Effect of Admixture on the Hydraulic Conductivity of Compacted Loess: A Case Study

Table 4

Test details of the LTL samples.

Specimen identification	Ca(OH)2 (%)^a	Dry density, dr (mg/m^3)	Void ratio after compaction, e0	Void ratio before test, e	Saturated hydraulic conductivity, ksat (m/s)
LTL-12	3	1.5	0.789	0.787	2.48 × 10^−6
LTL-13	3	1.55	0.732	0.730	9.63 × 10^−7
LTL-14	3	1.6	0.677	0.676	5.11 × 10^−7
LTL-15	3	1.65	0.627	0.625	2.61 × 10^−7
LTL-16	3	1.7	0.579	0.577	8.96 × 10^−8
LTL-17	3	1.75	0.534	0.532	8.79 × 10^−9
LTL-18	6	1.45	0.841	0.837	3.30 × 10^−6
LTL-19	6	1.5	0.779	0.775	1.50 × 10^−6
LTL-20	6	1.55	0.722	0.718	7.19 × 10^−7
LTL-21	6	1.6	0.668	0.664	2.56 × 10^−7
LTL-22	6	1.65	0.618	0.614	1.08 × 10^−7
LTL-23	6	1.7	0.570	0.567	2.88 × 10^−8
LTL-24	6	1.75	0.525	0.522	9.68 × 10^−9
LTL-25	12	1.4	0.887	0.879	2.90 × 10^−6
LTL-26	12	1.45	0.822	0.814	2.52 × 10^−6
LTL-27	12	1.5	0.761	0.754	1.17 × 10^−6
LTL-28	12	1.55	0.704	0.697	5.80 × 10^−7
LTL-29	12	1.6	0.651	0.644	2.04 × 10^−7
LTL-30	12	1.65	0.601	0.595	7.20 × 10^−8
LTL-31	12	1.7	0.554	0.548	3.80 × 10^−8

^aPercent by weight.