Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile

Composite Default screen

817

An equation to represent grain-size distribution

Murray D. Fredlund, D.G. Fredlund, and G. Ward Wilson
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by TPE/NAT TW UNIV OF SCI & TECH on 12/11/17

Abstract: The grain-size distribution is commonly used for soil classification; however, there is also potential to use
the grain-size distribution as a basis for estimating soil behaviour. For example, much emphasis has recently been
placed on the estimation of the soil-water characteristic curve. Many methods proposed in the literature use the grain-
size distribution as a starting point to estimate the soil-water characteristic curve. Two mathematical forms are pre-
sented to represent grain-size distribution curves, namely, a unimodal form and a bimodal form. The proposed equa-
tions provide methods for accurately representing uniform, well-graded soils, and gap-graded soils. The five-parameter
unimodal equation provides a closer fit than previous two-parameter, log-normal equations used to fit uniform and well-
graded soils. The unimodal equation also improves representation of the silt- and clay-sized portions of the grain-size
distribution curve.

Key words: grain-size distribution, sieve analysis, hydrometer analysis, soil classification, probability density function.

Résumé : La distribution granulométrique est utilisée couramment pour la classification des sols; cependant, il est pos-
sible d’utiliser également la distribution granulométrique comme base d’évaluation du comportement du sol. Par
exemple, beaucoup d’emphase a été mise récemment sur la détermination de la courbe caractéristique sol-eau. Plusieurs
méthodes proposées dans la littérature utilisent la distribution granulométrique comme point de départ pour établir la
courbe caractéristique sol-eau. Deux formes mathématiques sont présentées pour reproduire les courbes de distribution
granulométriqe: nommément, une forme unimodale et une forme bimodale. Les équations proposées fournissent des
méthodes pour représenter avec précision des sols à granulométrie uniforme, étalée et discontinue. L’équation
For personal use only.

unimodale à cinq paramètres fournit une meilleure concordance que les équations antérieures log normales à deux
paramètres utilisées pour reproduire les courbes des sols à granulométrie uniforme et étalée. L’équation unimodale
améliore aussi la représentation des portions de silt et de grosseurs argileuses de la courbe de distribution
granulométrique.

Mots clés : distribution granulométrique, analyse par tamisage, analyse à l’hydromètre, classification des sols, fonction
de densité probabilistique.

[Traduit par la Rédaction] Fredlund et al. 827

Introduction American Society for Testing and Materials standards

The grain-size distribution is a simple, yet informative test
routinely performed in soil mechanics to classify soils. Re-
cent research has made use of the grain-size distribution as a
basis for the estimation of other soil properties such as the
soil-water characteristic curve through mathematical analy-
sis (Gupta and Larson 1979a, 1979b; Arya and Paris 1981;
Haverkamp and Parlange 1986). Mathematically represent-
ing the grain-size distribution provides several benefits.
First, the soil may be classified using the best-fit parameters.
Second, the mathematical equation can be used as the basis
for analysis related to estimating the soil-water characteristic
curve. Third, a mathematical equation can provide a method
of representing the entire curve between measured data
points. Representing the soil as a mathematical function also
provides increased flexibility in searching for similar soils in
databases.
Received November 20, 1998. Accepted December 3, 1999.
Published on the NRC Research Press website on August 4,
2000.
M.D. Fredlund, D.G. Fredlund, and G.W. Wilson.
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Saskatchewan,
Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A9, Canada.
D1140-54 and D422-63 (ASTM 1964a, 1964b) provide a
basic testing and reporting method whereby the results of a
sieve and hydrometer analysis are plotted on a semilog-
arithmic graph. An interpretation method for the series of
plotted points is specified in the procedure. Manual interpre-
tation methods, such as sketching in a complete curve, have
often been used to provide a complete grain-size distribution
curve. Gardner (1956) proposed a two-parameter, log-normal
distribution to provide representation of grain-size distribu-
tion data. Both methods are feasible but have limitations that
are discussed later in the paper.
This paper proposes two new models to fit grain-size data,
namely, the use of a unimodal and a bimodal mathematical
function. The two new equations provide greater flexibility
for fitting a wide variety of soils.
Background
Numerous methods have been developed for particle-size
analysis in the laboratory and field. These include the
elutriation method, the test tube shaking method, the
Wiegner sedimentation cylinder, the photoelectric method,
the pipette method, and the hydrometer method, in addition
to the sieve analysis. Of these methods, only the pipette and

Can. Geotech. J. 37: 817–827 (2000) © 2000 NRC Canada

I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T00-015.vp
Tuesday, August 01, 2000 3:38:32 PM
 Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile
Composite Default screen

818 Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 37, 2000

Table 1. Equations that have been used to represent the soil-water characteristic curve.
Authors Equation Definition of variables
Gardner 1958  1  ws, saturated gravimetric water content; ww,
ww = w rg + ( ws − w rg )   any gravimetric water content; wrg,
[1 + ag ψ ] 
ng
residual gravimetric water content; ag,
fitting parameter; ng, fitting parameter; ψ,
soil suction
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by TPE/NAT TW UNIV OF SCI & TECH on 12/11/17

nc
Brooks and Corey 1964 a  ac, bubbling pressure (kPa); nc, pore-size
ww = w r + ( ws − w r )  c  index; ws, saturated gravimetric water
ψ  content; ww, any gravimetric water content;
wr, residual volumetric water content; ψ,
soil suction (kPa)

van Genuchten 1980;   ws, saturated gravimetric water content; ww,

Burdine 1953  1  any gravimetric water content; wrb, residual
ww = w rb + ( ws − w rb )   gravimetric water content; ab, fitting para-
 2 
 1 −  
[1 + ( a b ψ ) n b ] n b   meter; nb, fitting parameter; ψ, soil suction

van Genuchten 1980;   ws, saturated gravimetric water content; ww,

Mualem 1976  1  any gravimetric water content; wrm, residual
ww = w rm + ( ws − w rm )   gravimetric water content; am, fitting para-
 
 1 −  
1
[1 + ( am ψ ) n m ] n m   meter; nm, fitting parameter; ψ, soil suction
For personal use only.

van Genuchten 1980  1  ws, saturated gravimetric water content; ww,

ww = w rvg + ( ws − w rvg )   any gravimetric water content; wrvg, resid-
[1 + ( a vg ψ ) n vg ]m vg  ual gravimetric water content; avg, fitting
parameter; nvg, fitting parameter; mvg,
fitting parameter; ψ, soil suction

Fredlund and Xing 1994   ws, saturated gravimetric water content; ww,
    any gravimetric water content; af, fitting
 ψ
 ln 1 +     parameter closely related to the air-entry
 h r   
ww = ws 1 −
1 value for the soil; nf, fitting parameter
  
 10 6      nf 
mf
 related to the maximum slope of the curve;
 ln 1 +   ψ
  h r     ln exp(1) +      mf, fitting parameter related to the curvature
   af    of the slope; hr, parameter used to adjust
    
lower portion of the curve; ψ, soil suction

hydrometer methods have found general acceptance for fine-
grained soils (Kohnke 1968).
ASTM (1964a, 1964b) presents a standard for testing for
grain-size distribution. The interpretation of the grain-size
distribution is typically carried out manually. Further details
concerning the testing procedure and the interpolation of the
sieve and hydrometer tests are provided by Lambe (1951).
Gardner (1956) used a two-parameter, log-normal distri-
bution to fit grain-size distribution data. Kemper and Chepil
(1965) further studied the work of Gardner. The two-param-
eter fit of the grain-size distribution was performed using a
geometric mean parameter, xg, and a geometric standard de-
viation, σg. The method of fitting log-normal equations to
the grain-size distribution was not recommended for general
use. However, the reason given for not using the log-normal
method was the lack of computing power necessary to fit the
equation to data. Hagen et al. (1987) presented a computer-
ized, iterative procedure that required only two sieves to de-
termine the parameters for a standard, two-parameter log-
normal distribution. Unfortunately, the log-normal distribu-
tion often failed to provide a close fit of the grain-size distri-
bution at the extremes of the curve (Gardner 1956; Hagen et
al. 1987). Wagner and Ding (1994) later improved upon the
log-normal equation by presenting three- and four-parameter
log-normal equations.
Campbell (1985) presented a classification diagram based
on the assumption that the particle-size distribution is ap-
proximately log normal. This assumption led to the particle-
size distribution being approximated with a Gaussian distri-
bution function. With this assumption, any combination of
sand, silt, and clay can be represented by a geometric (or
logarithmic) mean particle diameter and a geometric stan-
dard deviation. Values were summarized in a modified U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA) textural classification
chart by Shirizi and Boersma (1984).
The first limitation associated with using a log-normal
type of equation is the assumption that the grain-size distri-
bution is symmetric. In reality, the grain-size distribution is
often nonsymmetric and can be better fit by a different type
of equation. Second, a method for fitting soils that are
© 2000 NRC Canada

I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T00-015.vp
Tuesday, August 01, 2000 3:38:33 PM
 Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile
Composite Default screen

Fredlund et al. 819

bimodal or gap-graded is of value and the four-parameter Fig. 1. Grain-size data fit with unimodal equation for a clayey
log-normal equations have not been found to be satisfactory silt: (a) best-fit curve, R2 = 0.998; (b) arithmetic probability den-
for fitting these types of grain-size distribution. sity function; (c) logarithmic probability density function (soil
There are three general categories of grain-size distribu- number 10030).
tions (Holtz and Kovacs 1981): well-graded soils, uniform
soils, and gap-graded soils. This paper focuses on these
three categories of grain-size distribution and provides equa-
tions to fit the experimental data for each category. The
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by TPE/NAT TW UNIV OF SCI & TECH on 12/11/17

well-graded and uniform soils are examined using a

unimodal method of fitting an equation, and then a mathe-
matical means of representing a gap-graded soil is presented.

Unimodal equation for grain-size

distribution data
The selection of an appropriate, mathematical equation in-
volved a review of a variety of equations that could be used
to fit soils data. It has been observed that the soil-water char-
acteristic curve possesses a shape similar to that of the
grain-size distribution curve. This is probably to be ex-
pected, since the soil-water characteristic curve provides a
representation of the void distribution in a soil, whereas the
grain-size curve provides information on the distribution of
the solid phase of the soil. Since the solids plus the voids
add up to the total soil volume, it is to be expected that the
For personal use only.

distribution of the solids phase (i.e., grain-size distribution)

would tend to bear an inverse relationship to the distribution
of voids (i.e., represented by the soil-water characteristic
curve), and vice versa.
A summary of several of the equations that have been
used to fit the soil-water characteristic curve is given in Ta-
ble 1. Brooks and Corey (1964) and Gardner (1974) pre-
sented three-parameter equations and van Genuchten (1980)
and Fredlund and Xing (1994) presented four-parameter
equations. It would seem reasonable that a form of equation
similar to those shown in Table 1 could be used to represent
the grain-size distribution.
An accurate representation of the clay fraction of the
grain-size distribution was considered necessary to complete
the mathematical function. Since the Fredlund and Xing
(1994) equation allows independent control over the lower
end of the curve (i.e., the fine particle size range), it was se-
lected as the basis for the development of a grain-size distri-
bution equation. The reversed scale of the grain-size
distribution and characteristics unique to the grain-size dis-
tribution required the original Fredlund and Xing equation to
be modified to the form shown as follows:

[1] Pp(d) =
  7 
  ln 1 + drgr   

1    d  
1 −  
  n 
mgr
  ln 1 + drgr   
   a gr  gr     


ln exp(1) +    dm  
   d     
  agr is a parameter designating the inflection point on the
curve and is related to the initial breaking point on the
where curve;
Pp(d) is the percentage, by mass, of particles passing a ngr is a parameter related to the steepest slope on the
particular size; curve (i.e., uniformity of the particle-size distribution);
© 2000 NRC Canada

I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T00-015.vp
Tuesday, August 01, 2000 3:38:40 PM
 Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile
Composite Default screen

820 Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 37, 2000

mgr is a parameter related to the shape of the curve as it
approaches the fines region;
drgr is a parameter related to the amount of fines in a soil;
d is the diameter of any particle size under consideration;
and
dm is the diameter of the minimum allowable size particle.
Equation [1] is referred to as a unimodal equation and can
be used to fit a wide variety of soils. A quasi-Newton fitting
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by TPE/NAT TW UNIV OF SCI & TECH on 12/11/17
The particle-size distributions presented in this paper are
calculated using eq. [2] and are referred to as the arithmetic
probability density function. Figure 1b illustrates the arith-
metic probability density function for the clayey silt (soil
number 10030) shown in Fig. 1a.
The highest point in the PDF plot is the mode or the most
frequent particle size. Since eq. [2] is a PDF, the natural
laws of probability hold, such that the area under the differ-

algorithm was used to adjust three of the four parameters to entiated curve must equal unity:
fit the equation to each soil. The algorithm progressively
+∞
minimizes the squared differences between the equation and  dPp 
experimental data. The best-fit particle-size distribution [3] ∫ 
 dd 
 dx = 1
function can be plotted along with the grain-size distribution −∞
data, typically on a logarithmic scale, as shown in Fig. 1a
for a clayey silt (soil number 10030).1 Equation [2] can be arithmetically integrated between the
The unimodal equation provides significant improvements specified particle-diameter sizes. The probability that a soil
in the fit of grain-size data over previous mathematical particle diameter will fall in a certain range is determined by
representations (i.e., log-normal distribution). This is to be the following relationship:
expected due to the increase in the number of parameters
used to represent the grain-size distribution. The complexity x=d 2

∫
of the proposed unimodal equation due to the added parame- [4] probability (d 1< d < d 2 ) = p(x)dx
ters is determined to be insignificant because of the avail-
x =d 1
ability of curve-fitting software.
The particle-size distribution provides information on the
amount and dominant sizes of particles present in a soil. It is convenient to represent the PDF in a different manner
However, another form can also be used to represent the dis- when plotted on a logarithmic scale. The arithmetic PDF
For personal use only.

tribution of particle sizes by differentiating the particle-size will often appear distorted when plotted on a logarithmic
distribution curve. The differentiation produces a particle- scale. The peak computed from eq. [4] will not represent the
size probability density function (PDF). The differentiated most frequent particle size. To overcome this limitation, the
form of the unimodal grain-size equation is given in eq. [2], PDF is often represented by taking the logarithm of the par-
and the parameters presented in the particle-size PDF are the ticle size and differentiating the grain-size equation to pro-
same as those defined for eq. [1]: duce a PDF which appears more physically realistic as
presented in eq. [5]:
dPp
[2] =
dd dPp dPp
[5] p l (d) = = ln(10)d
d log(d) dd
  7 
  ln1 + drgr   

   
n where pl(d) is the logarithmic PDF.
1 d   a gr  gr
1 −   gr
m   The peak of eq. [5] will represent the most frequent parti-
  n 
mgr
  ln1 + drgr     d 
   a gr  gr     


cle size. It must be noted that the probability of the logarith-
ln exp(1) +    dm   mic PDF must be calculated according to eq. [6]:
  
   d  

 x = log ( d 2 )
[6] probability (d 1< d < d 2 ) = ∫ p 1(x) dx
x = log ( d 1 )
n gr
×
 n 
 a  gr    a  gr  
n
 Figure 1c shows the logarithmic PDF for the clayey silt
d  exp(1) +  gr   ln  exp(1) +  gr   
  d     d   (soil number 10030).
    The unimodal equation fit for a silty sand (soil number
63) and a sandy clay (soil number 11648) are shown in
6
 d  Figs. 2a and 3a, respectively. Also shown are the arithmetic
ln 1 + rgr  probability density functions (i.e., Figs. 2b, 3b) and the loga-
7  d  drgr rithmic probability density function for each of the above
+
  n 
mgr
 d   7
 drgr   soils (i.e., Figs. 2c, 3c).
   a gr  gr   ln 1 + rgr   d 1 +
2
 The variation of R2 (where R is the correlation coefficient)
 ln exp(1) +    dm    d  

   d  

versus percent clay is shown in Fig. 4. The value of R2 was
 plotted versus percent clay because the representation of
fines by the new equation was considered important.
1
Soil numbers refer to soils found in the SoilVision database, which is a proprietary product of SoilVision Systems Ltd.
© 2000 NRC Canada

I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T00-015.vp
Tuesday, August 01, 2000 3:38:41 PM
 Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile
Composite Default screen
Fredlund et al.
Fig. 2. Grain-size data fit with unimodal equation for a silty
sand: (a) best-fit curve, R2 = 0.985; (b) arithmetic probability
density function; (c) logarithmic probability density function (soil
number 63).
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by TPE/NAT TW UNIV OF SCI & TECH on 12/11/17
For personal use only.
Parametric study of the proposed unimodal
grain-size distribution equation
A parametric study of the proposed unimodal equation
(i.e., eq. [1]) shows behaviour similar to that of the Fredlund
and Xing (1994) equation for the soil-water characteristic
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T00-015.vp
Tuesday, August 01, 2000 3:38:52 PM
821
Fig. 3. Grain-size data fit with unimodal equation for a sandy
clay: (a) best-fit curve, R2 = 0.999; (b) arithmetic probability
density function; (c) logarithmic probability density function
(soil number 11648).
curve. The parameter agr is related to the initial break of the
equation and is more precisely the inflection point on the
curve. Its effect on the grain-size distribution curve can be
seen in Fig. 5a, where agr is varied from 0.1 to 10 while the
other equation parameters are held constant. The parameter
agr provides an indication of the largest particle sizes.
© 2000 NRC Canada
 Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile
Composite Default screen

822 Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 37, 2000

Figure 5b shows how the parameter ngr influences the slope Fig. 4. Variation of R2 error as the amount of fines represented
of the grain-size distribution. The point of maximum slope in a soil increases.
along the grain-size distribution provides an indication of the
dominant particle size (i.e., on a logarithmic scale) in the
soil. In the parametric representation, ngr is varied from 1 to 4.
The parameter mgr influences the break onto the finer par-
ticle size of the sample. The effect of varying the parame-
ter mgr from 0.3 to 0.9 can be seen in Fig. 5c. The parameter
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by TPE/NAT TW UNIV OF SCI & TECH on 12/11/17

drgr affects the shape along the finer particle size portion of
the curve. However, the influence on the curve is quite mini-
mal as shown in Fig. 5d. In some cases drgr can be modified
to improve the fit of the overall equation. With the best-fit
analysis shown, drgr was adjusted manually to improve the fit
of the curve to the data. It was found that a value of 0.001
for drgr provided a reasonable fit in most cases.

Bimodal equation for the grain-size

distribution curve
There is a limitation in using the unimodal equation (i.e.,
eq. [1]) when the soils are gap-graded as shown in Fig. 6. In
this case, it is necessary to consider the use of a bimodal
equation when performing the best-fit analysis. Soils fre-
quently have particle-size distributions that are not consis-
tent with a unimodal distribution and, as a result, attempts to
fit the unimodal equation to certain data sets can often lead
For personal use only.
is differentiated and used for further analyses (e.g., estima-
tion of the soil-water characteristic curve).
The characteristic shape of a bimodal or gap-graded soil is
the double “hump” often observed from experimental data.
These humps indicate that the particle-size distribution is
concentrated around two separate particle sizes. From a
mathematical standpoint, a gap-graded soil can be viewed as
a combination of two or more separate soils (Durner 1994).

to a misrepresentation of the character of the particle-size This allows for the “stacking” of more than one unimodal
distribution. This is particularly important when the equation equation:

Fig. 5. Parameter variation: (a) effect of varying the parameter agr while ngr = 4.0, mgr = 0.5, drgr = 1000, and dm = 0.001; (b) effect of
varying the parameter ngr while agr = 1.0, mgr = 0.5, drgr = 1000, and dm = 0.001; (c) effect of varying the parameter mgr while agr =
1.0, ngr = 4.0, drgr = 1000, and dm = 0.001; (d) effect of varying the parameter drgr while agr = 1.0, ngr = 4.0, mgr = 0.5, and dm = 0.001.

© 2000 NRC Canada

I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T00-015.vp
Tuesday, August 01, 2000 3:39:01 PM
 Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile
Composite Default screen

Fredlund et al. 823

[7] Pp (d) = Fig. 6. Example of fit of a gap-graded soil with the unimodal
equation (R2 = 0.977) and the bimodal equation (R2 = 0.999)
  
  
(soil number 11491).
  
7
      ln 1 + dr   
 k       
d   
 ∑ w i  1 
 1 −   
 i =1        ln 1 + dr   
mgr
ngr  
  
 ln exp(1) +  a     

gr
  dm   
   d       
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by TPE/NAT TW UNIV OF SCI & TECH on 12/11/17

      


where
dr is the residual particle diameter;
k is the number of “subsystems” for the total particle-size
distribution; and
wi are weighting factors for the subcurves, subject to 0 <
wi < 1 and Σ wi = 1.
For a bimodal curve, k would be equal to 2 and the num-
ber of parameters to be determined is 4k + (k – 1) (i.e., 9).
The unimodal equation is used as the basis for the prediction A total of nine parameters must be computed when fitting
of the bimodal equation. The final equation for a bimodal the bimodal equation to data (i.e., stacking). Seven parame-
curve is given as follows in its extended form: ters can be determined using a nonlinear least squares fitting
   algorithm, and two parameters can be essentially fixed (i.e.,
   drbi and dm).
   Bimodal data sets can be closely fit using the bimodal
For personal use only.

  1  equation best-fit analysis. However, the best fit using a

[8] Pp (d) = w  mbi  unimodal equation provided only an adequate fit of the same
   nbi   
  ln exp(1) +  a bi    
data sets. On the other hand, if the data sets are unimodal in
     d    character, it is better to fit the data using the unimodal equa-
    tion. The superposition method provides a robust method of
fitting bimodal data sets. The results of fitting the bimodal
  curve to several different soils can be seen in Figs. 6–10.
  The R2 values for all bimodal fits was 0.999.
  Figure 6 shows a comparison of a bimodal and unimodal
 1 
+ (1 − w)  lbi  
best fit of a data set. The unimodal R2 value is 0.977 as op-
   k 
 j  bi    
posed to 0.999 for the bimodal best fit. Comparable reduc-
 ln exp(1) +  bi      tions in the R2 value are shown for the soils in Figs. 8–10.
    d    The bimodal silty sand shown in Fig. 7 (i.e., soil number
  
11492) also illustrates the bimodal particle sizes on the
arithmetic and logarithmic probability density function. The
  
7
analysis shows that it is the logarithmic probability density
  ln 1 + drbi   
    function that provides the most meaningful representation of
 d 
× 1 −   the dominant particle size. In this case the dominant particle
  ln 1 + drbi    sizes are approximately 0.008 and 0.5 mm.

   dm   
   Application of the mathematical function
where
for the grain-size distribution
abi is a parameter related to the initial breaking point The grain-size distribution has been used primarily for the
along the curve; classification of soils. The use of a mathematical equation to
nbi is a parameter related to the steepest slope along the fit the grain-size distribution provides several advantages for
curve; geotechnical engineering. First, the unimodal and bimodal
mbi is a parameter related to the shape of the curve; equations proposed in this paper provide a method for esti-
jbi is a parameter related to the second breaking point of mating a continuous function. Second, soils can be identified
the curve; on the basis of grain-size distribution by equations that are
kbi is a parameter related to the second steep slope along best fit to the data. This information can be stored in a data-
the curve; base and used for identification purposes. Third, equations
lbi is a parameter related to the second shape along the provide a consistent method for determining physical indices
curve; and such as percent clay, percent sand, percent silt, and particle-
drbi is a parameter related to the amount of fines in a soil. diameter variables such as d10, d20, d30, d50, and d60.

© 2000 NRC Canada

I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T00-015.vp
Tuesday, August 01, 2000 3:39:04 PM
 Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile
Composite Default screen

824 Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 37, 2000

Fig. 7. Example of fit of a gap-graded soil with the bimodal
equation for a clayey, silty sand: (a) best-fit curve, R2 = 0.999;
(b) arithmetic probability density function; (c) logarithmic proba-
bility density function (soil number 11492).
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by TPE/NAT TW UNIV OF SCI & TECH on 12/11/17
Fig. 8. Example of fit of a gap-graded clayey, silty sandy soil
with the unimodal equation (R2 = 0.984) and the bimodal equa-
tion (R2 = 0.999) (soil number 11492).

Fig. 9. Example of fit of a gap-graded soil with the unimodal

equation (R2 = 0.992) and the bimodal equation (R2 = 0.999)
(soil number 11493).
For personal use only.

Fig. 10. Example of fit of a gap-graded soil with the unimodal

equation (R2 = 0.987) and the bimodal equation (R2 = 0.999)
(soil number 11498).

The grain-size distribution has also been shown to be cen-

tral to several methods of estimating the soil-water charac-
teristic curve (Gupta and Larson 1979a, 1979b; Arya and
Paris 1981; Haverkamp and Parlange 1986; Ranjitkar 1989).
An accurate representation of the soil particle sizes is essen-
tial when the grain-size distribution curve is used as the

© 2000 NRC Canada

I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T00-015.vp
Tuesday, August 01, 2000 3:39:19 PM
 Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile
Composite Default screen
Fredlund et al.
Fig. 11. Unimodal parameter variation: (a) frequency distribution
of the natural logarithm of the parameter agr; (b) frequency dis-
tribution of the parameter ngr; (c) frequency distribution of the
parameter mgr .
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by TPE/NAT TW UNIV OF SCI & TECH on 12/11/17
For personal use only.
basis for the estimation of the soil-water characteristic
curve. The equations presented in this paper appear to pro-
vide an excellent basis for the estimation of the soil-water
characteristic curve (Fredlund et al. 1997).
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T00-015.vp
Tuesday, August 01, 2000 3:39:22 PM
825
Fig. 12. Determination of the soil fractions (i.e., percent clay,
silt, and sand), according to the USDA classification, when using
the unimodal equation.
Parameters of the grain-size distribution
equations
The unimodal fit of the grain-size distribution has been fit
to over 600 experimentally measured grain-size data sets
contained in the SoilVision® database. The unimodal fit per-
formed well with the exception of soils exhibiting bimodal
behaviour. The parameters of the unimodal equation appear
to vary in a manner similar to that of the parameters in the
Fredlund and Xing (1994) soil-water characteristic curve
equation.
Histograms showing the frequency distribution of
unimodal equation parameters are shown in Fig. 11. The fre-
quency distributions provide an indication of the mode and
range of each of the three main parameters for the soils con-
tained in the database. For example, the most frequent ngr
and mgr values were approximately 3 and 1, respectively.
One aspect of this study was to determine whether the
equation parameters could be grouped according to soil tex-
tural classifications. For example, is there a range of the pa-
rameter ngr typical for silty sands? The results of this
research indicate that general parameter groups can be iden-
tified but specific parameter groupings cannot be identified.
The influence of equation parameters on each other does not
allow for specific groupings. For example, the parameter ngr
influences the parameter mgr and vice versa. It was found
that grouping soils was more successful when parameters
with physical significance were selected. The groupings of
soil properties was better achieved by grouping soils accord-
ing to physical parameters such as percent clay, percent silt,
and percent sand, or using variables such as d10, d20, d30, d50,
and d60.
Determining physical parameters from the
grain-size distribution equation
One of the benefits of the two grain-size equations pre-
sented in this paper is that meaningful, physical variables
can be computed from the curves. The most commonly used
variables are percent clay, percent sand, percent silt, and di-
ameter variables such as d10, d20, d30, d50, and d60. The equa-
tions are in the form of percent passing a particular particle
© 2000 NRC Canada
 Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile
Composite Default screen
826
Fig. 13. Determination of the percent passing for any particle
size, d, for a unimodal grain-size distribution.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by TPE/NAT TW UNIV OF SCI & TECH on 12/11/17
size, Pp(d), where d is the particle diameter (mm). The per-
cent clay, percent silt, and percent sand can therefore be
read directly from the curve by substituting in the appropri-
ate diameters. The diameters used depend upon the criteria
associated with the various classification methods. For ex-
ample, the USDA classification boundaries are 0.002, 0.05,
and 2.0 mm for percent clay, percent silt, and percent sand,
respectively. The Unified Soil Classification System (USCS)
classification uses boundaries of 0.005, 0.075, and 4.75 mm
For personal use only.
for percent clay, percent silt, and percent sand, respectively.
The divisions can be determined for any classification
method by substituting the appropriate particle size into the
equations, as shown in Fig. 12.
The diameter variables must be read off the curve in an in-
verse manner. The particle-size diameter answers to the
question “what particle diameter has 10% of the total mass
smaller than this size?” Taking the inverse of either the
unimodal or bimodal equation is difficult. A “half-length”
algorithm was therefore used to read diameters from the
grain-size curve. An initial estimation diameter was selected
and the correction distance was progressively halved until
the iteration process yielded a minimal error. The results of
this process are shown in Fig. 13.
Application to the estimation of the soil-
water characteristic curve
Several current methods for the estimation of the soil-
water characteristic curve make use of the grain-size distri-
bution as the basis for the prediction (Arya and Paris 1981;
Haverkamp and Parlange 1986). The soil-water characteris-
tic curve has been found to be sensitive to the derivative of
the grain-size distribution (Fredlund et al. 1997). Methods of
estimating the soil-water characteristic curve have been
somewhat limited by the lack of a continuous grain-size dis-
tribution function. Current models often require grain-size
information to be estimated from the grain-size curve.
The grain-size distribution is theoretically a continuous
curve representing the amount of various particle sizes pres-
ent in soil. The soil-water characteristic curve is primarily a
representation of the pore sizes present in the soil. A method
for translating the particle-size distribution into a pore-size
distribution is central to most methods of estimating the soil-
water characteristic curve. An analysis of the soil can be
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T00-015.vp
Tuesday, August 01, 2000 3:39:23 PM
Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 37, 2000
performed by differentiating the grain-size equation as
shown by eq. [2]. The differentiated equation will produce a
particle-size probability density function that can be used as
the basis for further analysis. The particle-size distributions
calculated according to eq. [1] can vary over several orders
of magnitude.
Conclusions
Fitting of the grain-size distribution has historically been
a manual process or has involved the use of log-normal dis-
tributions of one, two, or three parameters. Unimodal and bi-
modal equations are presented in this paper to fit essentially
any grain-size distribution data set. The unimodal equation
was found to provide a good fit for a variety of soils. The
extremes of the grain-size distribution were also well fit by
the equation.
Gap-graded soils can be best fit using a bimodal equation.
The bimodal equation allows for a mathematical representa-
tion of any grain-size distribution where the sample contains
two distinctly different, but dominant particle-size groups.
Mathematical representation of the grain-size distribution
provides numerous benefits. First, the grain-size curves can
be identified and categorized. Likewise, the grain-size curves
can be located in a database using searching techniques.
Grain-size variables (i.e., percent clay, d10, d60, etc.) can be
mathematically determined from the equation. The unimodal
and bimodal equations provide a method for fitting the three
major soil categories of well-graded soils, uniform soils, and
gap-graded soils.
The proposed continuous mathematical function for the
grain-size curve sets the stage for further analysis to esti-
mate the soil-water characteristic curve of a soil.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Sai Vanapalli and Doug
Charleson for their assistance with the literature review. The
authors would also like to acknowledge the assistance of
Mrs. Noshin Zakerzadeh in the preparation of this paper.
References
Arya, L.M., and Paris, J.F. 1981. A physicoempirical model to pre-
dict the soil moisture characteristic from particle-size distribu-
tion and bulk density data. Soil Science Society of America
Journal, 45: 1023–1030.
ASTM. 1964a. Standard method of test for amount of material in
soils finer than the No. 200 sieve (D1140-54) (adopted 1954). In
Nomenclature and definitions standard methods suggested meth-
ods. 4th ed. American Society for Testing and Materials, Phila-
delphia, Pa., pp. 78–79.
ASTM. 1964b. Standard method for grain-size analysis of soil
(D422-63) (adopted 1963). In Nomenclature and definitions
standard methods suggested methods. 4th ed. American Society
for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pa., pp. 95–106.
Brooks, R.H., and Corey, A.T. 1964. Hydraulic properties of po-
rous media. Colorado State University, Hydrology Paper 3 (27).
Burdine, N.T. 1953. Relative permeability calculations from pore
size distribution data. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 5(3):
71–78.
Campbell, G.S. 1985. Soil physics with basic. Elsevier, New York.
© 2000 NRC Canada
 Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile
Composite Default screen
Fredlund et al.
Durner, W. 1994. Hydraulic conductivity estimation for soils with
heterogeneous pore structure. Water Resources Research, 30(2):
211–223.
Fredlund, D.G., and Xing, A. 1994. Equations for the soil-water
characteristic curve. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 31: 521–
532.
Fredlund, M.D., Fredlund, D.G., and Wilson, G.W. 1997. Predic-
tion of the soil-water characteristic curve from grain-size distri-
bution and volume-mass properties. In Proceedings of the 3rd
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by TPE/NAT TW UNIV OF SCI & TECH on 12/11/17
Brazilian Symposium on Unsaturated Soils, Rio de Janeiro, 22–
25 April 1997, Vol. 1, pp. 13–23.
Gardner, W.R. 1956. Representation of soil aggregate size distribu-
tion by a logarithmic-normal distribution. Soil Science Society
of America Proceedings, 20: 151–153.
Gardner, W.R. 1958. Some steady state solutions of the unsaturated
moisture flow equation with application to evaporation from a
water table. Soil Science, 85(4): 228–232.
Gardner, W.R. 1974. The permeability problem. Soil Science, 117:
243–249.
Gupta, S.C., and Larson, W.E. 1979a. Estimating soil-water reten-
tion characteristics from particle size distribution, organic matter
percent, and bulk density. Water Resources Research, 15(6):
1633–1635.
Gupta, S.C., and Larson, W.E. 1979b. A model for predicting pack-
ing density of soils using particle-size distribution. Soil Science
Society of America Journal, 43: 758–764.
Hagen, L.J., Skidmore, E.L., and Fryrear, D.W. 1987. Using two
For personal use only.
sieves to characterize dry soil aggregate size distribution. Trans-
actions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers,
30(1): 162–165.
I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T00-015.vp
Tuesday, August 01, 2000 3:39:24 PM
827
Haverkamp, R., and Parlange, J.Y. 1986. Predicting the water-
retention curve from a particle-size distribution: 1. Sandy soils
without organic matter. Soil Science, 142(6): 325–339.
Holtz, R.D., and Kovacs, W.D. 1981. An introduction to
geotechnical engineering. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs,
N.J.
Kemper, W.D., and Chepil, W.S. 1965. Size distribution of aggre-
gates. In Methods of soil analysis. Part 1. Edited by C.A. Black.
Agronomy, 9: 499–510.
Kohnke, H. 1968. Soil physics. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New
York, N.Y.
Lambe, W.T. 1951. Soil testing. John Wiley & Sons Inc., New
York, N.Y.
Mualem, Y. 1976. A new model for predicting the hydraulic con-
ductivity of unsaturated porous media. Water Resources Re-
search, 12: 513–522.
Ranjitkar, S.S.B. 1989. Prediction of hydraulic properties of unsat-
urated granular soils based on grain size data. Ph.D. thesis, Uni-
versity of Massachusetts.
Shirizi, M.A., and Boersma, L. 1984. A unifying quantitative anal-
ysis of soil texture. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 48:
142–147.
van Genuchten, M.T. 1980. A closed form equation for predicting
the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils. Soil Science So-
ciety of America Journal, 44: 892–890.
Wagner, L.E., and Ding, D. 1994. Representing aggregate size dis-
tributions as modified log normal distributions. Transactions of
the American Society of Agricultural Engineers, 37(3): 815–
821.
© 2000 NRC Canada
 This article has been cited by:

1. Sean T. O’Donnell, Bruce E. Rittmann, Edward Kavazanjian. 2017. MIDP: Liquefaction Mitigation via Microbial Denitrification
as a Two-Stage Process. I: Desaturation. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering 143:12, 04017094. [Crossref]
2. Sean T. O’Donnell, Edward Kavazanjian, Bruce E. Rittmann. 2017. MIDP: Liquefaction Mitigation via Microbial Denitrification
as a Two-Stage Process. II: MICP. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering 143:12, 04017095. [Crossref]
3. Stoney Q. Gan, Christopher A. Scholz. 2017. Skew Normal Distribution Deconvolution of Grain-size Distribution and Its
Application To 530 Samples from Lake Bosumtwi, Ghana. Journal of Sedimentary Research 87:11, 1214-1225. [Crossref]
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by TPE/NAT TW UNIV OF SCI & TECH on 12/11/17

4. Håkon Heyerdahl, Thomas Pabst. 2017. Comparison of Experimental and Predictive Approaches for Determination of Water
Retention Curves of Intact Samples of Quaternary Soils. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering 100. . [Crossref]
5. Hyoung Suk Suh, Tae Sup Yun. 2017. Modification of capillary pressure by considering pore throat geometry with the effects of
particle shape and packing features on water retention curves for uniformly graded sands. Computers and Geotechnics . [Crossref]
6. S. Roy, S. Rajesh. 2017. Influence of Confining Pressure on Water Retention Characteristics of Compacted Soil. Indian
Geotechnical Journal 76. . [Crossref]
7. F. MESKINI-VISHKAEE, N. DAVATGAR. 2017. Evaluation of Different Predictor Models of the Detailed Particle Size
Distribution. Pedosphere . [Crossref]
8. H. Bayat, M. Rastgou, A. Nemes, M. Mansourizadeh, P. Zamani. 2017. Mathematical models for soil particle-size distribution
and their overall and fraction-wise fitting to measurements. European Journal of Soil Science 68:3, 345-364. [Crossref]
9. Hyoung Suk Suh, Kwang Yeom Kim, Junhwan Lee, Tae Sup Yun. 2017. Quantification of bulk form and angularity of particle
with correlation of shear strength and packing density in sands. Engineering Geology 220, 256-265. [Crossref]
10. Li Yong, Huang Chengmin, Wang Baoliang, Tian Xiafei, Liu Jingjing. 2017. A unified expression for grain size distribution of
soils. Geoderma 288, 105-119. [Crossref]
11. Bernard Martineau. 2017. Formulation of a general gradation curve and its transformation to equivalent sigmoid form to represent
For personal use only.

grain size distribution. Road Materials and Pavement Design 18:1, 199-207. [Crossref]
12. Hongliang Tao, Chen Chen, Ping Jiang, Liyan Tang. 2017. Soil Water Characteristic Curves Based on Particle Analysis. Procedia
Engineering 174, 1289-1295. [Crossref]
13. Wei Liu, Wenwu Chen, Jun Bi, Gaochao Lin, Weijiang Wu, Xing Su. 2017. Fitting Performance of Different Models on Loess
Particle Size Distribution Curves. Advances in Materials Science and Engineering 2017, 1-15. [Crossref]
14. Leila Esmaeelnejad, Fatemeh Siavashi, Javad Seyedmohammadi, Mahmood Shabanpour. 2016. The best mathematical models
describing particle size distribution of soils. Modeling Earth Systems and Environment 2:4. . [Crossref]
15. Sanghyeong Lim, Hyunwook Choo, Woojin Lee, Changho Lee. 2016. The Characterization of Controlled Low Strength Material
(CLSM) Using High CaO Fly Ash without Chemical Alkaline Activator. Journal of the Korean Geoenvironmental Society 17:12,
17-26. [Crossref]
16. Fang Tan, Wan-Huan Zhou, Ka-Veng Yuen. 2016. Modeling the soil water retention properties of same-textured soils with
different initial void ratios. Journal of Hydrology 542, 731-743. [Crossref]
17. Hyoung Suk Suh, Yumin Jo, Tae Sup Yun, Kwang Yeom Kim. 2016. Shear Resistance of Sandy Soils Depending on Particle
Shape. Journal of the Korean Geotechnical Society 32:6, 41-48. [Crossref]
18. Vinay Kumar Gadi, Sanandam Bordoloi, Ankit Garg, Yasufumi Kobayashi, Lingaraj Sahoo. 2016. Improving and correcting
unsaturated soil hydraulic properties with plant parameters for agriculture and bioengineered slopes. Rhizosphere 1, 58-78.
[Crossref]
19. Jennifer Thompson, Ahmed M.A. Sattar, Bahram Gharabaghi, Richard C. Warner. 2016. Event-based total suspended sediment
particle size distribution model. Journal of Hydrology 536, 236-246. [Crossref]
20. M. A. Adabanija, E. A. Adetona, A. O. Akinyemi. 2016. Integrated approach for pavement deterioration assessments in a low
latitude crystalline basement of south-western Nigeria. Environmental Earth Sciences 75:4. . [Crossref]
21. Zong-qing Zhou, Pathegama Gamage Ranjith, Shu-cai Li. 2016. Optimal model for particle size distribution of granular soil.
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Geotechnical Engineering 169:1, 73-82. [Crossref]
22. D. C. Simpson, T. M. Evans. 2016. Behavioral Thresholds in Mixtures of Sand and Kaolinite Clay. Journal of Geotechnical and
Geoenvironmental Engineering 142:2, 04015073. [Crossref]
23. Rafael Angulo-Jaramillo, Vincenzo Bagarello, Massimo Iovino, Laurent Lassabatere. An Introduction to Soil and Water
Infiltration 1-42. [Crossref]
 24. Haibing Wang, Xiaopeng Jia, Kuan Li, Yongshan Li. 2015. Horizontal wind erosion flux and potential dust emission in arid and
semiarid regions of China: A major source area for East Asia dust storms. CATENA 133, 373-384. [Crossref]
25. Shunchao Qi, Sai K. Vanapalli. 2015. Hydro-mechanical coupling effect on surficial layer stability of unsaturated expansive soil
slopes. Computers and Geotechnics 70, 68-82. [Crossref]
26. Hossein Bayat, Mostafa Rastgo, Moharram Mansouri Zadeh, Harry Vereecken. 2015. Particle size distribution models, their
characteristics and fitting capability. Journal of Hydrology 529, 872-889. [Crossref]
27. Juan M. Menéndez-Aguado, Elizabeth Peña-Carpio, Carlos Sierra. 2015. Particle size distribution fitting of surface detrital
sediment using the Swrebec function. Journal of Soils and Sediments 15:9, 2004-2011. [Crossref]
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by TPE/NAT TW UNIV OF SCI & TECH on 12/11/17

28. R.P. Flood, J.D. Orford, J.M. McKinley, S. Roberson. 2015. Effective grain size distribution analysis for interpretation of tidal–
deltaic facies: West Bengal Sundarbans. Sedimentary Geology 318, 58-74. [Crossref]
29. Gyu-Hyun Go, Seung-Rae Lee, Nikhil N.V., Seok Yoon. 2015. A new performance evaluation algorithm for horizontal GCHPs
(ground coupled heat pump systems) that considers rainfall infiltration. Energy 83, 766-777. [Crossref]
30. Milan Cisty, Lubomir Celar, Peter Minaric. 2015. Conversion between Soil Texture Classification Systems using the Random
Forest Algorithm. Air, Soil and Water Research 8, ASWR.S31924. [Crossref]
31. Sam Roberson, Gert Jan Weltje. 2014. Inter-instrument comparison of particle-size analysers. Sedimentology 61:4, 1157-1174.
[Crossref]
32. X. Li, J.H. Li, L.M. Zhang. 2014. Predicting bimodal soil–water characteristic curves and permeability functions using physically
based parameters. Computers and Geotechnics 57, 85-96. [Crossref]
33. Mohammad Taghi Tirgarsoltani, Manoochehr Gorji, Mohammad Hossein Mohammadi, Humberto Millan. 2014. Evaluation of
models for description of wet aggregate size distribution from soils of different land uses. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 60:2,
123-133. [Crossref]
34. Robert P. Chapuis, Véronique Dallaire, Antoine Saucier. 2014. Getting Information from Modal Decomposition of Grain Size
Distribution Curves. Geotechnical Testing Journal 37:2, 20120218. [Crossref]
For personal use only.

35. Wei Shangguan, YongJiu Dai, Carlos García-Gutiérrez, Hua Yuan. 2014. Particle-Size Distribution Models for the Conversion of
Chinese Data to FAO/USDA System. The Scientific World Journal 2014, 1-11. [Crossref]
36. C. Antinoro, V. Bagarello, V. Ferro, G. Giordano, M. Iovino. 2014. A simplified approach to estimate water retention for Sicilian
soils by the Arya–Paris model. Geoderma 213, 226-234. [Crossref]
37. Yanan Cheng, Jianli Liu, Jiabao Zhang. 2013. Fractal estimation of soil water retention curves using CT images. Acta Agriculturae
Scandinavica, Section B - Soil & Plant Science 63:5, 442-452. [Crossref]
38. Harianto Rahardjo, Alfrendo Satyanaga, Eng-Choon Leong, Jing-Yuan Wang. 2013. Unsaturated properties of recycled concrete
aggregate and reclaimed asphalt pavement. Engineering Geology 161, 44-54. [Crossref]
39. Jaime Horta, Eduardo Rojas, María L. Pérez-Rea, Teresa López, Juan B. Zaragoza. 2013. A random solid-porous model to simulate
the retention curves of soils. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics 37:8, 932-944. [Crossref]
40. Alfrendo Satyanaga, Harianto Rahardjo, Eng-Choon Leong, Jin-Yuan Wang. 2013. Water characteristic curve of soil with bimodal
grain-size distribution. Computers and Geotechnics 48, 51-61. [Crossref]
41. M.H. MOHAMMADI, F. MESKINI-VISHKAEE. 2013. Predicting Soil Moisture Characteristic Curves from Continuous
Particle-Size Distribution Data. Pedosphere 23:1, 70-80. [Crossref]
42. Yves-Dady Botula, Wim M. Cornelis, Geert Baert, Paul Mafuka, Eric Ranst. 2013. Particle size distribution models for soils of
the humid tropics. Journal of Soils and Sediments . [Crossref]
43. Maki Ito, Shahid Azam. 2013. Engineering properties of a vertisolic expansive soil deposit. Engineering Geology 152:1, 10-16.
[Crossref]
44. Songhao Shang. 2013. Log-Cubic Method for Generation of Soil Particle Size Distribution Curve. The Scientific World Journal
2013, 1-7. [Crossref]
45. Hamid Reza Fooladmand, Maryam Mansuri. 2013. Comparison of two models for estimating the soil particle-size distribution
curve based on soil textural data. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 59:1, 83-92. [Crossref]
46. Samir Hamza, Noureddine Slimane, Zitouni Azari, Guy Pluvinage. 2013. Structural and mechanical properties of the coral and
nacre and the potentiality of their use as bone substitutes. Applied Surface Science 264, 485-491. [Crossref]
47. Mohammed Q. H. AL-Jumaily, Thanoon H. AL-Dabbagh. 2013. A New Approach for Smoothing Soil Grain Size Curve
Determined by Hydrometer. International Journal of Geosciences 04:09, 1285-1291. [Crossref]
 48. V. Bagarello, M. Iovino. 2012. Testing the BEST procedure to estimate the soil water retention curve. Geoderma 187-188, 67-76.
[Crossref]
49. . References 864-909. [Crossref]
50. Gert Jan Weltje, Sam Roberson. 2012. Numerical methods for integrating particle-size frequency distributions. Computers &
Geosciences 44, 156-167. [Crossref]
51. Alejandro C. Frery, Lorena Rivarola-Duarte, Viviane Carrilho Leão Ramos, Adeildo Soares Ramos, William Wagner Matos Lira.
2012. Stochastic particle packing with specified granulometry and porosity. Granular Matter 14:1, 27-36. [Crossref]
52. Harianto Rahardjo, Alfrendo Satyanaga, Gabriele A.R. D'Amore, Eng-Choon Leong. 2012. Soil–water characteristic curves of
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by TPE/NAT TW UNIV OF SCI & TECH on 12/11/17

gap-graded soils. Engineering Geology 125, 102-107. [Crossref]

53. S. Bottiglieri, R. A. Haber. Ultrasonic Nondestructive Characterization and its Correlation to Alumina Microstructure 127-137.
[Crossref]
54. M. Jamei, H. Guiras, Y. Chtourou, A. Kallel, E. Romero, I. Georgopoulos. 2011. Water retention properties of perlite as a material
with crushable soft particles. Engineering Geology 122:3-4, 261-271. [Crossref]
55. Amir M. Abdolahzadeh, Benoit Lacroix Vachon, Alexandre R. Cabral. 2011. Assessment of the Design of an Experimental Cover
with Capillary Barrier Effect Using 4 Years of Field Data. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering 29:5, 783-802. [Crossref]
56. V. Bagarello, G. Provenzano, A. Sgroi. 2009. Fitting particle size distribution models to data from Burundian soils for the BEST
procedure and other purposes. Biosystems Engineering 104:3, 435-441. [Crossref]
57. Delwyn G.FredlundD.G. Fredlund, Sandra L.HoustonS.L. Houston. 2009. Protocol for the assessment of unsaturated soil
properties in geotechnical engineering practice. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 46:6, 694-707. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF
Plus]
58. X.LiX. Li, L. M.ZhangL.M. Zhang. 2009. Characterization of dual-structure pore-size distribution of soil. Canadian Geotechnical
Journal 46:2, 129-141. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF Plus]
59. Hyen Chung Chun, Daniel Giménez, Sung Won Yoon. 2008. Morphology, lacunarity and entropy of intra-aggregate pores:
For personal use only.

Aggregate size and soil management effects. Geoderma 146:1-2, 83-93. [Crossref]
60. Jorge E. F. W. Lima, Euzebio M. da Silva. 2007. Seleção de modelos para o traçado de curvas granulométricas de sedimentos em
suspensão em rios. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental 11:1, 101-107. [Crossref]
61. Yusong Li, Eugene J. LeBoeuf, P.K. Basu, Sankaran Mahadevan. 2005. Stochastic modeling of the permeability of randomly
generated porous media. Advances in Water Resources 28:8, 835-844. [Crossref]
62. Sang Il Hwang. 2004. Effect of texture on the performance of soil particle-size distribution models. Geoderma 123:3-4, 363-371.
[Crossref]
63. Euzebio Medrado da Silva, Jorge Enoch Furquim Werneck Lima, Lineu Neiva Rodrigues, Juscelino Antônio de Azevedo. 2004.
Comparação de modelos matemáticos para o traçado de curvas granulométricas. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira 39:4, 363-370.
[Crossref]
64. Gilson de F. N. Gitirana, Delwyn G. Fredlund. 2004. Soil-Water Characteristic Curve Equation with Independent Properties.
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering 130:2, 209-212. [Crossref]
65. A. Nemes∗, W.J. Rawls. Soil texture and particle-size distribution as input to estimate soil hydraulic properties 47-70. [Crossref]
66. Murray D Fredlund, G Ward Wilson, Delwyn G Fredlund. 2002. Use of the grain-size distribution for estimation of the soil-
water characteristic curve. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 39:5, 1103-1117. [Abstract] [PDF] [PDF Plus]
67. Craig A. Burger, Charles D. Shackelford. 2001. Soil-Water Characteristic Curves and Dual Porosity of Sand–Diatomaceous Earth
Mixtures. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering 127:9, 790-800. [Crossref]