsaturated porous media. Chaos, Solitons and fractals 19, 327–337. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0960-0779(03)00045-6.

      [23] Vladimir S, Omar D, Aleksandr M & Albert R (2006) Estimation of hyraulic conductivity on clay content in soil determined from resistivity data. Geophysical International 45(3), 195-207.

      [24] Vukovick M & Soro A (1992) Determination of Hydraulic Conductivity of Porous Media from Grain–Size Composition. Water Resources Publications, Littleton, Colorado 16, 367-386.

      [25] Yu L, Rogiers B, Gedeon M, Marivoet J, De Craen M & Mallants D (2013) A critical review of laboratory and in-situ hydraulic conductivity measurements for the Boom Clay in Belgium. Applied Clay, Science, 75–76, 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2013.02.018.

  • Downloads

    Additional Files

  • How to Cite

    Fajobi, A., Falade, F., Adepelumi, A., & Akindulureni, O. (2014). Evaluation of hydraulic conductivity of lateritic soils using integrated approach: southwestern Nigeria case study. International Journal of Advanced Geosciences, 3(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijag.v3i1.3552

    Received date: 2014-09-05

    Accepted date: 2014-09-28

    Published date: 2014-12-17