HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (4) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Thomas, P.J. Articles by Zelazny, L.W. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Thomas, P.J. Articles by Zelazny, L.W. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Thomas, P.J. Articles by Zelazny, L.W.

An Expansive Soil Index for Predicting Shrink–Swell Potential

^a Dep. of Crop and Soil Environmental Sciences, Virginia Polytechnic Inst. and St. Univ., Blacksburg, VA 24061-0404 USA

View larger version (56K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1 Relationship between clay content and estimated shrink–swell class. Means as indicated by the same letter are not significantly different at the 0.05 level of probability

View larger version (44K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2 Relationship between cation-exchange capacity (CEC) and estimated shrink–swell class. Means as indicated by the same letter are not significantly different at the 0.05 level of probability

View larger version (44K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3 Relationship between liquid limit and estimated shrink–swell class. Means as indicated by the same letter are not significantly different at the 0.05 level of probability

View larger version (43K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4 Relationship between plasticity index and estimated shrink–swell class. Means as indicated by the same letter are not significantly different at the 0.05 level of probability

View larger version (38K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5 Relationship between COLE and estimated shrink–swell class. Means as indicated by the same letter are not significantly different at the 0.05 level of probability

View larger version (49K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6 Relationship between swell index and estimated shrink–swell class. Means as indicated by the same letter are not significantly different at the 0.05 level of probability

View larger version (42K): [in a new window]   Fig. 7 Relationship between swelling 2:1 mineral content and estimated shrink–swell class. Means as indicated by the same letter are not significantly different at the 0.05 level of probability