SSSAJ Grow Your Career with SSSA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Assouline, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Assouline, S.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Assouline, S.
Related Collections
Right arrow Soil Compaction
Right arrow Soil Models
Soil Science Society of America Journal 66:1784-1787 (2002)
© 2002 Soil Science Society of America

DIVISION S-1—NOTES

Modeling soil compaction under uniaxial compression

S. Assouline*

Institute of Soil, Water and Environmental Sciences, A.R.O., the Volcani Center, P.O.B. 6, Bet Dagan 50250, Israel

* Corresponding author (vwshmuel{at}agri.gov.il)

Knowledge about soil compaction is increasingly important within agriculture and for environmental protection. The objective of this study is to modify a previous two-parameter model to generalize it to account for preconsolidation effect. A three-parameter model for the relationship between soil bulk density and applied stresses during compaction is presented. It relies on the physical approach of the previous two-parameter model and satisfies the same boundary conditions. The proposed model is applied to compaction data of four silt loam and loam soils. A good fit to data is obtained for a wide range of applied stresses, including stresses less than the preconsolidation stress. The proposed model is compared with the three-parameter version of a recent model. The performances of the two models are similar. The root mean square errors for the four soils ranged between 0.004 to 0.011 for the recent equation and 0.005 to 0.018 for the proposed model. The advantage of the proposed model is that it releases the physically unrealistic constraint in the recent model that the maximal bulk density of a compacted soil is equal to its particle density.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Soil Sci.Home page
D. D. Fritton
Fitting Uniaxial Soil Compression Using Initial Bulk Density, Water Content, and Matric Potential
Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., June 21, 2006; 70(4): 1262 - 1271.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Vadose Zone JHome page
S. Assouline
Modeling the Relationship between Soil Bulk Density and the Water Retention Curve
Vadose Zone J., April 27, 2006; 5(2): 554 - 563.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality
The Plant Genome
Copyright © 2002 by the Soil Science Society of America.