Comparative Hydro-Mechanical Response of Marl and Chikoko Soils from the Niger Delta to Multiple Wetting and Drying Cycles


Authors : Chukuma, A. Vincent; Temple C. Nwofor; Chiedozie F. Ikebude

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 7 - July


Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/2s3nz7ta

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25jul149

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Note : Google Scholar may take 30 to 40 days to display the article.


Abstract : This study compares how two different but common soil types—Marl and Chikoko soils—respond to various cycles of wetting and drying. In a three-level, four-factor full factorial design framework, these soils—Marl, a calcareous clay, and Chikoko, an organic-rich swampy clay—were all subjected to a rigorous experimental program using standard and modified oedometer tests. Their volumetric changes, deformation characteristics, and tensile strength properties were carefully compared in the investigation under various conditions, including changes in initial moisture content, dry density, surcharge pressure, and the number of wetting and drying cycles. The main conclusions show that although both soils are highly susceptible to cracking and show considerable volumetric instability, their specific reactions, accumulation of cumulative strain, and patterns of degradation are very different. While Chikoko soil exhibits complex, frequently larger magnitude, volumetric changes and greater susceptibility to structural degradation influenced by its organic content, Marl soil typically exhibits more classical expansive clay behavior with noticeable swell. A monolithic approach to geotechnical engineering in the Niger Delta is discouraged by the study, which emphasizes that the best design strategies for preventing moisture-induced damage in the area must be specifically tailored to the distinct hydro-mechanical profile of each soil type. This comparative understanding is essential for creating infrastructure solutions that are more sustainable and resilient.

Keywords : Marl Soil, Chikoko Soil, Niger Delta, Comparative Study, Wetting and Drying Cycles, Volumetric Change, Deformation, Tensile Strength, Expansive Soils, Organic Soils.

References :

  1. S. N. Abduljauwad, “Engineering behavior of compacted sabkha soil,” J. Geotech. Eng., vol. 117, no. 12, pp. 1845–1863, 1991.
  2. E. G. Akpokodje, “The engineering geology of the Niger Delta,” Eng. Geol., vol. 24, no. 1–4, pp. 317–331, 1987.
  3. A. S. Al-Homoud, A. A. Basma, and M. Husein, “Geotechnical characteristics of marl from northern Jordan,” Eng. Geol., vol. 40, no. 3–4, pp. 213–224, 1995.
  4. A. S. Al-Homoud, A. A. Basma, and M. Husein, “Performance of spread footings on collapsible marl soil,” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., vol. 123, no. 7, pp. 675–684, 1997.
  5. A. A. Al-Rawas and H. Goosen, Expansive Soils: Recent Advances in Characterization and Treatment, CRC Press, 2006.
  6. C. Bardanis and A. Chatzidimitriou, “Effect of wetting-drying cycles on the mechanical properties of an expansive clay from Greece,” Eng. Geol., vol. 123, no. 3, pp. 260–267, 2011.
  7. A. A. Basma, A. S. Al-Homoud, and M. Husein, “Shear strength characteristics of compacted marl,” Geotech. Test. J., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 362–371, 1995.
  8. K. Brady, M. Husein, and S. Rahman, “Tensile strength of compacted cohesive soils,” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., vol. 135, no. 11, pp. 1690–1701, 2009.
  9. F. H. Chen, Foundations on Expansive Soils, Elsevier, 1988.
  10. R. W. Day, “Expansive clayey soils,” in Eng. Prop. Expansive Soils, McGraw-Hill, 1994, pp. 1–27.
  11. T. B. Edil and I. B. Mochtar, “Settlement of organic soils,” J. Geotech. Eng., vol. 115, no. 11, pp. 1591–1609, 1989.
  12. J. O. Etu-Efeotor and E. G. Akpokodje, “Geotechnical properties of some Niger Delta soils and their implications on foundation design,” Eng. Geol., vol. 28, no. 3–4, pp. 333–345, 1990.
  13. D. G. Fredlund and H. Rahardjo, Soil Mechanics for Unsaturated Soils, John Wiley & Sons, 1993.
  14. R. E. Grim, Clay Mineralogy, McGraw-Hill, 1968.
  15. W. G. Holtz and H. J. Gibbs, “Engineering properties of expansive clays,” Trans. ASCE, vol. 121, no. 1, pp. 641–671, 1956.
  16. L. D. Jones and I. Jefferson, “Expansive soils,” in ICE Manual of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 1, ICE Publishing, 2012, pp. 517–536.
  17. J. M. Konrad and R. Ayad, “A new test procedure for measuring the tensile strength of cohesive soils,” Can. Geotech. J., vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 585–592, 1997.
  18. L. Li and C. Zhao, “Cumulative deformation of compacted expansive soils under cyclic wetting and drying,” Eng. Geol., vol. 119, no. 3–4, pp. 163–170, 2011.
  19. A. Mesida, “Geotechnical characteristics of residual soils in Nigeria,” Eng. Geol., vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 173–181, 1989.
  20. C. J. Miller and N. Yesiller, “Impact of desiccation on compacted clay liners,” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., vol. 128, no. 7, pp. 579–585, 2002.
  21. J. K. Mitchell, Fundamentals of Soil Behavior, John Wiley & Sons, 1993.
  22. J. K. Mitchell and K. Soga, Fundamentals of Soil Behavior, 3rd ed., John Wiley & Sons, 2005.
  23. D. C. Montgomery, Design and Analysis of Experiments, 9th ed., John Wiley & Sons, 2017.
  24. H. H. Nahlawi and D. R. Katti, “Tensile strength of expansive clays,” Eng. Geol., vol. 59, no. 3–4, pp. 213–225, 2001.
  25. J. D. Nelson and D. J. Miller, Expansive Soils: Problems and Practice in Foundation and Pavement Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, 1992.
  26. S. A. Ola, “Geotechnical properties of a black cotton soil,” Géotechnique, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 263–269, 1974.
  27. K. J. Osinubi, “Influence of compactive efforts on permeability of compacted lateritic soils,” J. Transp. Eng., vol. 125, no. 2, pp. 127–133, 1999.
  28. K. J. Osinubi and V. Y. Katte, “Effect of compaction on the compressibility of a black cotton soil,” Niger. J. Eng. Manag., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 1997.
  29. K. J. Osinubi, P. Yohanna, and A. A. Adejumo, “Compressibility of black cotton soil treated with rice husk ash,” J. Mater. Civ. Eng., vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 184–190, 2009.
  30. A. L. A. Perera, H. Konietzky, and J. D. Frost, “Numerical simulation of desiccation cracking in compacted clays,” Geotech. Geol. Eng., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 129–145, 2005.
  31. J. T. Pidgeon, “Swelling and shrinkage of expansive clays,” in Proc. 12th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., vol. 1, pp. 295–298, 1989.
  32. H. B. Seed, R. J. Woodward, and R. Lundgren, “Prediction of swelling potential for compacted clays,” J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., vol. 88, no. SM3, pp. 53–88, 1962.
  33. M. Sharma and S. P. Singh, “Effect of moisture content on the shear strength of compacted granular soils,” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., vol. 133, no. 12, pp. 1539–1547, 2007.
  34. A. Sridharan and Y. Gurtug, “The swelling behaviour of compacted expansive clays,” Eng. Geol., vol. 72, no. 1–2, pp. 9–18, 2004.
  35. A. Sridharan and M. S. Jayadeva, “Volume change behaviour of montmorillonite-rich clays,” Géotechnique, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 317–324, 1982.
  36. A. Sridharan and H. B. Nagaraj, “Specific surface and consolidation behavior of soils,” Geotech. Eng., vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 65–71, 2005.
  37. A. Sridharan and S. M. Rao, “Characterization of expansive soils,” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., vol. 127, no. 8, pp. 705–708, 2001.
  38. C. Tang, B. Shi, C. Liu, L. Gao, and H. I. Inyang, “Desiccation cracking of soils: A review,” Eng. Geol., vol. 184, pp. 118–132, 2015.
  39. K. Terzaghi, Theoretical Soil Mechanics, John Wiley & Sons, 1943.
  40. D. H. Van der Merwe, “The prediction of heave from the plasticity index,” Civ. Eng. South Africa, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 103–107, 1964.
  41. S. K. Vanapalli, D. G. Fredlund, and D. E. Pufahl, “The influence of matric suction on the shear strength of unsaturated soils,” Can. Geotech. J., vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 940–947, 1996.
  42. P. Voottipruex and P. Jamsawang, “Shear strength behavior of compacted expansive clay under cyclic wetting-drying conditions,” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., vol. 140, no. 11, p. 04014068, 2014.
  43. N. Yesiller, C. Miller, G. Inci, and K. Yaldo, “Desiccation and cracking behaviour of three compacted landfill liner soils,” Eng. Geol., vol. 57, no. 1–2, pp. 105–121, 2000.
  44. S. Yoshida and K. Adachi, “Numerical analysis of crack generation in saturated deformable soil under row-planted vegetation,” Geoderma, vol. 120, no. 1–2, pp. 63–74, 2004.
  45. Y. Yoshimi and T. Kishida, “A ring torsion apparatus for evaluating friction between soil and metal surfaces,” Geotech. Test. J., vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 145–152, 1981.
  46. B. Zhang, Q. Li, H. Yuan, and X. Sun, “Tensile fracture characteristics of compacted soils under uniaxial tension,” J. Mater. Civ. Eng., vol. 27, no. 10, p. 04015013, 2015.
  47. Z. Zhang, H. Zhou, Q. Zhao, H. Lin, and X. Peng, “Characteristics of cracks in two paddy soils and their impacts on preferential flow,” Geoderma, vol. 228–229, pp. 1–10, 2014.

This study compares how two different but common soil types—Marl and Chikoko soils—respond to various cycles of wetting and drying. In a three-level, four-factor full factorial design framework, these soils—Marl, a calcareous clay, and Chikoko, an organic-rich swampy clay—were all subjected to a rigorous experimental program using standard and modified oedometer tests. Their volumetric changes, deformation characteristics, and tensile strength properties were carefully compared in the investigation under various conditions, including changes in initial moisture content, dry density, surcharge pressure, and the number of wetting and drying cycles. The main conclusions show that although both soils are highly susceptible to cracking and show considerable volumetric instability, their specific reactions, accumulation of cumulative strain, and patterns of degradation are very different. While Chikoko soil exhibits complex, frequently larger magnitude, volumetric changes and greater susceptibility to structural degradation influenced by its organic content, Marl soil typically exhibits more classical expansive clay behavior with noticeable swell. A monolithic approach to geotechnical engineering in the Niger Delta is discouraged by the study, which emphasizes that the best design strategies for preventing moisture-induced damage in the area must be specifically tailored to the distinct hydro-mechanical profile of each soil type. This comparative understanding is essential for creating infrastructure solutions that are more sustainable and resilient.

Keywords : Marl Soil, Chikoko Soil, Niger Delta, Comparative Study, Wetting and Drying Cycles, Volumetric Change, Deformation, Tensile Strength, Expansive Soils, Organic Soils.

CALL FOR PAPERS


Paper Submission Last Date
31 - December - 2025

Video Explanation for Published paper

Never miss an update from Papermashup

Get notified about the latest tutorials and downloads.

Subscribe by Email

Get alerts directly into your inbox after each post and stay updated.
Subscribe
OR

Subscribe by RSS

Add our RSS to your feedreader to get regular updates from us.
Subscribe