Statistical Reappraisal of the Wax and Mercury Methods for Shrinkage Limit Determinations of Fine-Grained Soils

Abstract

AbstractBecause of the hazards associated with handling mercury, most standards organizations have withdrawn the conventional mercury (displacement) method (MM) for shrinkage limit (SL) determination of fine-grained soils. Despite attempts to substantiate the wax (coating) method (WM), which is presently the only standardized MM-testing alternative, the geotechnical community remains somewhat hesitant of its adoption in routine practice. To encourage more widespread use of WM-testing, this study re-examines the level of agreement between the MM- and WM-deduced SL parameters (i.e., SLMM and SLWM, respectively). This was achieved by performing comprehensive statistical analyses on the largest and most diverse database of its kind, to date, entailing SLMM:SLWM measurements for 168 different fine-grained soils having wide ranges of plasticity characteristics (i.e., liquid limit = 31.6–362.0%, plasticity index = 8.2–318.0% and SLMM = 7.1–42.0%). Furthermore, an attempt was made to evaluate the SLWM (in lieu of the SLMM) parameter for performing preliminary soil expansivity assessments using existing SLMM-based classification approaches. It was demonstrated that the MM and WM methods do not produce identical SL values for a given fine-grained soil under similar testing conditions, with their discrepancy being systematic and hence likely arising from the differences between the materials (mercury versus wax) and methodologies involved in performing these tests. New SLWM → SLMM conversion relationships were established, allowing SLMM to be deduced as a function of SLWM with high accuracy. Hence, when inputting SLWM in SLMM-based empirical correlations to predict other geoengineering design parameters, the newly proposed conversion relationships can be employed to minimize systematic prediction errors. It was also demonstrated that plasticity-based correlations, at best, can only provide a rough approximation of SLMM. Hence, when the SL is desired, WM-testing or any other alternative method that directly and reliably measures the soil shrinkage factors should be retained. Finally, the same soil-expansivity rankings, as obtained for existing classification systems employing SLMM results, are achieved using SLWM measurements (i.e., without the need of applying SLWM → SLMM conversion equations).