THE EFFECT OF MECHANICAL COMFQSITION

AND CLAY MlNERAL TYPES ON THE
MOESTURE PROPERTiES OF SO!LS

Thai: for tho Dogma of Fit. D.
W‘CHIGAN NATE COLLEGE
Law/is H. Sfolzy
I954

VXIIV". }. :,,_‘.:

mm ’

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled
The Effect of Mechanical Composition and Clay
Mineral Types on the Moisture Properties of Soils

presented bg

Lewis Hal Stolzy

has been accepted towards fulfillment

of the requirements for

Doctor of Philosophy degree in 5011 Science

URLM

Major professor

Date Febru 2 1

._ “1‘
‘T‘

TY’E FfiF‘F‘ECT C‘F‘ iii‘IC‘F/XNICAL Uri-1730.5ITIC-N
All!) CLAY MII‘JVIUKL 'I'YT’LCS ON THE

MUISTURE PROPERIIES U? dUILS

By

Lewis H. tolzy
“Nu.

AN ABSTRACT

Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan
State College of Agriculture and Applied Science
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of 5011 Science

19%;

Approved by a? ,_ L- eo—irg

*HESIS

Lewis H. dtolzy
ABSTRACT
The Effect of Mechanical Composition and Clay mineral Types
on the Moisture PrOperties of Soils

A study was made on the moisture cnaracteristics of thirty-eight
Michigan soils. Moisture properties were determined on cores and bag
samples taken from each horizon. Field capacity measurements were
made on the different horizons after they were artificially saturated
and allowed to free drain for 9b to he hours.

The soil cores were taken into the laboratory and various tensions
from 0 to 1 atmOSphere were determined on the tension table and by
the porous plate method. Tensions from 3 to 27.19 atmospheres were
determined on less than two millimeters air dry samples taken from the
different horizons. The pressure-membrane apparatus was used for these
determinations. Moisture equivalents, mechanical analyses and wilting
point determinations were also made on the soil samples.

The Norelco X-ray spectrometer was used to determine the types
and amounts of clay minerals present in the soil clays. Montmorillonite,
illite and kaolinite were present in Micnigan soils. Illite pre-
dominated in most horizons. Kaolinite was generally present in the
different horizons in varying amounts. Montmorillonite was the least
common in the different horizons with twenty percent using the largest
amount present in any one horizon.

The data for the various horizons for each soil were tabled and

the moisture release curves for these horizons were drawn. The field

ID

.

via

4.
rU

OK

Lewis H. otolzy
capacity, moisture equivalent and tno wilting point were indicated on
the release curves. The drop in moisiure tension values from 1 to 5
atmoSpheres especially on the AP horizon indicated that soil structure
is still a factor to be considered in moisture studies above 1 atmosphere.

The relations.ip of ficlc capacity to moisture equivalent, to O.d6
atmOSphere tension and to Q.j5 atmosphere tension were studied. Similar
relationships for field capacity and moisture equivalent were found
for Michigan soils as were found by other investigators for soils in
different parts of the country. Samples with field capacity values
below l2 percent have a much lower moisture equivalent. Those from
12 percent to 22 percent moisture equivalent approach field capacity
but are still lower. Samples with above 22 percent moisture equivalent
have lower field capacities. The 0.00 atmosplere tension is the best
measure of field capacity on samples below l: percent moisture while
a tension between 0.30 atmoSphere and o.55 atnOSphere would be the
best measure of field capacity above la percent.

The permanent wilting percentaqcs were determined on the stems
of tomato plants. ‘These percentages were then compared with the j,

8 and 15 atloSphere tensions. The permanent wilting percentage
approached most nearly the 5 atmosphere tensions with the line of
best fit falling between the 5 and 8 atmospheres tension.

The percent of available water in the different soil horizons
varied from h to 16 percent moisture on surface soils when the clay
content of the soil sample was less than 28 percent. This decreased

with higher percentages of clay. Subsurface samples had from h to

Lewis H. Stolzy
lo percent available moisture when the clay content of the soil
sample was less than 16 percent. While subsurface samples with
clay contents higher than lo percent decreased in available water with

increasing percentages of clay.

TAB EFFJCT or rucsaulcas cnnroslrlen
AND CLAY MINERAL TYPES on THE

MOISTURE PEOPEMTIES OF SJILS

By

Lewis B. Stolzy

A THESIS

Submitted to the School of Graduste Studies of Michigan
state College of Agriculture and Applied Science
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTQK O? PHILOdUPhY
Department of Soil Science

195h

ACRNQWLELthENT

The author exyresses nis appreciation to Lr. A. E. Erickson for
his interest and guidance throughout the course of this stud“. The
author also wishes to thank him at this time for his willingness to
secure equipment which was sucn a necessary part of this investigation.

Particular acknowledgement is due Mr. D. E. Van Farowe of the
Michigan Department of Health for his assistance and cooperation
in using the X-ray spectrometer of the health Department.

He is also indebted to Doctors E. P. Whiteside and R. L. Cook

for their assistance in the preparation of the final manuscript.

TABLE 0” CCNTEfiTS

'1‘}! ~ 'f‘fl ‘V 1
.UFROLLbl.Jflooooooooooooooo00.0.0000.0.000000000000000.coo-00000000

EXFEHIHRHTAL PROCEDUnE..............................-...o-o...-.oo.
ASSULTS AND LISCUSSION.............................................
The loisture Melease Curves......................................
Clay Minerals....................................................
Moisture Relationships of Field Capacity.........................
Field Capacity versus Noisture Equivalent......................
Field Capacity versus o.oe AtmoSphere..........................

Field cap&City versus 0055 Atmosphere..........................

Relationship of Fielc Capacity to Structure and Types of Clay

Minerals..................................................
MOiSture RelatiJnShipS at the hilting POintooooooooooo000000.000.
Relationship of hilting Point to Lifferent Tensions............

Relationship of Permanent Wilting Percentages to Percent Clay
and Typa Of Clay MineralSeoeooooo.oooooeoeoeoooooooooeoooo

Percent Available Rater..........................................
Percent Available Water Based on Field Capacity................
Percent Available hater Based on Moisture Tensions.............

SUMMAhY............................................................

LITEMTUI‘E CITEDCOOOOOOOOO0.000......OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.00.00.00.00

IXPPEIVrDIXOOOOOOOOOO00.00.00.000000000000000COOOOOOOOOQOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

PAGE

a:
v1 \J

R)
\J,

50
50
5o
ii

55
55
5o

bl
143
A}

A6

INTKQDJCTlJN

Much of the experimental data generally gathered on different
Michigan soils are mainly concerned with the chemical and nutrient
relationships between soils and plants. Until recently there has
been little organized effort to determine the moisture characteristics
of the different soil types in Michigan. The need for such a study
in this state has prompted a project in which the moieture characteristics
of the soil profile of the more important agricultural soils are
studied in detail. The one phase of this project that is included in
this investigation shows how the types and sizes of soil materials can
affect the different moisture determinations of the soils.

Field capacity and wilting perCentage are the physical properties
most often referred to in any soil moisture study. Field capacity
is generally considered as the amount of water a soil retains against
the force of gravity one to three days after water has been applied
either as rain or irrigation. The moisture content of a soil after
a plant has permanently wilted is considered the wilting percentage
of that soil. Most of the investigations concerning field capacity
and wilting percentages have been concerned with the development of
rapid methods of measuring these two points on soils taken from the
field. The results Obtained differ from one region to another, with
different types of soils and with the investigators.

Briggs and McLane (5) developed one of the first methods for

determining a measure of field capacity which they termed "moisture

equivalent". This is numerically equal to the percentage of moisture
that a soil can hold against a centrifical force lJUU times that of
gravity. This single determination has been studied and used more
intensively than any other soil moisture characteriStic. Briggs and
Shantg (6) later correlated moisture equivalent with wilting percentage.
After making 1500 determinations on #0 different soils, they concluded
that the wilting coefficient could be determined by dividing the moisture
equivalent by the factor of 1.8h.

Veihmeyer and Hendrickson (52) (55) conducted intensive studies
on the relationship of moisture equivalent to field capacity, wilting
percentage and mechanical analysis. They found moisture equivalent
to be a good indication of field capacity for soils with a moisture
equivalent from 50 percent down to about 12 to lh percent. Below
this range, moisture equivalent is less than field capacity. They
also found that a linear relationship does not exist between wilting
point and moisture equivalent. The ratio varies from l.u to 5.8 with
both high and low ratios with sands as well as clays. They also
showed that moisture equivalent is a fairly reliable measure of the
texture of the soil. ‘

Browning (7) and Harding (12) found that moisture equivalent was
equal to field capacity at a value of about 21 percent; while soils
with moisture equivalent lower than this had a greater field capacity
value and soil with moisture equivalent higher than 21 percent had a
lowez'.field capacity value. Stoltenberg and Lauritzen (30) found

that the ratio of moisture equivalent to field capacity varied from

0.714 t0 10214.0

\31

Middleton (17) and Smith (25) seemed to think that there was a
direct relationship between moisture equivalent and the percentages
of sand, silt and clay as determined by mechanical analysis. The
presence of considerable amounts of organic matter in the soil seemed
to increase the moisture equivalent and disturbed the relationship
between the moisture equivalent and mecnanical analysis. Bouyoucos
(5) found no relationship between coarse silt and sand and tne moisture
equivalent.~ However, he found a remarkably close relationship between
the moisture equivalent and the colloidal content of tne soil.

Wilcox and Spilsourg (56) found that the field capacities of
certain Canadian soils were closely related to the percentages of
sand they contained. Wilcox (55) in a separate investigation of 95
soils collected at two different depths found that organic matter
content did not affect field capacity. Moisture equivalent proved
to be the best laboratory determination of field capacity and permanent
wilting percentage, while the determination of percentage of sand
and colloidal material proved reasonably satisfactory. It was evident
in his investigation that as the soil particles became finer the
range between field capacity and wilting percentage became greater
up to a clay content of about 55 percent.

Coile (8) studied the effect of incorporated organic matter on
the moisture equivalent and wilting percentage values of soils. He
found that incorporated organic matter greatly increased the moisture
equivalent on light-textured soils while the wilting percentage was
increased at a lesser rate. on fine-textured soils moisture equivalent

was increased but not at the same rate as in those of coarser texture.

Wilting percentage values of fine-textured soils appeared to be but
little affected by incorporated orpanic matter. Coile also concluded
that the commonly used ratio, l.dh, of moisture equivalent to wilting
percentage was of very little value. RobertSon and Kohnke (27) using
twenty samples from different depths of seven Indiana soils found no
correlation between wilting percentage and the texture or the organic
matter content of soils.

Furr and Reeve (10) used 60 southern California soils in their
study of permanent wilting in relation to soil moisture. The sunflower
was used as the test plant. They classified wilting into two stages:
first, permanent wilting point as marked by permanent wilting of the
basal leaves and the ultimate wilting point as marked by complete
permanent wilting of the apical leaves. It was found that the ratio
of the moisture equivalent to the first permanent wilting point or the
ultimate wilting point is not constant. It was also found that the
colloidal content of the soil is not a reliable basis for calculation
of the wilting points of soils.

Richards and Weaver (26) used 71 of the soils that Furr and Reeve
(10) had used for their study. They used the pressure plate apparatus
(2A) or the suction-plate apparatus (26) for tensions between 0 and l
atmosphere. The pressure membrane apparatus (2i) was used for tensions
above 1 atmosphere. They found, on an average, a fairly close relationsnip
'between the moisture retained at u.j5 atmosphere and moisture equivalents.
They also found in connection with this study of 71 soils that on of
the soils were between the first permanent wilting point and the ultimate

wilting point at the 15 atmospheres tension. Veihmeyer and hendrickson

4..“

5 .
(5h) in a comparison of methods of measuring field capacity and permanent
wilting percentage felt that iichards' 13 atmospheres for permanent
wilting percentage had promise but there was not always good agreement
at what tension permanent wilting occured in the plant.

Colman (9) determined the field capacity of soils on irrigated
plots as well as on plots during periods of rainfall. These moisture
results were then compared to those obtained on the same soils screened
and drained at 0.35 atmospheres. The apparatus used was similar to
that used by Richards and Weaver (26). A constant relationsuip was
found to exist between field capacity and u.jj atmospheres tensions.
Field capacity was found to equal the 0.5j atmOSpheres tension at 25
percent moisture but at lower moisture values the field capacity was
greater than U.jj atmospheres of tension while at moisture values
above 25 percent it was less. A similar relationship was found between
field capacity and moisture equivalent by Browning (7), except that
21 percent moisture marked the point where field capacity and moisture
equivalent were equal.

Peale and Beale (18) after determining field capacities, moisture
equivalents, permanent wilting percentages and l5 atmospheres tensions
for several South Carolina soils set up linear equations in which
field capacities could be determined from moisture equivalents and the
wilting percentages from the 15 atmospheres tensions.

Woodruff (57) investigated the dehydration curves of finely
divided clays as a means of studying the possible mechanisms by which
the soil retains water. Three types of clays were used: kaolinite,

beidellite and montmorillonite. From the results obtained, neodruff

classified the three different mechanisms wnich may operate to retain
water in a clay under moisture tensions: (a) adsorption aSsociated

with swelling and shrinking, (b) structural formation which is operative
at low moisture tension with montmorillonite and is associated with
swelling and shrinkage (0) surface tension which is operative at

higher tension where shrinkage ceases and also at lower tensions of
most kaolinite systems or coarser fractions.

In view of the conflicting results obtained by investigators on
moisture properties of soils it was felt that the types of clay minerals
found in the soil might have a partial bearing on tne inability of
investigators to reproduce results obtained by others on soils containing

the same percentage of sand, silt and clay.

"V'

“’9'”

nXPEnlMAHTAL ldOLEDUKE

I

The locations of the various soils used in this eXperiment were
selected by E. P. hhitesiue* during the summers of 1992 and 1995.
Locations of these various soils by counties are given in Figure l
and the legal descriptions the sites are given in Table I. Under
the direction of A. E. Erickson** various types of field data were,
obtained on these soils during the summers of l952 and 1955.

Only a portion of the data collected on these sites are included
in this study but in order to better understand how certain data such
as field capacity were obtained a brief description of the work is
discussed here.

Fifteen concentric infiltrometers were forced into the soil
with a special type of driver. Ten of these measured infiltration
of the surface and five of them were used to measure infiltration
of a subsurface layer. A large burette was mounted above each ring to
maintain a constant water head on the center ring, and to measure
the amount of water flowing into the soil. An equal constant head
was also maintained on the outer ring in order to avoid lateral flow
of water from the central ring. An initial run of seven hours was
{followed twelve hours later by a second run (wet run) for seven hours.

Four of the infiltrometer locations were then covered with heavy

 

* Professor, Soil Classification, Michigan state Colleée.

** Assistant Professor, Soil Physics, Michigan State College.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    
  
   
     
   
   
 
       
          
       
       
   
 
      
   
     
        
  
        
     

 

 

 

 

 

    

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DICKINSON mar/me A
“I
- l “j
i
/
45° ~ _ / omen
' S 26
tum an MD Moscow! urom
mm?— on mm
mm. wanna u/sw/ nascm OGEMAW Iasca
w. an: escrow can: cumin Anzmc u
a.
Figure 1. Location of 3011. ammo mcosu menu MIDLAND
by counties . ruscou 34mm
Numbers indicate ———e
murauu curler SAGIMW
3113.8 0
1mm .
"' - 6 sum: “’5"
am m tom tummy um um,
18 20
may um menu LIV/Ham 55
L6 17 1 2 23 o

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mum. cum”: ‘JACKJOII 'msumuu mm:

 

 

 

 

"
V-

31403:»: nut” mum: mums: gonna:
15 3S 31
7 8

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE

I

IDLhTIFICATIbN o?

'oILS

 

 

 

Site No. Soil Series County Legal Description
1 Berrien Inghmn SW Corner NH 4 Sec. 19 ThN th
2 Granby Ingham NE no so 4 Sec. 2a Tim R2W
5 Hillsdale Ingham NE MO SW ; Sec. 50 TAN RlW
h Niani Ingham NW no NE ; Sec. jl Tbfl RIW
5 Brookston Ingham NW ho NE ” Sec. ju TAN le
6 Sims Saginaw NE ho NW E Sec. 53 T9N R93
7 Nappanee Lenawee NiCorner SW 4 Sec. lj TBS hjE
8.- Hoytsville Lenawee NW Corner SW ; Sec. 15 T83 R5E
9 Fox Branch W Side ma no NW.§ Sec. 2j TbS R7W
10 Fox Kalamazoo SW Corner NA 4 Sec. u T23 Blow
11 Warsaw Kalamazoo Sfi Corner SE no NW 3 Sec. 7 T28 Rllh
12 Spinks Berrien SE Corner‘NE no NE : Sec. )5 Tbs RIVW
15 Berrien Berrien N Side NE no NW 4 Sec. 26 T73 R19W
1h Warsaw Kalamazoo N Side Sh no 3E ; Sec. 19 Th8 RllN
13 Fox st. Joseph Nu Corner Ni 4 Sec. 26 T58 hlZW
lo Conover Eaton NE Corner 85 4 Sec. 9 ThN «5w
17 Miami Eaton s}. is New no 3w 5'; Sec. 1n TuN 19.5w
lo a Granby Ottawa SW Corner SE DO SW ; Sec. 55 T7N_R15h
»19 Saugatuck Ottawa NE Corner NH i—Sec. u TéN hlbw
20 Conover Clinton SE Corner Sec..jb TBN his
21 Granby Allegan NE no NW ; Sec. :1 T2N Rlpw
22 Berrien Allegan NW no SW-4 Sec. 25 TIN klhw
25 Hillsdale Livingston NE 1d SN no Na 4 Sec. 20 TfiN Roi
an Guelph Sanilac NH hJ oh 4 Sec. lj leN hlpfi
2) Kalkaska Antrim SE no es ; Sec. jh Tde Row
26 Kalkaska Antrim ss no :5. 5, Sec. 51;, T5JN new
:7 Mancelona Antrim NE ld “W ; Sec. 19 Tde Raw
29 Coral Montcalm N3 10 NW 4 SW 3 Sec. 6 TllN RQE
50 Paulding Macomb' NW 10 NE hd Sec. 25 TuN leE
51 Hoytsville Lenawee ‘ Sh no NW i 880. 12 T68 R53
32 Goldwater Branch ,NE hO NE 1 Sec. 20 TbN a7:
35 Nappanee Allegan _NE 10 NW 3 Sec. 53 T2} Rth
j; Nappanee macomb NW he NW ; Sec. 25 ThN RIQE
56 Pickford Chippewa NE no NW 3 Sec. 25 ThON le
57 Ontonagan Chippewa NW hU NW 4 Sec. 19 Tth BEN
56 Selkirk Montmorency SW uO SR 4 Sec. Zj TfilN RhE
59 Pickford Arenac SE 10 NE no NE 4 Sec. 17 TZJN RSE
ho Selkirk Arenac SW no SW ; Sec. 9 T2UN RéE

in

pieces of canvas to minimize evaporation. After a period of go to so
hours four moisture samples were taken with a 1; inch soil auger from
the different horizons of the four infiltrometer locations. During
the initial infiltration run a soil pit was dug on the site and on
the second run 1o to 15 three-inch soil cores were taken from each
horizon. The method and apparatus used is that described by Uhland
and O'Neal (51). These cores were brought to toe laboratory for
measurement of tensions from d to 1 atmosphere*. rat the same time
the cores were collected, bag samples were taken from each horizon.
The bag samples were passed through a two millimeter screen and used
for all determinations except the measurements of O to 1 atmosphere
tensions and field capacity.

The tensions on the soil cores from 0 to 0.06 atmospheres were
measured on blotter paper tension tables similar to those described
by Leaner and Shaw (1e). A series of five tables, one above the
other, were-set up in a metal cabinet to decrease evaporation losses
from the cores and the table. The tensions on the tables were 0.01,
0.02, o.o§, o.on and o.oe atmospheres. The soil cores were covered on
the lower side with number one filter paper and cheese cloth to
prevent soil losses. They were then placed in three inches of water
for a period of two days or until they reached saturation. The
weights were recorded and they were placed on the 0.01 tension table

* 1 atmosphere 2 1.015 x 106 dyne cm. '2 s lh.71 pounds in.’2 :
76.59 cm. of mercury : 1056 cm. of water a 54.01 feet of water at

21° c.

"

oru" A

for a period of two days. They were then reweighed and moved to a
higher tension.

After the above tensions from 0.01 to 0.oo atmospheres were
determined twe cores were placed on porous ceramic plates as described
by Richards and Fireman (2h). These were then placed in pressure
cookers as described by hichards (22). The 0.9fi and 1.0 atmoSpnere
tensions were measured by this method using pressure control units as
described by Blake and Corey (2). The cores were left in the pressure
cookers at each tension for a period of two days and tnen reweighed.
They were then oven dried at a temperature of l09° to 110° centigrade
and again reweighed. Percent moisture on an oven dry basis was calculated
for each tension. From the oven dry weight the volume weight for each
core was also determined.

Soil moisture tensions for the 5, 5, 8, 15 and 27.2 atmOSpheres
were determined on Richards' pressure membrane apparatus (20) (21).
This is similar to the ultrafiltration apparatus which has been used
for many years in chemical and biological work. It consists of a
chamber into which a soil sample or a number of samples can be placed
on a Visking cellulose sausage casing supported on tne underside by
a screen base. Thus when the pressure is applied in the chamber the
samples come to equilibrium with the membrane at that pressure. The
general procedure was to measure out twenty soil samples of approximately
25 grams each. These were poured into rubber rings placed on tne
membrane. The chamber was then partially filled with distilled water.
The water was added very slowly in order not to wash the samples out

of the rubber rings. After a period of two days of soaking, excess

water was drawn from the membrane and the chamber sealed. The unit
was placed in a constant temperature oven at 59° centigrade and
pressure then was applied gradually to the chamber until the desired
atmosphere was reached. The Chamber was kept at this pressure for

a period of two days or more depending on the length of time required
for the particular sample to reach equilibrium with the membrane.

This was determined both by measuring with a burette the flow from the
chamber and also by running the same soil sample for different lengths
of time. After the sample had reached equilibrium it was removed from
the chamber and the percent of moisture determined.

On fine-textured soils dehydration of the sample was accompanied
by shrinkage. This pulled the soil away from the membrane and prevented
the sample from reaching equilibrium. In order to avoid this Richards
(21) placed a diaphragm on the top wall of the chamber. After the

greater portion of the water and been forced from the chamber and the

soil had reached sufficient ri

gidity to hold its shape, a differential
mercury manometer was attached. This manometer adds a four pound per
square inch pressure directly on top of the soil samples which holds
them in contact with the membrane. The first source of pressure was
compressed air purchased in a cylinder which was later Supplanted by.
a compressor that could deliver A00 pounds per square inch. A bubbler
system was arranged in the air line so that the air would pass through
water before entering the pressure chamber. This was to avoid a
possible drying out of the soil sample by the compressed air as it
diffused through the membrane.

The pipette method was used for the mechanical analyses (lb).

‘W*" i

Samples of l0 grams for flue‘tuXCJTCd Soils and a) grams for coarse-
textured soils were treated with 6 percent hydrogen pciexide to
destroy the organic matter and hydrochloric acid to destroy the carbonates.
After it was washed free of chlorides the sample was then dispersed by
'titration filth sodium hydroxide to a phenolpnthalein end point using
an external indicator. It was then washed through a 5J0 mesh sieve.
The sands were oven dried and weighed. The material passing through
the 500 mesh sieve was poured into a sedimentation cylinder and diluted
to one liter.

Making the assumption that all soil particles have a density of
2.65 gm/cma, Stoke's Law was used to determine the depth and time of
sampling for the 2,u,clay at a temperature of 30° centigrade. A 25
milliliter aliquot of the material was taken and the percentage of
material per sample was determined on an oven dry basis. Two samples
containing the clay fraction were taken for each soil. The first
was for the purpose of figuring the amount of clay and the second,
Consisting of 100 milliters, was used in the making of slides for X-ray
analyses. A composite sample was taken to be used later in determining
the quantity of fine clay (62»).

The hygrOSCOpic coefficients are approximate. They were moisture
determinations on air dry soils during-the summer months.

Moisture equivalent was determined on approximately 30 grams
of air dry soil saturated for a period of 2h hours and then drained
itu"50 minutes. The sample was then centrifuged for 53 minutes at
2hh0‘ revolutions per minute, a force equal to 1000 times that of

gravity.

¢r-" u

The percent of total carbon was deternined on the doper two

i
. . . . . . . . . . . J
horizons of eacn soil type using the combustion train method descrited t
by hopper (lb).
Permanent wilting yercentabes were determined in the greenhouse
\

on tomato plants as described by Preazeale and mcGeorEe (h) in which
a tube was placed on the stem of the tomato plant. This was sealed at 5
one end and the soil for which the wilting point was desired was placed
in the tube surrounding the stem. This Soil was kept moist until root
develoyment on the stem was evident. The top of the tube was then
sealed and left on the plant for a period of two weeks or until the
back pull of the soil for moisture equaled the suction pressure of the .
plant. The percentabe of moisture left in the soil was then determined
on an oven dry basis.
The percenta5es of montmorillonite, illite and kaolinite were
determined by the x-ray method. The slides to be X-rayed were prepared
according to the instructions of Gieseking and nrickson (11). The
methoo consisted of placing a quantity of sodium disijersed (42)»)
clay, equal to J.Jj grams, in a 15 milliliter centrifuge tube. The
clay suspension was then diluted to 15 milliliters and two drops of
glycerol were added to the suspension. The suspension was shaken and
allowed to stand for a period of at least ten hours. It was then
flocculated with one drop of concentrated hydrochloric acid and centri-
‘Fuged. The supernatent liquid was poured off and the sediment was
made into a viscous paste and transferred to a microscope slide. The

clay on the slide was allowed to air dry in the room, after which it

was placed in an anhydrone charged desiccator for at least 2b hours

 

’4
\r‘l

before it was X-rayed.

dtandaru clay SJSFOnSiCHS were made in order to determine tue
types as well as tie amounts of clays present. Ihe standaru solutions
were made with clays obtained from he following regions: montnorillonite
from Clay spur, Lboming; illite from horris, Illinois and kaolinite
from Bath, South tarolina.

The procedure for obtaining the clays from the samples has been
discussed with the mechanical analyses of the Soil samples. After
aliquots of each clay were obtained they were diluted to the same
density. The slides in Table II were then made as discussed above
using different preporticns of clay suSpensions amounting to 0.c5
grams per slide.

The K-ray unit was the Norelco X-ray Spectrometer with a high and
low angle Geiger counter Goniometer and Brown Electronic recorder.

The X-ray tube contained a tungsten filament and a copper target.

A nickel filter has usad to filter out radiations of shorter Wave
lengths than that of cepper ch . The X-ray unit "as adjusted to 15
milliamperes at 3) kilovolts.

The x-ray diffraction intensity patterns of tue standard clays
and tue soil clays were all measured within a space of Oiéflt days.

The X-ray diffraction intensities for each slide were recorded as the
goniometer rotated from 2° to 15°. This took into account tie Spacing
of 21.u A0 to 15.8 A0 which contains all of the expanding lattice
minerals of the montmorillonite group including vermiculite, tne
spacing of 1;.c A0 to 9.2 A0 which contains the illite group anc

micaeous minerals and the kaolinite peak with a spacing of Y.l A0.

’ O

IQ"\

TABLE II

USED To MAhE JP

.~;;~
lru',

ST 'L; LAJ‘LD SL1 DECS

nihikf‘lI-n'LS )1“ ::1~.“IE‘I’$J.1'hILLUHIL'L', ILLl’l‘i Aim haoldull'tfi

 

 

 

Slide bercent by height of the Different Clays
Numbers Montmorillonite Illite Kaolinite
l U 100 U
2 5 95 0
5 10 9O 0
u 20 e0 0
5 50 7O 0
6 Lo 60 O
8 75 25 0
9 100 0 O
10 0 95 5
ll 0 90 lo
l2 0 BO 2O
15 O 70 50
lb 0 so no
15 0 5O 50
lo 0 25 75
17 O O 100
18 5 ' 90 5
19 25 50 25
2O 25 25 5O
21 5O 25 25
22 75 O 25
23 25 0 73
2h 50 0 5O
25 hS 10 h5

 

7‘

' s ,t.¢-..—a.' u.

H ”'v.

In using these standard clay samples as a basis for determining CHU
percentage of clay minerals present in the soil the assumption was
made that all of the clay mineral groups found in the soil have tne
same intensity of diffraction as the standard clay samples. After
the goniometer had reached 150 another slice was placed in the
Spectrometer and the X-ray diffraction intensity pattern was recched
from l5° to 20 for this slide. This was done in order to save time
by not having to return the goniometer to 20 after each sample. The
time required to measure the pattern for each slide was approximately
11 minutes.

After recording the X-ray diffraction intensity patterns it was
necesSary to determine the boundary between the X-ray diffraction
intensity due to the clay mineral groups and that due to general
scattering (labeled background in Figure 2). This boundary remained
the same for both the standard clay samples and the soil clay samples as
is indicated in Figures 2 and j. The portions of the curve related
to a particular clay mineral was determined from the X-ray diffraction
intensity pattern of the 25 standard clay samples. These are indicated
in Figure 2 by the vertical lines and are reproduced in Figure 5 for
the soil clays. After the diffraction peaks for the soil clays were
marked out their areas were measured with a planimeter.

The X-ray diffraction patterns of the twenty-five standards
listed in Table II were determined before and after the soil clays
had been measured to evaluate the fluctuation in the intensity of the
X-ray beam. Also in order to correct for fluctuations in the X-ray

intensity during the period that the soil clays were being measured

‘

if .4.

W- MONTL‘UR I LL01! I ‘l E —i-

F 3/ 0
)‘J j;

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BACPLGR(,"UND BAC PIGRIJUIID

  

BACKGROUND

    

2° 15° 2°

18

5 J16
*-KAUL1NITL

LIWJNT

29%

 

 

BACKGROUND

   

 

20

Figure 2. Diffraction intensity patterns as recorded by the Norelco
X-ray Spectrometer of standard montmorillonite, illite

and kaolinite clays showing how the peaks related to the

clay minerals were marked out for measuring.

1" ”’4

.——r— ,,

    

 

   
   
  
   

     

 

 

     
   

 

 

 

 

 

BERRIEN LOAMY SAND SIMS CLAY LOAM
HORIZONS 311 a 813 HORIZONS 319 a 326
MONT
I | I ILL MONT,
I I I I II l| I I
‘ IMONT: ILL: : ILL: I KAOL: I I I
I
~ I I I IIIII: I I
I I I ' |:II'| I
I I I I I , H : I I
I ‘ II I
I I l I I
I ,ILL IIIIII
I 'I II" II '
I II :III'|' I
I '. III'I II
\ I I {I I /
\ I . I . I/
BACKGROUND BACKGROUND BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
20 _ 15° 2° 13° 2°

19

 

Figure 5. Diffraction intensity patterns as recorded by the Norelco
X-ray Spectrometer of Berrien loamy sand and Sims clay
loam soils.

’5

a loo; kaolinite standard slide was remeasured at regular intervals.

The loo; kaolinite sample was used LecauSe the peak heignt was
a definite point which could be reproduced on successive runs with the
same sample. These peak heights were tnen measured and using the
highest value of 11h as l, a curve was made (Figure h) to determine
the correction factor to be used for each area measured with the
planimeter.

The curve of the x-ray diffraction intensities versus the percent
of each clay are shown in Figures 3, b and 7. These curves were determined
by the area of the first and seCond run of the standards with LAG
areas for the second run being adjusted for the decrease in the X-ray
diffraction intensity. The curves were then used to determine the
percent of montmorillonite, illite and kaolinite clay in each of the

soil samples.

v r

 

If r

I qj.‘
"

 

W. .andddwm s we moflcaaosx flood w1am: mamas opwcflqomx use
,: ouflaafl .opflsoaaflaoEQCQE pow maoposm Coflpocauoo seam Meow Qofipocammwc asuIM menses mpzmfio: use; .3 oaswflm
meHzHaoax eoofl mom emeHm: mama
QHH sod am on on so on a: a“ on
_ I _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ 3
ILr
N4
.IL,
:.H
0.4
.m.a
,o.m
IIlm.m

 

HV HVQd NOILOVHddIG A L-X

EHHOO V3

NOILO

HOLOVd

QC

[5/

.aepefioapommm heals
ooqoaoa as; no Jooaoooc we seas moot :oflposuMMHc asaIK maman> ceasedafluoepcOe psaoaom .n ouswflm
anzaqun aw: a B noMmm
as ea 00 on a: Om om on o

 

 

      

 

do.
mpfisflqoex one veflqqfl can ouflsoaaflaofipdoa u I
mudfiaosx one ofisoaafluoeficoa I‘
@334. .33 ooflcofiiaoepcoa u.
mmnaxHa mo mmwe
1 0
mo
l.NH.
ls
ca.
IIL
am.
l
:m.

 

BLINOTTIUOWLNOH JO VHHV XVEd NOILOVHddIG AVH-X UNLOFHWOO

 

 

’. cl ‘inl‘l‘lI \. II I I I I
W. .aopofivauoemm
angle ooaeaoz wt» %3 cmeaoooa me does mpfiwsopcfl cofipodcmawc meanx wewao> opflqaw ucooaom .0 oaswfia
mquqH Hamoxnm .
so a» on am a: am am ca 3
. I
ll
Ho.
I
opfluflaom: eds mowsoaafiaoGpSoa one onwaaH u I
winded acts 3:: u d
moflc044flh2fisoa use ouwaaH u C I
mnDBKHd mo mmwa
Ill,mo.
I
Ill, 0
4r - m9
0 1
ll 0
u no
1 a. no.
I
.0
I
no.

 

REV HVSJ HOILDVHddIG AVE-X GSLOSHHOO

SLITTI d0 V

i\I._I‘I

 

 

 

.umpeEOAooomm heanx ooqvaoz or» no uocaoooa we sous mama seapoeammflc zeanx mamao> opflzflHde pcvoaom .5 oaSMfla
meHzHAo«x azmommm
an 2. 3 om a: on S o
opfizfl on: opflcojzofiun, E was opwcwaosx u I ‘
mafia: use opflCHaosx I {
epwcozfiuoascas cassIou%:fiPoex I.
mxsest mo waxy
I
.I
1.
1.
< all

 

 

 

do.

no.

mo.

03.

MOILOVHddIG AVH-X GHLOEHHOO

I
C.’

'3

SLINITOVH d0 VSHV XV

HEDHLTJ Afih ;1sc> SIoN

U1

The data which were necessary to characterize the different soils
for his investigation mere arrange; in tables accordinv to site

L;

numbers :nd included in the Appendix. JXCept where noted all moisture

and mechanical analysis values are averages of two or mIre determinations.

Volume weight data are averages of the number of cores taken in a
given horizon, usually 10 but virying fron 5 to 15 in numoer. The
percenta5es for each type of clay mineral are Single determinations.
Missing data such as field capacity and type of clay minerals were

not measured for various reasons.
The uoisture helease turves

The moisture release curves for the different horizons of eacn
site were drawn on semi—logarithmic paper. Field capacity, moisture
equivalent and permanent wilting perCentuge are indicated on the
curves. The moisture release curves for each site accompany the tatle
for that site in the Appendix. The dotted line on the moisture release
curve is the change from the undisturbed core samples to the disturbed,
less than 2 millimeter air dried soil samples. It can be noted that
in most cases except for very coarse-textured soils there is a break
from the 1.0 atmosphere tension to the 5.0 atmoSpnere tension. This

.
is most generally true of the AP horizon. The drop in moisture values
between the cores and the air dry Soil would indicate that soil

I

structure is still a factor to be considered at between 1.0 and 5.0

1"

’

,...-

atmoSphorcs and is a much Breatgr factor on surface soils.

In some finer-textured subsurface soil samples, moisture tension
Values for the 5.J atmospheres were higher than for l.d atmOSphere.
This is CSpecially noticeable on site dc for the B horizon and on
several of tne horizons for sites )1, j), )5 and 57. The cause or
such a discrepancy is the removal of coarser materials ((vszmn). .As
in the case of the C1 horizon for site Ej approximately lU percent
of the material was hreater than two millimeters, while in the C2
horizon for the same site the corresponding percentage was 5.

In some cases on fine-textured soils field capacity and even
moisture equivalent were above the zero tension determined on the cores.
This condition was especially true on the Ontonagon silty clay, site
57, and the Selkirk silty clay loam, site 90. This discrepancy could
be due to two things; (a) insufficient drainage of the profile before
field capacity samples were taken or (b) the possibility that the
soil cores did not reach saturation in the laboratory.

In a comparison of field capacity measurements with soil moisture
tensions, Fibure a shows a wide range of tensions at which field capacity
occurs. other investigators have found that field capacity values
occurred most often at tensions between u.ue and U.j§ atmospheres.

As shown by the data presented in Figure U field capacity measurements
exceeded this range of tensions.

It is very probable that the group of soils that had a field
capacity value above 0.j5 atmoSpneres were not brought up to field
capacity during the infiltration runs. The reasoning here is partly

based on Smith and Browning's work (29) in Which they showed that a

1"

r

I'

”we.“ I..." Q‘s-MW

RE

AJ

’fi

‘TMQSPH*

I\

‘TWRE TENSION -

s)

C

OIL “CI

8

 

 

. >’o{.,)
I
_ u 27
5-0 I
1.0 . ' . -. .. ~ - -
ob... .
.10 00. .000
.06_ . ’ '
0 ..
.1): . i o.
.07 . °
)r—- o o . o .
.02
.01 I . l ’ J] l l

H “;-¢ '~£°w u.“

.I"

’vl

 

U 10 20 30 no 50
FIELD CAPACITY - PERCENT OF DRY WT.
Figure 0. Field capacity versus tension as it occurs on the moisture
release curve.

lack of complete artificial wetting resulted in a field capacity

value equal to or lower than tie moisture equivalent after two days

of free drainage. This is the case for many of t ese samples. Also
the reasoning here is based on Lwé fact that many of bASSS soils were
very fine-textured soils anc so would be slow in becoming completely
wet during a dry season. The Miami soil, site h, was one of t ese
soils that was measured during a very dry season. However, why the

A horizon of tue Berrien and G anby soil, sites l and 2, have such a
high tension for Field capacity cannot be exylaiued except for the
fact that they probably dried below field capacity during the two days
that these were left to drain before field capacity values were taken.
During that two oays tne temperature was very high and the surrounding
soil was dry.

The soil samples with tension values below d.JO atmospheres were
in many cases subsoil samples in which due to low permeability orainage
had not been sufficient for moisture to reach field capacity. In some
cases they were due to insufficient wetting of tne soil cores from that
particular horiZon. The period or time necessary for preper drainage
of soils of such high clay content is hard to determine. If the subsoil
is drained prOperly the surface will lose part of its moisture through
evaporation. Many of tiese soil cores had such a low percentage of
continuous non-capillary pore Space when brought into the laboratory

that several days of soaking did not saturate them with water.
Clay Minerals

In the X-ray determination of the amiunt of clay minerals present

’

in tne soil clays there were a few cases in which tie total amount of
clay Linerals cxcceo loo perc.nt. ihis Wes very evident on the hp
horizon of the “area“ silt loam, site ll, in which the total amount
of clay minerals are l)h percent. The reason for this ciscrepancy

was that tne clay minerals in tuese particular samples have a much
higher diffraction characteristic than the standard clays that were
used. Some of the fineetextured soils such as the Pickford, site

I

56, and The ontonaéon, site 97, the diffraction Characteristics
for the clay minerals were very low. A further investigation of the
types of minerals present in these fine-textured soils was not made.
In comparing these results on clay mineral analysis with the
results obtained ny other investigators it was found that Pennington
and Jackson (19) studied a miami soil from Wisconsin and found that
the B2 horizon contained 50 percent montmorillonite, l5 percent illite
and 10 percent kaolinite. In compariSon the Miami sample studied here
(site h) from the 821 horizon contained 5 percent montmorillonite, bu
percent illite and l: percent kaolinite. Bidwell and Page (1) Studied
the clay fraCtion from some Ohio soils in the Miami catena. The 82 and
the C2 horizons in a miami silt loam contained only illite while a
Michigan Miami loam (site 17) had both illite and kaolinite present.
however, in Brookston silty clay loam tqey reported a medium amount
of both montmorillonite and illite in the b2 horizon while in this
investigation it was found that in the BG; horizon of a Brookston
sandy loam (site 5) only illite and kaolinite were present while the

861 and the BG2 horizons contained fairly large amounts of all three

types of clay minerals.

’

 

”-1

' H._g3rw-—fl’

"

."

moisture uelationshiis of Field Capacity l

I‘-

field papacity versus woisture hiuivalent. The relationship of

 

field capacity to moisture equivalent has generally been used for

field capacity values when those data are not available. This

"

relationsnip is shown in Figure 9. The hEO line is used to show the

variation in the two values. The relationsnip of field capacity to :
moisture equivalent for Michigan soils is very close to that found

by other investigators (7) (9) (la) (55) in different parts of the

country. All values below l2 percent have a much lower moisture

equivalent than was Obtained for field capacity. From (l percent to l
25 percent field capacity values approach moisture equivalent and are

in some cases lower but predominately are higher.

Field Capacity versus 0.06 Atmosphere. The O.do atmoSphere tension

 

or to cm. of water has been used as tne boundary between capillary
and non-capillary pore space.

A comparison ietween the moisture contents at this tension and
field capacity is shown in Figure l0. For soils with a field capacity
value of less than 1/ percent tne d.0o utmOSpnere tension measurement
would lead to more accurate field capacity determinations than would
the measurement of moisture euuivalent. However, for field capacity
values nigner than 17 percent the 0.00 atnOSphere tension measurements
would lead to results generally a little low. The measurement of
moisture eiuivalent would constitute a better laboratory determination
of field capacities where the results were running over l7 percent.
The closer agreement on moisture equivalent above 17 percent can be

related to toe use of air dry soil in which structure was not a

0F DuY Wl‘ o

’T‘
l

D CAPACITY - PRHCEN

'1'

f
.15.:

PI"

50

\N
\n

\_\

13

F.)
’"J

\J-‘l

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

if. L

10 15 20 25 50 5
MOISTURE EQUIVALENT - PERCENT or DRY WT.

U1F——

3

 

Figure 9. Relation of field capacity to moisture equivalent. The A50 line

is drawn in for reference.

FIELD CAPACITY - PERCENT OF DRY WT.

EU

9')

50

[\I
U?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  
    

 

' 1

 

 

 

Ii I I I J I

o 5 10 15 20 25 50 to
0.06 ATMOSPHERE TENSION - PERCENT or DRY WT.

 

|
f
I
I .
l
l
I
l.
l
I
|
|
l
l
I
I
I
l

I _

U1

Figure 10. Relation of field capacity to 0.06 atmosphere tension. The h5° line
is drawn in for reference.

J

 

problem. Tension measurements on undisturbed soil sanplos still have
the influence of structure.

Field Capacity versus o.jj thoSpheres. Field capacity values

 

below l: percent are higher than those indicated oy the tensions at
I. " 4 tr r' '\‘r )0 1?. “ l \ )*' 1.!) l ' , t Y‘v“ 1" '\ ' ‘3 tr
b.j) a fiUSyderLQ (.lgure l,. Between c perCun and a] pertcnt 16

measurements obtained by tne tensions at o.)5 atmospheres have good

agreement with field capacity and are a better meaSure of field capacity

than those obtained at o.oo atm/spheres above l7 percent moisture.

The accuracy of measurements at both 0.06 and U.j§ atmosphere tenSion
values becomes less above 2/ percent moisture. In comparing the field
capacity values between 1: percent and a] percent as determined at the
two tensions the line of nest fit would appear to fall between the
9.00 atmosphere and 0.55 atmosphere tensions. This is shown by the
fact that over two-thirds of the values at c.0o utmoSpheres fall below
the hjo line while three—fifths of the 0.)) atnospneres values fall
above the line. The wider scattering of Values above to percent is
due mainly to the discrepancy mentioned earlier, that of taking of
field capacity measurements and the inadequate wetting of soil cores.

Relationship of Field Capacity to structure and Types of Clay

 

Minerals. It is a generally estatlisned fact that field capacity is

 

determined to some extent by structure wnich is in turn ailected by
organic matter and percent of sand, silt and clay. In most cases the
Ap horizon had the highs: moisture content for tensions of U to l
atmosphere. This is due mainly to the influence of soil structure or
organic matter constituent and is brought out by the lower volume

weights for this horizon. This higher moisture content of the AP

”mp‘.‘ '

v

 

 

 

 

T OF' DRY WP.

Y
‘

FIELD CAPACITY - PERCEl

50p.—

\.n
\H

 

(J

\3 J

 

 

_——--—\———_——_—_——-_——— .
/.

 

\
\H
O
O
O
\\\\\

 

"J
(~—
0 o
O
\ ..
V
'3‘ f

.0 . I E ’
o O o
l? o . $ e I .:

 

 

 

I Ill l 11 l l 1

 

o 5 10 19 2o 25 50 55 to
0.55 ATMOSPHERE TENSION - PERCENT DRY WT. '

Figure 11. Relation of field capacity to 0.33 atmospheres tension. The A50
line is drawn in for reference.

“’M

J

A ,__.—

\T'l

horizon for the release curves between 0 and l utmoSphere does not i
necessarily continue from 5 to Z7 atmoSpneres unless the clay content S
of tne AP horizon approaches that of the other horizons. I

Any comparison of field capacity to the type of clay mineral

"v’

seems to be obscured by soil structure. Soil structure Could be
influenced some oy tne type of clay minerals present in the soil.

For the most part the predominating clay minerals are the illite and
kaolinite types. Both have a non-eXpanding crystal lattice. Montmoril-
lonite with an expandins crystal lattice would have the greatest influence

on meisture properties of soils. In only two samples did tne montmorill-

onite clays make up more than do percent of the clay minerals present

a.

l

and in these two samples the total amount of clay (<.d/u& amounted to
5 and id percent. This would then amount to less than a percent of
montmorillonite present in any of tne soil samples studied which
would have little influence on even the higher moisture tensions
measured on the soil. If there had seen a wider range of clay mineral

COMpOSitiOH this relations»ip could have been studied more fully.
moisture nelationsnips at the wilting Point

The methOd of Brcazeale and McCeorge (A) that was used for
determining nilting point is based on the theory that when the soil
moisture reaches equilitrium with the plant the back pull of the soil
for tne remainder of the nOisture equals tne pull of the plant for 2
more moisture. Therefore, if the soil remains long enough around the
plant which has sufficient root develOpment in that soil even the

finest—textured soil should come to equilibrium. The one difficulity

/

jo
encountered with the very fine—textured soils was shrinnape which
caused cracks to form. hhen the soils Were kept very moist to prevent
the Shrinkage, root develOpment did not tateiplace due to the lack of
oxygen. When they were allowed to dry down to an Optimum moisture
condition the soil was too hard to be penetrated preperly by the roots.
This made it difficult to get reproducable determinations and the
results from duplicate samples of fine-textured soils varied widely.
Thus, results reported here are averages of two figures within lJ
percent of each other.

Relationship Of hilting Point to Different Tensions. Richards
and beaver (2;) were among the first to suggest the lb atmoSpheres as
a possible measure of the permanent wilting percentage. They came
to this conclusion after comparing the different tensions with the
permanent wilting percentages determined by Furr and neeve (10).

The lb atmOSphere moisture values fell between the first permanent
wilting percentaées and the ultimate wilting percentages.

The permanent wilting percentages reported here have a higher
value than the ultimitc wilting perpentnbes reported by Furr and Reeve
(lo) on California soils because the entire sunflower plant permanently
wilted with their method. The Wilting percentages as determined in
this investigation are closely related to Furr and Reeve's first permanent
wilting percentascs where only the basal leaves wilted. This is
born out by Figure l2 which shows that the permanent wilting percentages
are greater than the l5 atmosphere percentages.

The comparisons between permanent wilting percentage and different

tensions were made in Figures ld, l5 and in. The hpo lines were drawn

1...; v ’-

, itvl

l “A H~5 -.

’V‘

NT WILTING PERCENTAGE - PERCENT OF DRY HT.

7"
u
U

PERMAN

37

52.______

(\3
(r)

16

   

 

 

J

u h 8 12 16 20 2a
15 ATMOSPHERE TENSION - PERCENT OF DRY wT.

Figure 12. Relation of permanent wilting percentage to 15 atmosphere tonsion.
Tho h5° lino is drawn in for rofcronco.

_r—-——-d""‘ " H... . _

_... ”I"-

DRY WT.

Y?
s

PERMANFNT WILTING PERCENTAGE - PERCENT O

 

 

8 ATMOSPHEXB TENSION - PERCENT OF DRY “T.

Figure 15. Relation of permanent wilting percentage to 8 ttmosphOr.

The u5° line is drawn in for roforonéc.

321*
(38‘
2‘4 -
,;

so _______ ,1 '°

~ 0
15. - . _.
1C2 °
(J) .0}... .

.. ;y
o ”O ‘.
”to. .
J h 8 12 16 2o

. J “OMH‘WE‘M I O~"W'H-—~‘m#

W's-9'

O

- PERCENT OF DRY WT.

PERMANENT WILTING PERCENTAGE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

59
52
a6
_____
2h e 2 TOTAL CARBON ABM/:3
THREE PERCEKT
£0 ee
0 .. .
16 . . Q
12,___ "
e ' . . .
3;; . .3:
. '. . '
’L K . .e 0
J u 8 12 16 20 211

Figure in.

5 ATMOSPHERE TENSION - PERCENT OF DRY WT.

Relation of permanent wilting percentage to 5 atmosphere tension.
The h5° line is drawn in for reference.

4:

in for comparison purposrs. no shown in 31 are l& tne germanent tilting
percentafies were eonsicerably noove those indicateo Ly the l) atmosphere
tensions. This is shown by the fact that nearly all points are aoove
the M50 line. The points come oloser to the line lor the e atmosphere
determinations (Figure l5) tut the closest relationsiip was found

by comparing permanent Wiltinb fSFCBAthSS with 5 atmoSphere tensions
Figure la). A closer inSpection of Figures 15 and in shows that
permanent wilting values fall on the upper siae of the QSO line at the
0 atmosphere tension. This is more apparent as the permanent wilting
percentages increase in moisture content. In Figure la the larger
portion of the values fall oeneath the Q50 line and occomes more apparent
as the permanent wilting percenta;es increase in moisture content.

From these two relationships it can no seen that the line or best fit
for the permanent wilting percentages would fall somewhere between the

5 and 8 atmOSpneres tensions and prooably at about 6 atmospheres
tension.

From observation of the hiltlng percentapes of the top soil it

mas relt that organic matter coulu be a factor inILUGDClflC this value.
The wilting points of tne first two horizons from each profile were
listed accoroing to Lhr amount or total carbon they contained. These
were then compared with the 5 atmosphere tension values. Those_soils
containing less than 0.3 p rcent carbon were on the average equal to

the 5 atmoSphere tension values. Those nontainlng 0.9 to 3 percent
total carton hao on the average wilting point values from 0.3'to O.u

percent less than the values at y atmOSpheres tension. The wilting

percentage values of sails which contained Fore than 5 percent total

 

43 «H- 1U

o “a".

 

n1
carbon were 1.5 percent melon those at 5 atmospheres tension. however,
due to the fuck Llit there were only 31x soils with total carbon above
j percent, with two having wilting percentage values greater than tne
5 atmoSphercs tension, it is felt want the number of determinations
for soils high in organic matter were not sufficient to say definitely
that organic matter influenced wilting percentAge. If, however, this
observation is correct then it would appear that the plants capacity
for removing water from soils increases with an increase in organic
matter. That is, plants are able to withdraw water at a higher tension
as the organic matter of the soil increases.
Relationship of Permanent hilting Percentages to Percent
Clay and Type of Clay Minerals

Permanent wilting percentages were based on air dry soil samples
and therefore were not influenced in this study by soil structure.
Therefore, there should be a direct relationship between permanent
wilting percentage and clay content. This relationship was born out
in Figure 15 which does not appear to be a straight linear relationship.
In plotting this graph it was evident that total carbon influenced the
wilting point determinations. The AP horizons were classified into
different total carbon ranges and the values marked on the graph.
There were five values that were above 5 percent total carbon. All of
the permanent wilting percentages for these values fell the farthest
below the curves. The next highest range from 2 to 5 percent total
carbon fell below the main curve but not as far as the group containing
more than 5 percent carbon. The rest of the values were close to or

on the main curve.

hi) at bixT TOTAL CLAY

oi

 
   

 

O 01/
F"__ . .
Pisnfl'vfl L "11:115. Cfihiliilv . ‘
IN a) LLIL-LlZUN
. 2 Jo)".'L-U
F—-——- : o’v‘-L’.‘~J '
: goo-500 /
().Lj.o-c.o , ‘/
3/
c . c I"
; ,/
,____ a
'° ’ 2/ .1
o / L ‘l .— ._ _ -
' .3 /’
/, I /
L———— o / ‘ ' /
. // . ' .' l
. 0/, . '1. /
, ‘I'Ill //
. /
A. /
~ , .A /’
. /
__ u /
/.. O /.
/
/'
' .° ‘/
, G) /
o 0- ° /
h—— . /'. /
° /

/‘ TOTAL (,1th UN

Bod-3.0 PnnChLT
TUTAL Cultist/N

 

 

 

12 16 20 2h
PERMANENT WILTING PERCENTAGE - PERCENT DRY n .

Figure l5. Relation of total clay to permanent wilting percentage. Curves
represent distribution of permanent wilting percentages at

different levels of total carbon.

It was felt that an imperical formula cauld be worked out that
would take into account such factors as organic matter anu types of
clay minerals. The moisture release curves as determined by hoodruff
('7) for the different types of clay minerals were used to assign the
values of j for montmorillonite, 2 for illite and 1 for kaolinite and
other minerals. Total carbon was given a value of lo whicn would
take into account the conversion factor of 1.7 for changing total
carbon to organic matter. The imperical formula used was

Index Number = Total Carbon x 10 + Montmorillonite x 5 x percent

Clay per sample-+ Illite x 2 x percent Clay + rest of Clay

Mineral x 1 x percent Clay.

After plotting the index number versus permanent wilting percentage
the same type of curve as in Figure 15 was obtained with more scattering.
The figure and the graph were not included because Figure 15 was a

much better relationship.-

Percent Available Water

Percent Available Water Based on Field Capacity. The amount of

 

water available for plant growth is the moisture present in the soil
between field capacity and permanent wilting percentage. This
difference has been determined for each sample and listed in Table
III. Missing values are subsoil samples on which field capacity data
were not taken. Sample jB had a negative value due to insufficient
wetting of the subsurface soil during the infiltration runs.

Several factors usually affect the amount of available water

present in the soil. .Structure is one of these factors which is in

III'III' l’ll’L
III-IvllIrIIIIrIIII’ 1';
1'1

llllllullu‘ll'lllll‘lll

 

[I'll 1‘. 1ili 1| l"

 

TAMLE III

 

 

 

 

l§h$.r;hC4iflF AVAlLJUflsE 1JJFCR I} ‘NTE DIF?¥-MSHT 35131435.
THE DIFFERENCE BiTnsSK FIELD CAkACITY alD
Pbkannhl uILTINS PLKCLJTH3LS
Sample Percent Sample Percent sample Percent
Number hater Number hater Number hater
1 10.0 b1 o.n 81
2 7.8 h2 5.5 82 lh.o
5 5.7 hi 0.5 b5 19-5
h hh 6.0 oh 8.5
5 ha 7.9 85 7.5
6 12.5 he h-h 86 h.h
7 agu u? 7.5 87 12.1
8 15.5 h8 9.8 88 7.8
9 h9 6.0 89 5.2
10 50 2.j 90 1.7
11 15.6 51 5.9 91 8.h
2 15.7 52 5.0 92
13 6-7 55 95
Bi 6.5 5h 10.5 9h 12.8
15 11.2 55 - 12.h 95 9.5
16 . 56 12.1 96 9.1
17 57 7.0 97 7-7
18 8.0 58 98 10.5
19 11.1. 59 99 6.7
20 5.h 60 5.9 100 11.5
21 h.8 61 6.8 101 9.7
22 11.5 62 11.; 102
23 65 7-9 10: u-p
2h 12.0 6h 0.1 10h 8.7
25 7.5 65 6.5 105 11.0
20 7.1 66 106 8.0
27 707 {/37 bod 107
Eb 68 10.) 108 6.5
29 69 9.4 109 14-?
9o 21.6 70 h.j 110 5.9
51 Lh.5 71 5.7 111 4.8
52 6.h 72 112 6.b
53 h.2 75 10.6 115
in 1.8 7h 7.6 11h 10.0
55 11m 75 7.7 115 7.1.
36 5-8 76 5.b 115 8.9
97 0.2 77 8.8 117 7.]
5c -l.1 78 118 15.1
D9 79 119
no 13.2 80 120 5.1

 

AS

TAELE III (continued)

____
‘1

 

Sample rercent sample Percent sample Percent
Number hater Number hater Number water
121 12.5 lh5 172 h.8
122 8.6 lh9 15.5 175 h.o
123 5.7 150 11.2 174 7.u
12a h.2 1,1 12.5 175
125 5.5 152 6.9 176 17-/
12. 9-7 1‘9; 9.0 177 11.1.
127 15h 12.1 178 h.7
126 155 15.6 , 179 12.h
129 156 11.h 160 9.6
150 7.2 157 11.0 181 l2.h
151 11.0 156 182 15.0
19: 7.9 1)) h.6 1H5 7.5
195 160 5.8 18h 10.1
ljn 7.h 161 in) 6.9
15) 1’09 160 0.0
156 16h 12.2 lb] ho?
157 165 6.5 108
198 166 5.7 189 7.5
199 167 190 11.9
luu 168 11.5 171 6.h
lhl 7.7 169 7.2 192 5.0
lat - 5.7 170 hob
1hj 171 h.u

 

p—
0\

turn affected by the amount of organic matter, percent clay, tillage
practices, drainage, etc. Many soils with a high clay content which
were investigated had such a high water table throughout most of the
year that good root development and other factors necessary for the
building of structure throughout tne horizons were at a minimum.

A comparison was made in Figure 16 showing he percent of available
. water present in relationship to tne percent of clay present in the
soil sample. Also the AP horizons and the horizons immediately under
these were plotted separately from the subsurface soils. It can be
noted that the greatest majority of the values for available water
fall between h and 16 percent moiSLure on an oven dry basis. The two
samples containing available moisture above 16 percent were surface
samples highest in organic matter content (samples 50 and 176){
These samples also contained a relatively high percentage of clay.
Both of these soils from which the samples were taken had been left
for several years with a grass sod cover. In general subsurface samples
containing less than 18 percent clay vary between 6 and 16 percent
available moisture and samples above 18 percent clay have 5 to 15
percent available moisture.

Percent of Available Water Based on Moisture Tensions. In order

 

to better see the relationship between available water and clay on
undisturbed samples tze 0.06 and 0.55 moisture tensions were used in
the place of field capacity to determine the available water in each
horizon. Pernanent wilting percentages were subtracted from the 0.06
atmosphere tensions on all moisture values on or below 12 percent at

that tension. The reason for using the 0.06 atmOSphere tension for

PERCENT TCTAL CLAY

 

 

 

, I A?
01+— I
'0
so
O = Ap rollzom
g = FIRST HULILQN
UKLih Thh AP HUhIZUN
I I
bb‘ .
C . n
' O
.I
no I '
r—‘—— I
. I
0'
O
. O
52 . .
O
I . .
' O
. I
2u___._ . '
o . .
‘ ° . - . I
. II, .
16 , . - O
I
e l.’ .. .
, I I ‘ , O
o I . . ‘.
.I. I
t 1.
I ’ . 0
. ,0 .,' '3 .’
.. ..: O. . e . o
. . '9‘
o h s 12 16 20 214

PnhChNT OF AVAILABLE MATER

Figure 16. Relation of total clay to available water. Differences between

field capacity values and permanent wilting percentage values.

.5—
w

soil samples less than l2 percent is that for this range the 0.06
atmosphere tension is tne best measure of field capacity. The

remainder of the permanent wilting percentages were subtracted from

0.55 atmosphere tensions. These differences were listed in Table

IV. The available water in the-different horizons based on the two
tensions were plotted against the percent clay in Figure l]. The same
general relationships are shown here as in Figure 16 with the surface
soils having more available water. Most of the values for the subsurface
samples fall between a and 10 percent. Both Figures 16 and 17 show

that available water is greater in the surface horizons than in subsurface

horizons due to greater organic matter content and better structure.

TAeLd IV

iBVCNhT nVaILAVL~I .U‘T'h 1h 7 d DlannjaT JAMELES. TH; LIFESR:U;L
dnfuzzfl 0.00 {T;. m1
6 LOJ T .bLJ? H :C‘JT ‘Ul>1\.. EAL 'lM} LIr: thCZ FLTnEEN 0.55
AT.USF1" 1.13 1:2 :31 N .131) Pb) *(If. :EJENT MIL/TING FahCr'N‘TAGhS ABOVE
TAELVE PEhC EJT MOISTURE

. .\\~ 11" ’s— ..-"'. 0(«1 -r a, T». »:“ l- . Tm; .‘I‘
T .1)IJN :uu rzxm~<zwl nlLllhz remomhla.eo

W

 

 

Sample Percent Sample Eercent sample Percent
Number hater Number Hater Number Water
1 15.6 no 15.9 79
2 h.2 bl 10.9 80
5 707 - h2 5.2 01
u 6.5,. b5 6.1 62 lh.5
9 7-D 5.5 05 15.5
6 13.h hS n.9 on 6.5
7 0.0 as 0.8 85 Mon
0 £36 147 be 9.9
9 9.9 be 12.1 07 15.0
10 9.l A9 60 10.2
11 14.7 so 6.u 69 6.6
12 1a.7 \ 91 7.9 90 2-7
ii 9-7 bc a1 9.u
1h lh.0 55 92
15 17-0 an 95 ho?
16 19.1 55 12.5 9h 10.3
17 22.5 56 7.9 95 7.8
18 l2.u 97 70H 90 8.0
19 0-9 56 97 0-9
20 0.6 59 9C 7.u
21 7.2 60 h.2 99 7.0
22 10.0 61 6.2 100 5.5
25 5.0 62 h.5 101 7.0
an 9. 6 65 0.7 102 6.6
25 6.0 on 10.6 105 7.0
26 h. h 65 7.1 lUb 10.0
27 0.2 b6 10; 6.5
26 5.9 67 6.6 106 5.9
Z‘j 269 6 68 9.? 107 )01
5o 20.h, 7 6) 6.6 105 0.5
51 11.h 70 6.0 109 15.1
52 2.0 71 110 6.5
55 72 111 7.0
5n. 2.h 75 9.6 112 5.5
55 mi. 71. 7.5 up 5.1.
56 h.7 7p 6.h 11a 7.o
)7 0.9 76 A.) 119 5.2
58 0.9 77 8.5 110 2.0
59 1.1 {o 117 9.0

 

TABLE IV (continued)

50

 

 

5am31e rercent ;ngple ;CTU'L1 senle [c
Number hater number Water Number
116 10.0 lb2 6.2 171
119 0.1 1&5 172
120 N95. 1&5 175
121 9.7 1&9 15.1 172
122 h.h 153 7.1 175
125 2.5 151 176
1211 5 .0 152 6. 5 177
125 0.6 155 6.7 178
126 6.5 15h 10.5 179
127 11.0 155 6.7 150
126' 6.5 156 11..) 101
129 6.0 157 182
150 5.9 156 185
151 5.0 159 11.9 16h
152 9.8 160 7.2 105
155 9.5 161 5.5 106
15b .6 105 5.9 107
155 6.9 166. 15.2 106
156 6.7 165 9.1 169
157 0.6 166 5.5 190
155 7.2 - 167 5.2 191
15.9 5.7 168 111.2 192
1170 ' 109 0.11
lul 7.9 .170 0.6

 

‘ 7
\
..
. a
1

1'1

(‘7‘

 

m;
t—acxsecooxlwmer—ch‘c
o .rr~. o o o

H

2

o 0!; o . .1
GCCWHON N@.mmwmwwoqurlw

H
t‘br—am‘xlmm
O

 

PERCENT TOTAL CLAY

 

 

51
644____ I
‘I
56,___ o: A? HORIZON
I = FIkST HORIZON
UNDER T13 11p HORIZON
I . .
1401—- I
o. '
I1
O . .
hU . I
I ’ I
I
I1
O . .
2 v -
3 __ .
o ' .
° 1.
. I
2bb—— o . o.
o 0 .
. ~." ' o
I1 I .
16 , .' " 0'
I
I-. .. . .5 .
g 0' 0 ° 0
. ' . ”I 5
8 . I O . I
n_..... I 1I
' .I . . I . .
' I
I . . .
I I 5-' -I ‘I . .’ '
' ~o'.:--" “0.: -
o u 8 12 16 20 211
PERCENT OF AVilLABLE WATER
Figure 17. kelation of total clay to available water. Differences between

the 0.06 or 0.55 atmosphere tension values and permanent wilting
percentage values.

SUWEAKY

This investigation was undertaken to determine the moisture
properties of several Michigan soils and their relationship to mechanical
composition and types of clay minerals. The different horizons of
56 hichigan soils were characterized as to their moisture prOperties.
Field capacity values were taken after infiltration studies in the
field. Moisture percentages at tensions from 0 to 1 atmosphere were
measured on cores from eaen horizon; Moisture percentages at tensions
from 5 to 27.19 atmospheres were determined on disturbed samples. All
other measurements were made on air dried samples.

Moisture tension curves for each hdrizon were drawn. It could
be seen from these curves that the change from undisturbed samples to
disturbed samples involved a breaking down of the soil structure
which caused a considerable drop in moisture from the l to the 5
atmospheres tension. In general the Ap horizons were most affected
by the change from undisturbed to disturbed samples. In many of the
fine-textured samples the moisture release between 0.01 and 1.0
atmOSpheres tension on the undisturbed sample was almost negligible,
however, the moisture release on the disturbed samples were much
more pronounced.

The types and amounts of clay minerals in the soil were determined
( .
by K-ray diffraction using msntmorillonite from Wyoming, illite from
Illinois and kaolinite from South Carolina as standards. All three

types of these ninerals were found to be present in Michigan soils

 

 

h

’

 

 

 

 

55
with the highest percentage of montmorillonite in the Ap horizon of
the Granby soils. The illite minerals were predominant in most of
the soil horizons wnile varying amiunts of kaolinite seemed to be
present in the majority of the soil horizons. In this investigation
there was no relationship shown between the type of clay minerals
and various moisture determinations. This was mainly due to the fact
that the montmorillonite which would contribute most to variations
in soil properties made up a very small percentage of the clay contained
in the soil.

The difficulity in determining field capacity by laboratory
methods may partly be due to the breaking down of the soil structure
when going from an undisturbed sample to a disturbed sample. When
comparing moisture equivalent with field capacity it was found to be
too low for field capacity values below 12 percent. Field capacity
values above 12 percent more nearly approached moisture equivalent
and were at an optimum at approximately 25 percent moisture. The 0.06
atmOSphere tension was the best measure of field capacity values below
17 percent. The 0.55 atmosphere tension was a good measure of field
capacity values from 12 to 26 percent moisture. Field capacities
above 17 percent moisture were more closely related to tne moisture
equivalent than other measurements.

The wilting percentage determinations seemed to have a close
correlation at the 5 atmosphere tension with about 6 atmosphere tension
being possibly the best measure of wilting point. The permanent
wilting percentages of soils decrease with increasing amounts of

5

organic matter.

m
The percent of available water contained in tne Soil profile

is in general higher in the Ap horizon than in tne subsurface horizon.
The lack of agreement between percent clay and available water is
definitely due to variations in field capacity values. The variations
in field capacity values are due to structural differences in tne various
soil horizons. A farther study is needed that would not only investigate
field capacity in relationship to soil texture but also would relate

field capacity to soil structure.

/\
[U

"\
C.
V

”
(3}
V

/\

9)

(10)

(ll)

(12)

for different plants and its indirect deternination. d. o.

LITEnATdhE LITED

Bidwell, O. h. and Page, J. B. 1990 The effect of weathering
on the clay mineral composition of soils in the niami
catena. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. rroc. ljzjlh-filo.

blake, G. h. and Corey, A. T. 1951 Low-pressure control for
moisture-release studies. Soil Sci. 72gj27-331.

Bouyoucos, G. J. 1929 A new, simple and rapid method for
determining the moisture equivalent of soils and the role
of soil colloids on this moisture equivalent. soil Sci.
27:255-2h0.

Breazeale, E. and McGeorge, R. T. 19h9 A new technic for
determining wilting percentage of soil. Soil Sci. 08:
571-57h-

Briggs, L. J. and McLane, J. a. 1907 The moisture equivalent
Of SUilSe U. 80 Dept. Agr. Bur. 501150 BUIO u521-250

and Shantz, H. L. 1912. The wilting coefficient

' \

Dept. Agr. Bur. Plant Indus. Bul. 29ozl-o2.

Browning, G. M. lyhl Relation of field capacity to moisture
equivalent in soils of west Virginia. Soil Sci. )2gbh5-hbo.

Coile, T. S. 1953 effect of incorporated organic matter on the

moisture equivalent and wilting percentage values of soil.
Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Eroc. j;h5-ho.

Colman, E. A. l9u7 A lab procedure for determining tne field
capacity of soils. Soil Sci. 63:277-235.

Furr, J. R. and neeve, J. O. 19u5 Range of soil-moisture
percentages through which plants undergo permanent wilting
in some soils from semi-arid irrigated areas. Jour. Agr.
Res. 71:1u9-170.

Gieseking, J. E. and Erickson, A. E. l9u8 Occurance of
montmorillonite in loesseal soils as influenced by vegetation
and slope. Unpublished data.

Harding, S. T. l9l9 Relation of moisture equivalent of soils
to the moisture preperties under field conditions of
irrigation. Soil Sci. 5:505-312.

 

v ‘ .':' JEN-LI

 

 

(lfi)

(m)

(19)

(lb)

'(17)

(25)

(26)

:0
hendricason, A. h. and Veinmejer, E. J. 19M) Lermanent wilting
percentage of soils obtained from yield and laboratory
rials. Elant Phys. adgjlY-)jfi.

Hopper, T. H. 1955 Combustion train for determination of
total carbon in soils. Ind. and ang. Chem. Anal. ad. 9;

114L2- 11.4.7) 0

hilmer, V. J. and Alexander, L. T. 19u9 Methoos of making
mechanical analyses of soils. Soil Sci. 06:15-du.

Learner, R. u. and Shaw, B. lynl A simple apparatus for
measuring noncapillary porosity on an extensive scale.
Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 95:1009-1000.

Middleton, B. E. l920 The moisture equivalent in relation
to the mechanical analysis of soils. Soil Sci. 9:159-167.

Peels, T. E. and Beale, O. A. 1990 Relation of moisture
equivalent to field capacity and moisture retained at 15
atmospheres pressures to th~ wilting percentage. Agron.
Jour. u2, ulgéun-OO7.

Pennington, R. P. and Jackson, m. L. l9u7 Segregation of the
clay minerals of poljcomponent Sjil clays. Soil Sci. Soc.
Alnero PrOCO 12:1432‘14570

Richards, L. A. 19ul A pressure membrane extraction apparatus
for soil solution. Soil Sci. 91:577-jcb.

19n7 Pressure membrane apparatus construction and
use. Agr. Engin. ad:hbl-nyn, nod.

 

19nd Porous plate apparatus for measuring moisture
retention and transmission by soils. Soil Sci. 66:109-110.

lane Methods of measuring Soil moisture tension.

SBIITsci. saggy-112.

and Fireman, m. 19h} Pressure-plate apparatus
for studying moisture sorption and transmission by soil.
Soil Sci. 56:595-non.

and neavcr, L. R. lanj Fifteen atmosphere percentage
as related to the permanent wilting percentage. Soil Sci.

56:551‘fi59-

and 19AM Moisture retention by some
W w . . .
irrigated 30115 as related to 5011 meisture tenSion.
Jour. Agr. Res. o9g2lj-djb.

 

 

Fulfil huh u 3 ,.r.

eru.‘ .ln~
.

(8/)

(2e)

(:2)

(50)

(91)

(52)

(55)

.(511)

(55)

(56)

(57)

“F"
\}

itobertson, L. S. and Kohnke, H. 1914] The pF at the wilting
point of SGVUFdl Indiana soils. Soil sci. Soc. Amer.
PrOCo 11:50‘5do

Smith, A. 1917 nelntion of the mechanical analysis to the
moisture equivalent of soils. Soil Sci. uzu71-u7‘.

Smith, R. n. and Browning, D. H. 1946 Soil moisture tension
and pore space relations for several SullS in tne range
of the field capacity. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Iroc. 1d;
17-51.

stollenberg, N. L. and Lauritzen, C. s. 194A Structure of
Houston blacx clay as reflected by moisture equivalent
data. Jour. Amer. Soc. Agron. 96:922-9d7.

Uhland, R. E. and U'Neal, A. h. 1951 Soil permeability
determinations for use in Soil and water conservation.
Mimeograph Material U.S.D.A.-SCS-TP lJl:l-j6-

Veihmeyer, F. J. and Hendrickson, A. F. 1928 Soil moisture
at permanent wilting of plants. Plant Physiol. 3:555-557.

and 1991 The moisture equivalent as
measure of the field capacity of soils. Soil Sci. 92:
181'1950

and l9u9 Methods of measuring field

capacity and permanent tilting percentage of soils. Soil
Sci. 06:75-9u.

Lilcox, J. C. 19u9 Soil moisture IV. Indirect determination
of field capacity for moisture. Sci. Agri. 49:505-779.

and Spilsburg, h. H. l9ul Soil moisture studies II.
Some relationships between moisture measurements and mechanical
analysis. Sci. Agri. leuDQ-h72.‘

Loodruff, C. m. 1950 hater retention by clays. Soil sci. Soc.
Amer. Proc. 15;;n-9o.

APPENDIX

 

 

TABLE V
BASIC DATA 0N BV’KIhH LUALY SAJD SITE NUMBER QEE‘
Sample Number 1 2 5 A
Horizon Ap B 1 812 BE
Depth (inches) 0-10 10-21 21-29 25-u2
dygroscopic Coefficient 1.0 0.61 0.u7 0.n
Permanent Wilting Point 5.h** 5.0.. 9.) 2.7
Field Capacity 16.h 12.6 9.0
moisture Equivalent 10.6 5.5 u.6 5.5
Total Carbon 2.8 0.56
Sand 80.9 8n.h 87.6 92.9
Silt 10.5** 7.6** 5.6 2.1
2 u Clay h.h u.6 u.b. 3.7
.2‘u Clay
lontmorillonite 10 10 5 5
Illite 50 50 0 50
Kaolinite h 8 a 12
Volume Weight (gms/cc) 1.3 1.h 1.5 1.6
Moisture Content at;
0.00 Atms no 55 51 25
0.01 Atms 50 51 51 21
0.02 Atms 56 51 25 20
0.05 Atms 52 25 2o 19
0.0u.Atms 51 2o 15 15
0.06 Atms 25 15 11 11
0.55 Atms 19 5 b h
1.00 Atms 17 7 h u
5.00 Atms 7.6 u.5 5.5 2.7
5.00 Atms 6.7 5.9 5.0 2.5
6.00 Atms 5.9 5.7 2.8 2.5
15.00 Atms 5.6 5.0 2.u 2.0
270.19 Atms 505 2.8 2.1 1.9

 

\I‘I

 

* Except when noted figures indicate percent on an oven dry basis.

at Figures include only one determination.

.oco gonads opwm poem meeoa dowuuom new mo>nzo ommcaou ounumfloz .0H madman

mmmmrmmOEed I ZOHmzmH mmDBmHOE AHom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

ma.em cums 0.0 owm o.m odd mm. to. :0. no. mo.. do.
if _ a _ n _ _ _ o
Namrlllluwr ”I! n'r
S
.8.
o“
[.0:
ll om
@223st “133:, Hawaiian u I
923523 @5930: "4
waHoameo mamua . o
oo

 

'LM £80 £0 LNBDHSd - lNSLNOO SHHLSION TIOS

BASIC DATA ON

-_o
m -.—-

Sample Number

Horizon

Depth (inches)

Hygroscopic Coefficient

Permanent wilting Point

Field Capacity

Moisture Equivalent

Total Carbon

Sand

Silt

2/uz01ay

.2” C lay

Montmorillonite

Illite

Kaolinite

Volume Weight (gms/cc)

Moisture Content at;
0.00 Atms
0.01 Atms
O o 02 Atms
0.03 Atms
0.0u Atms
0.06 Atms
0.55 Atms
1.00 Atms

5.00
5.00
8.00
15.00
27.19

Atms
Atms
Atms
Atms
Atms

TABLE VI

GHANBY LOAMY

~J F‘RTFJ C>>'C\
£7~JVDLTU1v~CDPJJJU

o 0 O. .0
\CO-‘Omrr-‘OWC

27
15.0
15.5

12.7
10.6

7
Ag
9-19
0.60
n.0
15.h
6.1
0.00
85.0
7-5
hob

10

30

12
1.5

28
26
2h
21

18

SAND SITE

20

NUMBER THO*

10

C1

00-55
0.12
0.90

1.9

95-6
0.76
1.6

0
10

2
1.6

22
21
21
19
16
10

h

5
1.1

0.92
0.82
0.88
0.88

61

 

* Except when noted figures indicate percent on an oven dry basis.
** Figures include only one determination.

ma.mm
mo. 3.. w

n
.L

CL

1"

“1) N I
.Y‘. m

o.ma

.030 honed: opwm teem hEdOH mneeau you mo>A30 omeoaop endpmflofi

memmmmmoza< - onmzms mmeamuos sHom
o.e o.m o.m o.~ mm.

 

.al .tswaa

mo. .40. “O. NO. H00

 

 

 

m

H.
C

 

<9

w

‘

 

I. Ilrmll
I,

0 4114*" . Ilvlr.

 

 

 

 

momma ozHaaH; ezmzazxmm u
ezmq<>uegm mmaamHoz u
weHoemao ageHa u

«-<1II

____ .

 

om

 

‘LM 180 do LNSOHSJ - LNSLNOO SHflLSIOW 110$

c5

 

 

 

 

 

TAHLL Vll
BASIC LATA.201 lLLLSDALQ SAMLX 13Md51513i N? -MJ%’Xikhn~
Sample Number 11 12 15 14 15 16 17
norizon A? A2 851 Bpg B; 01 02
[eptn (inches) 0-7 0-15 15-20 20-20 20-52 54-50 50
Hygroscopic Coefficient 0.70 0.50 1.01 1.1 0.72 0.55 0.52
Permanent nilting Point 5.5!! 0.5 8.5 0.0 6.0 0.9 5.7
Field Capacity 20.9 10.0 15.0 10.5 17.2
Moisture Equivalent 12.7 10.6 1n.2 15.0 11.0 9.9 10.2
Total Carbon 1.1 0.52
Sand 56.5 06.8 50.5** 60.5tt 68.9 62.1 16.1
Si1t 51.5 00.5 22.5 20.5** 2h.5** 26.0 00.2
2/uIC1ay 7.5 5.5 16.9 15.0 9.7 7.0 0.0
.2/u201ay
Montmorillonite <5 0 0 5 <5 45 0
Illite 20 10 50 50 50 50 50
Kaolinite 8 2 8 10 8 8 8
Volume Weight (gms/cc) 1.0 1.5 1.5 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.5
Moisture Content at: .
" 0.00 Atms 55 27 as 52 5h 55 57
0.01 Atms 51 2h 25 50 55 51 55
0.02 Atms 29 2h 25 29 52 51 50
0.05 Atms 28 25 2h 28 51 50 55
0.0a Atms 27 22 25 27' 50 50 55
0.06 Atms 2h 21 22 26 28 26 52
0.55 Atms 20 19 18 22 25 2h 20
1.00 Atms 17 16 10‘ 1/ 16 16 22
5.00 Atms 0.2 u.u 0 0 0.6 2.9
5.00 Atms 5.6 5.7 5 5 u.5 2.6
8.00 Atms 5.0 5.2 5 5 0.0 2.0
15.J0 Atms u.2 2.6 2 8 5.5 2.0
27.19 Atms 0.5 2.5 6 2 5.5 1.6

* Except when noted figures indicate percent on an oven dry basis.
** Figures include only one determination.

:1,
F»vr u

.oohcp confide opflm Eeoa Anson oawbmaaw: how weepso mmwoaou monomfios .em ooswflm

mmmmzmmozee . onmzme mxsemoos qum
ma.em o.m~ 0.x o.m o.m o.H mm. . be. :5. mo. mo. 0.

_ d . _ __ fl

 

 

 

 

 

2:522 mars; ezmzeémm .-
92242>Hmem mxsamHos . .
weHoemeo oque u o

 

HfllSICN TIOS

,..
.1

'LM AHG d0 LNEOHHd - LN3$N00

.‘.|‘
.1 i x .. .
w

 

 

 

 

E34310 1:517" L115 T 1'".‘.v'-I SHED" '2' 11.771.71.15 3313173392. 41:17.16“
Sample Number 18 19 20 21 22 25
norizon AP A2 31 831 82? C
Depth (inches) 0-6 7-11 12-16 16-21 25-20 00-05
nyyrcocoyic Coefficient 0.61 0.66 1.5 .2 1.1 1.2
Permanent hilting Point 6.6 7. 9.0 9.8 9.0** 10.2**
Field Capacity 10.6 11.5 12.8 10.6 15.5
Moisture squivalent 10.9 12.8 10.0 10.3 15.8 17.6
Total Carbon 0.05 0.0j
Sand L)! .1 311.“) 730.3) 52.0 55.5 141.1.)
Silt 29.6 10.9 26.2 20.8 27.5 26.7
2/uaC1ay 8.9 11.8 19.7 19.5 20.5 20.7
.2/u-Clay 10.8 11.9
Montmorillonite <5 0 <5 5 <45 5
lllite 20 20 50 60 50 50
Kuolinite 0 8 <2 12 o 10
Volume ”eight (axe/cc) 1.0 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.0 1.7
doisture Content at;
0.00 Atms 29 22 20 22 20 21
0.01 Atms 25 19 21 21 22 21
0.02 Atms 20 18 20 20 21 20
0.05 Atms 22 17 19 19 20 19
0.00 Atms '21 17 19 18 20 19
0.06 Atms 2) 16 lo 1/ 19 18
0.35 Atms 19 16 16 17 19 16
1.00 Atms 10 15 15 16 18 10
5.00 Atms 7.6 7.5 10.2 10.0 13.0 13.2
5.00 Atms 6.1 ' 6.2 9.5 9.0 9.7 12.0
8.00 Aims 5.5 5.1 8.5 6.7 6.9 11.0
15.00 Atms 0.5 0.1 7.0 7.6 7.6 9.5
27.19 Atms 0.2 5.0 '6.5 0.7 6.0 0.0

* Except when noted fi;ures indicate I.1—32‘0e1'1t on an oven er basis.
** Figures include only one determination.

 

.lzl Ill-.1 I I

ELM

J

.Lzom Landau moan anH xucdm Mada: pom mmaujo mmwmaog Ohdpwwoa

muxammmoge< - 2666269 66:66H62 4666
o.ma 6.6 o.m q.m 3.H mm.

____

.40 ohzuflm

oo. :6. no.

___

 

252.6336 9:33 azmzéamm .-
ezqu>unnm mmmeHon . .
SEES 3m: .. 0

mo.

_

Ho.

 

 

om

'LM £30 £0 LNGOHSJ - LN31NCO SHBLSIOW 1108

 

 

 

T

t1 .3?

..
,‘Lt .

” IX

67

 

 

 

BASIC iflfihk-JN 5h00K$IVHJ.jAJDY Lumen ilTn 9737131 '1VS*
Eklmple Number 2A 25 2o 27 20 29
Efiorizon A3 B31 03¢ 53) C D
lxeptn (incnes) 0110 15-17 10-25 21-52 62-66 67-55
Ehygroscopic Coefficient 1.2 0.6h 0.65 1.0 0.56 d-QU
Fwermanent wilting Point d.n 6.0 6.6 7.6 5.1** 5.6
frield Capacity 20.h 15.5 15.7 15.5
hkaisture Equivalent 16.9 6.6 10.7 1h.h 12.1 11.1
Total Carbon 2.0 0.1121
Sand 56.1.1 75. 5 67 . 5 511. 1 66.6 59. 5
Eiilt 20.6 10.1 16.2 26.5 25.9 26.1
kéauJC1ay 12.2 11.0 12.h 15.0 9.h 6.9
.B/u/ Clay
Mkantmorillonite (5 15 10 0 <5 5
I llite . '20 70 70 L10 L10 5O
Kj1olinite 8 16 1h 10 12 16
\Lolume Weight (gms/cc) 1.h 1.6 1.6 1.7 2.0 2.0
Nkaisture Content at;
0.00 Atms 50 2 22 20 15 51
0.01 Atms 29 21 20 18 12 50
0.02 Atms 27 19 13 17 12 50
0.05 Atms 25 lo 17 16 12 50
0.06 Atms 2h 17 16 16 11 50
0.06 Atms 22' 16 15 15 11 50
0.55 Atms 18' 12 11 lb '50
1.00 Atms .17 11 ~10 15 11 29
5.00 Atms 9.9 6.0 7.1 8.6 6.“ u.9
5.00 Atms 9.0 5.7 6.5 7.8 5.5 6.1
5.00 Atms 6.1 5.6 6.2 7.2 6.7 5.6
15.00 Atms 7.7 6.9 5.5 6.2 5.6 2.7
27.19 Atms 7.1 6.7 6.6 5.6 5.5 2.2

* Except wnen noted figures indicate percent on an oven dry basis.
¢* Figures include only one determination.

DO

.m>fl.« gonads opww Fdoa udsam doommooum you. 99730 mmdmamp weapmwofla .mw 0.3m;

Ur.

mmxnmemoeae . zoumzme mxeemusg 666m
md.em o.m~ 6.6 o.m o.m odd mm. on. as. no. mo. Ho.

 

 

 

 

 

_ _ _ A _ fl _ a _ ‘ __,
12AM“
« w, o
1! I m
, mum .
I
, ,4. .
/ 462 am
y ,
/ /
, /
I . mm
/
6.22531 3:5; azmzfiémm .. I /
2.5.2353 $53qu a 1 r
. £

.1!!!illlll£!€1. r z

I 1‘

 

 

HDLSION 'IIOS

rw

‘31

quLNOO

AHG .210 1118011311 -

’ 1.1-i

 

 

 

 

 

* Except waen noted rigures inmicate percent

 

** Figures inc1ude only one determination.

T.‘Lb 1
BASIC DATA J& I 3 CLA LLP 311' oIX+
ESample Nmeer 5O 51 52 55 5h
Ezorizon AD 816 826 85G C
Depth (inches) 017 7-22 22-25 20-29 57—110
Ehygroscoyic Coefficient 5.1 2.0 1.6 1.b 1.5
EWermanent dilting Point 17.b** 12.6»* 14.5 15.0 16.6
{Field Capacity 59.2 27.1 21.0 1).2 13.u
Edoisture Equivalent 55.1 21.u 20.9 2J.é 25.J
Trotal Carbon §.b 1.5
;5and 56.9 57.2 5o.5 55.2 55.5
ESilt 2c.5 5u.n 29.5 5u.9 51.)
EB/u’Clay 28.6 27.6 29.9 52.2 95-h
oZ/wClay 10.3 15...) 1).]. 15.1.1 1'5.)
iuontmorillonite 0 5 '45 13 Q
:Illite 20 be 50 oo 20
Iiuolinite 8 13 10 15 0
'Volume height (gms/cc) 1.0 1.u 1.5 1.5 1.6
Idoisuure Content at;
0.u0 Atms 60 55 2o 27 25
0.01 Atms 52 29 2A 25 21
0.02 Atms h7 27 25 22 21
0.05 Atms hb 2b ”2 21 21
c.0u Atms La 25 21 21 20
0.15 Atms 2 2a 21 20 20
3.55 Atms 5d 2h 17 19
1.00 Atms 57 25 17 2O 13
5.00 Atms 2’.6 15.6 15.1 15.9 17.7
5.00 Atms 21.9 'lu.7 15.9 lu.7 15.6
6.00 Atms 20.2 15.c 12.8 15.3 17.1
15.00 Atms 19.5 11.6 11.2 12.0 15.h
27.19 Atms 15.0.. 1c.2 9.7 19.0 11.5

on an oven dry basis.

.me popEfio mpflm Edoa mmao mswm you mobuso mmmoamu myopmflofi .mm vpzmwm

marmmmmozee . zopmzxe mezechx chm
ma.wu o.ma o.m o.n o.m o.H mm. co. :0. no. no. do.

7 ._ __4 _ _ ____ .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/
/ mam
// allll f.“
/
4r
/
/1|||::I::|:1:4:11071:;x-I
,,,/;/ .111 o:
mmfizmoxfi 93.55., Empagamm .-
Bzmfiipvm @820: u 1
33420 oqu u o

 

 

JO EHQlSICW 7108

1311

'LM 1H1 do lNSOHfid - 1N31

 

.—

 

'1‘: 11.!‘1. )11

71

 

 

BanC 331A 0N RAFFAEHE 310T LCAV JIT? B11 5012(*
fSample Number 5 56 57 5o 59
}iorizon A? Bl_ 32g C D
1ktpth (inCheS) -) 13-15 15-20 20-111 111
Ifiygroscopic Coefficient 1.6 2.2 2.5 1.5 1.5
IFermanent Wilting Point 15.5 1C.5 19.1 10.1 15.9
IPield Capacity 29.0 22.1 21.0 15.0
mfioisture Equivalent 20.9 25.0 25.5 20.0 22.b
ifotal Carbon 2.5 0.59
:sand 20.9 23.5 13.5 10.0 12.5
ESilt b2.6 52.5 55.6*# 27.5 27.0**
23/u1C1ay 22.5 50.7 no.6 52.1 52.7
.2/u,01ay 0.0 17.1 20.9 1L.5 10.5
Montmorillonite <5 5 0 <5 <5
IIllite 50 50 50 50 00
Kaolinite 11 10 L1 (2 10
Volume Weight (Qua/cc) 1.1 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.7
hfioisture Content at;
0.00 Atms 29 28 26 25 20
0.01 Atms 1.10 211 211 21 19
0.02 Atms 57 25 25 20 18
0.05 Atms 5o. 22 22 20 lo
0.00 Atms 5; 22 22 20 1a
0.06 Atms 5h 21 22 19 17
0.55 Atms 5A 21 20 17 17
1.00 Atms 55 21 19 17 16
5.00 Atms 22.0 17.2 20.2 17.5 10.5
5.00 Atms 10.7 15.8 19.0 10.5 17.2
0.00 Atms 2.5 10.0 10.0 15.9 15.7
15.00 Atms 11.6 15.0 10.2 15.1 15.2
27.19 Atms 9.0 11.6 lu.l 11.1 10.9

 

* Except when n0ted figures indicate percent on an oven dry basis.
** Figures include only one determination.

 

 

 

.co>mm nopesc ouwm Emoa pqfim mammamdz how mo>pqo mmmmamu endumfloz

mammmmm029< I onmzme mmDEmHnfi AHOm

1.ma o.w o.m o.m Qua mm.

00.

.30 ok;wflm

.6. 3.

mo.

do.
5

 

am<grnuxn1
H

___ _

 

_

 

 

 

 

3:3... 922242?“ I
251231.? $1220.». 1
yiéiu 3.1.25 n o

d _

m

4

_

 

 

L)
-b
N

l om

 

HHLSIOW qIOS

.3!

r-

O $N30H3d - LNSLMVO

V
N
L4

LNG

. LL 'v':

 

Thfllb X11

 

 

 

 

BASIC LLTA CE JOYTSV1LLE CLRY LQAX 3113 NH Ll” 1*
ESOanle Number 00 bl 02
Eioz‘izon AP G18 023
Depth (inches) 0-7 7-12 2-145
I€yygroscoyic Coefficient 5.5 2.0 3-0
Permanent v‘u‘i1ting Point 29.1 19.1 19.8
I?i£31d Capacity h2.5 27.5 25.1
BiCJisture Equivalent 50.6 27.0 20.8
Total Carbon 11.7 1.7
ESsirid 11.5 l7.h 15.2
:Sifllt 52.0 56.6 50.1
93 A» Clay L155) 5%). 1 141-9
o’dQuIC1ay 10.5 10.7 20.11
thIItmorillonite 5 5 (j
Illite ‘ 50 70 50
Kaolinite 5 <2 :5
Volume Weight (gas/cc) 0.92 l. 1.11
Moisture Content at;
c.1o Atms 62 56 51
0.01 Ath 55 55 29
0.02 Atms .50 52 as
0.05 Atms Ag 52 2m
0.0m Atms AU 52 28
0.00 Atms no 51 27
0.55 Atms 05 50 25
1.00 Atms 05 2’ 25
5.00 Atms 20.7 20.5 20.7
5.00 Atms 27.0 19.2 19.1
8.00 Atms 25.5 17.0 17.8
15.00 Atms 20.1 10.0 15.9
27.l9 Atms 19.5** lu.2 15.8**

—\

* Except when noted figures indicate percent on an oven dry oasis.
** Figures include only one determiwaticn.

.umwam gonads mafia xdao oaafi>mpmom pom mm>czo cmsvavu mnzwmfioz .mm up: He

mmxmmmmouem t Zmezae 2x39mH02 dwcw
o 0 to 4.4.0 o .10 o
ma.~m 3.3. 3.3 a.m o.m o H m“ on .5 no mo Ho

_ _ ___ _ _:a o

Q Ma / «HIM
/
/ ,

 

.""l

39
g

t“.

I,
//
J/ ///

/ I

/ 711 Ill
. /.
Ir
0 o
1.13111/11111 mmnrxw l.
/

1lllldlllrllllhllllllll1.
/

mac
/

 

 

\7
N‘\
d - lNSLNCO EHfilSIOW 1108

/
d0 lNHGHF

'lM 1H0

 

amxezmozmg mAHBJH: 92mzmfixmm
Bzm4<>Hbdm meBmHQW
waHo¢mmo quHm

u n
‘I“II

 

 

r;

 

 

b 1C lTA QTJ'fl A SAEDY LTK 1'" " ‘ h ‘1 1*
Sample Number 5 bu 05 no 07
Horizon AP, 01 . Be B3 _ Cl
D€pth (inches) U-D v-1u 10-20 2--57 57
hygroscopic Coefficient 0.61 0.96 1.2 0.92 0.25
Pernanent ailting loint b.9** 6.7 7.1** 0.2 2.0
Field Capacity 15.1 12.7 15.0 10.6 9.5
Moisture Equivalent 10.0 10.5 12.5 0.5 5.6
Total Carbon 3.0 0.5 ;
Sand 72.0 07.2 70.5 79.2 05.0
Silt 19.2 10.1 7.9 7.2** 21.6
2/u’C1ay 0.7 15.5 10.5 11.0 2.5
02/11! Clay
Montmorillonite 0 (5 5 5 0
Illite 20 20 50 50 50
Kaolinite 8 o 0 <2 8
Volume weight (gm/cc) 1.0 1.6 1.6 1.5
moisture Content at:

0.00 Atms 2O 20 21 22

0.01 Atms 20 17 19 20

0.02 Atms 19 15 17 17

0.05 Atms 16 lb 16 15

0.06 Atms 16 5 16 16

0.06 Atms 1a 12 10 15

0.55 Atms 11 12 7

1.00 tms 10 12 11 6

5.00 Atms 5.6 6 9 6.1 6 2 2 2

5.00 Atms 5.1 6 h 7.7 5 9 1 9

8.00 Atms 6.0 5 6 6.9 5 6 1 7

15.00 Atms 5.5 5.3 6.7 6.8 1.5

27.19 Atms 5.1 u.6 6.0 6.1 1.6

 

* Except when noted figures indicate percent on an oven dry oasis.
** Figures include only one determination.

 

 

mgfig vNfi.Q:3~ :
. H 0.3m zaoa meadow u3....H com .6353 omaoaoa 0.25302 .Ou. 0.31:

mexmmmmoae< . onmzuy mmzamuoz aHom
ma.5m o.ma 6.6 o.m o.“ o.a «a. 63. no. «9. mo. 4

.7 ___ _ 1 ::

 

-
. v

 

 

 

O thOHSd - lflHLNxO BHH1SIOW 1108

1'
LJ

’lM AHU

(\l

a3¢azfloxmm DZHHJH: BZQZdEfimm
Bzmq<>H1wm meBMHQS
>9H0<L<o quHm

 

u I I
O‘-

 

 

H.131": DRTA L‘IJ T7771. SAT‘ZLY 100111» 0112. 1.011133}; TEN"

 

 

 

 

.Sanmle Number 68 M9 50 51 52 5
Horizon. AP Bl 7 32 W B? Cl c2
Lkfifikl(1nches) 0-0 6-12 12-21 2 -5h 50-61 bl
I‘~5I,t:.',roscopic Coefficient 0.66 1.2 1.6 0.07 J.l9 0.65
‘Permanent wilting Point u.9** 8.5 10.6** 5.1 1.6 5.2
Field Capacity 10.7 10.5 12.9 9.0 6.6
Moisture Equivalent 15.9 12.6 14.1 6.5 1-7 6.6
Total Carbon 0.85 0.50
Sand 52.6 05-0 16.0 90.6 96.1 90.6
Silt 56.9 55.1 10.5 _ 5.9 1.0 1-9
2/u/C1ay 7.7 17.5 21.2 2.7 1.9 5.0
.210: Clay 56.1:
Rontmorillonite 5 <5 5 0 0 0
Illite 50 50 50 10 0 50
Kaolinite 10 8 6 O O 10
Volume "eight (gms/cc) 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.5
moisture Content at;
0.00 Atms 25 22 25 25
0.01 Atms 22 20 21 22
0.02 Atms 21 19 19 18
0.05 Atms 20 G 19 lb
0.06 Atms 19 17 10 2
0.06 Atms 17 16 1f 11
0.55 Atms 17 17 11
1.00 Atms 15 16 16 10
5.00 Atms 6.0 9.5 10.2 5.5 1.0 9.3
5.00 11th 11.9 6.5 9.6 5.1 1-5 5-5
0.00 itms 6.1 7.5 9.5 2.9 1-5 5.2
15.30 Atms 3.0 6.5 8.6 2.7 1.1 2.0
27.19 Atms 5.1 5.8 6.0 2.6 1.0 2.6

 

 

* Except when noted figures indicate percent on an oven dry oaSlS.
** Figures include only one determination.

 

.sop gonads mpfim Edoa Anode xom new m0>pzo mmmoaou mpzpmfloz .wm moan“

mummmmmOWE¢ I z HMZQB meBmHfiE AHom
Cow Com O.“ 30H ““0 00. do. “O. NO. HA...

 

 

 

.FL _ _ —___

 

£323.03; 9.1.242. szfiamm u I
E..~mj>wam 9.6593qu n C
u_.

 

in

 

.ESES 33....

 

1N81MOO RHHLSIOW 710$

'OHfld -

.1

1H0 d0 LN'

TU.
Lu.

D Nulflqalfl‘

 

 

 

*- ‘1 XV
811.816 LITA €021 3:115:92 711103 10011..." .315? 1";'T.‘.i*1£11 111m 7153‘
SaJngvle Number 50 55 5o 57 5o 59
F-Orizon Ap A515]. 132 85 C1 C2
1‘3LVbr1 (inches) 6-5 o-15 15-50 55-56 55-66 06
HY{§IWoscopic Coefficient 2.1 2.5 2.0 0.56 0.15 0.26
Permanent .‘dlting, Point 111.14 12.7 6.1 2.6 0.96 2.5
Fieelnd Capacity 26.9 25.1 16.2 10.2
Mc>iesture Equivalent 25.6 19.5 11.5 5.1 1.5 2.0
Total Carbon 2.6 0.01;
Send 1.0.0 52.6 65.6 90.0 96.0 67.7
§ilt 511.1 57.6 25.9 1. 7 1.0 5.6
‘12441 Clay _ 10.1 25.6 11.2 6.1 1.0 5.9
'29afilaClay 10.7
Montmrillonite 20 0 <5 <5 0 <5
Illite 90 0 50 110 20 1.0
12a 0 l inite 211 O 1;, 'd 6 t;
vc>ll1me Weight (gm/cc) 1.2 1.6 1.6 1.6
Mo 1 8 ture Content at ;
0.00 Atms 59 29 . 21 19
0.01 Atms 56 29 20 17
0.02 Atms 5h 26 19 15
0.05 Atms '2 2 10 15
0.00 Atms 5o 26 17 11
0.06 Atms 29 25 16 10
0.55 Atms 2 16 6
1.00 Atms. an 15 5
5.00 Atms 15.6 15.6 6.5 2.7 1.0 L.5
5.00 Atms 15.2 12.0 5.9 2.6 0.99 2.0
6.JO Atms 11.2 11.1.; 5.5 2.5 0.95 1.6
15.00 5th 9.5 10.5 11.7 2.1 0.c-1 1.11
27.19 Atms 6.5 10.0 0.0 2.0 0.01 1.5
\

 

* Except when noted firurus indicate pGVCudL on an oven dry basis.

 

oGD>QH® LDDESQ mvflw :QwOH Qaflm gawk”: hOrH m9>k30 ©md®4®h QkSJmHOE

warmmmnwaa< I ZhHmzme mzbwadu Juan
9;

 

.0U mgswam

NC. at

 

 

 

 

 

awe“: exam mzHequ ezmz<dxmm
auxq<>wam azmewHoz
ceHommzo aanm

4D‘1ll

_

m m_.

 

\(\
.Y)

.'\J ‘

m

Ann:

I. .n l

mar/II;

om

 

lNglNOO EHDLPICN TIOS

AHG d0 lNEOHHd -

° 1::

g.

 

 

 

 

.5.‘ .11: E .II; v 2 1 1! / I ' ) l a .1 It I L .4 V .
ikunple LgLnb r L0 01 62 05
fiorizcn AP A; 21 D5
Lebth (inches) 0-10 1J-QL 50-20 40

Ig/groscogic coefficient 0.57 0.21 9.53 0.50

Permanent fiilting Point 5.054 1.C ”.1 5.5

field Lapacity 9.7 0.0 7.0 1J.b

.“oisture equivalent 4 7 2.9 5.2 u.u

’fotal Carbon 0.59 0.00
5

Sand (3)4. -‘ 9d. 1 9L: .9 if] 0 l
Silt 'gt. c.5 1.2.. 121
Cf’bCl-qy' LL..4 CC) 1100 3102

.2/u, Clay
Evie-nanorillonite (5 0
1111133 1‘3 \)
Kinflinitr: 5 O
VOJAHne height (gms/cc) 1.7 1
AXJisture content at;
0.00 Atms 25 25 '2 25
1.01 Atms 211 2.1.: 22 811.
0.02 Atms 25 2 21 . 2L
0.05 Atns 22 lo. 15 25
0.0L Atms 10 11 10 - 2
0.05 Atms 1
3.55 Atms

P‘C.C/C)
ij
P‘RJC3V1

O
\J’t

O. \L
O

\r

«C

1 .531) Atgxls 7 5 d u,

j o 1.10 Atflls 5 o '_) .2 o .. 23 a 7 j o C)

9.00 Atms 5.1 1.9 2.5 5.5
0.00 Atms 2.9 1.7 2.5 2.9
15.00 ALms 2.1 1.5 2.0 2.5
27.19 gtms ”.1 1.2 1.9 2.2

\ -a“‘-«----‘~~—.-m~.~-Au~¢ A.- —--w

 

* Excegt Whflfl noteu figures iaaicaze Ecrcunt an an even ary UASiS.
** Tifiures inciuue only one ueterniuntion.

.r...1i:. thirr. :3...— 4!

I l

.mSHsz. p.038: 03m 93m .383 33mm you $250 omega 239391.. .mN 83w;

nm21mmn:se<.u onnzme mxpaans geam

 

3.5 23 3. can 0.“ 3 mm. 8. 8.3. mo.

_ _4_fi

 

 

 

Anahgaozup mzHqus azuz<zxum
92.4«>szn a DQmHog
wBHo<mxo gqum

1D‘UII

LA
(\I

 

180 .210 .LNFIOHEd -

.1.qu .LNOC) BHHJI‘ICW 'IIOS

0 1A1

 

k . .r\ ' T— x r n l \p A ' Y4 \7 H 3 l . I
3:)14 ./ -1‘. :v' --v I I..L 21 .4‘ 1 ._. L .) \ L .N 1) H!
- ——. ‘ 1‘ fi““—‘.—. - - -. fi ‘ - .- - ‘ ~. - ‘- - - -- C. ~‘ - - '- -- * - ‘ - - . II. - - - - V. - Q C O - -‘ - O \. n - O C v- ‘ ‘ V. “w
— -—. ‘ — C -‘O. -‘-- C ‘—- Ch. 0». d — O C -- ._ - - - O D Q --- d - Q- - O“ A - g- ‘ . ‘_. O. - O C C ~‘ 0 C
S' v vfi \7 v\.' _ /' thr' I /
~Lngle Ammver 04 p; to n]

horizon .w ,
”fiptfl (inches) J-o Q-ll 11-17 17-39

'-

I
4

n§g;roscopic Coefficient 0.70 J.;& J.27 J.lh

Pknfinanent diltixb fciut ;.4** Q-7 905 1'9

T’ielmi Capacity 11.5 ll.h» f
xnylsture Equivalemt 12.4 8.2 5.6 2.0

l

letal Carbuu ‘
Samuj @905 7
silt [L7 1
51),, Clay 7.9
. B/u, Clay

:fiuultunorillunite

J /

I llite 10 20 50 50
6 ‘.
1

H
O
\J\
K-
O
\
‘
.. 1
‘J
.
‘.j \I
.5 1"!-

 

Kafi31.lnite

Vk>lane Weight (gms/bc)

MOisture Content at;
0.00 3.th 22,-) 2:- 1;,

0.01 Atms 25 2 lb
0.0.:- Atms 214 19 16
0.05 Atms 22 17 1
0-0h Atms 21 15

0.09 Atms 19 lfi

J.;j Atns 16 2

1.00 Atms 15 ll

fi.UU Atms 7.6 U09 §.U .

-

9.Ju Atms 9
0.JO Atms 5 d M
15.00 Atms 2.8 1.9
2Y.19 Atms ’ 2 l 7

o
\J} O
C-

O

,x‘T f\
R

o

C'F’P‘P‘F4\J(D(K\Cf0

0
CL! C RDW \J‘.

i-
0

\.~
u-N}

\

 

 

* Except when noted fiéQFPS indicate percent on an oven dr’
** Figures incluge only one determination.

(‘A
C .
m
U)
,4
m
.

 

 

 

.cmmupfinp umDEd: Opwm EdoH ansam cowphmm pom m¢>gso mmmmamu musuwflofl .3“ okswflm

mmmmmmm¢5~¢ I ZAFmva umDBmHfifi awom

 

 

 

 

ma.\m o.ma o.m o.m o.m 0.“ mm. co. :a. mo. mo. “a.
m _. _ _ # _ _ — _ a a.
-,.,...\_ _ .
.n NC
9..

 

35...; in... mafia... $551.23 a I
.:.Mmfi;.H._)_£ £3205 .. d
msHQ<x<o aqum - o

 

 

CW 1103

£30 £0 LNSDHHJ - LNHLNOD ENDISI

' .IM

 

 

 

 

 

':‘;‘-.,‘SL.:L 111.111
@1310 L’Fz_ A .haihkv.51L1 L). ‘1 .52 FiUmfifllr
Sample Number 615 69 7O 71 72
Horizon April 1121 3‘; Cl D
De pt‘n (inches) 0-1 11-21 41-30 2 3-211 111-on
fayrgrOSCOpic Coefficient 1.0 2.5 1.: 0.5) 0.12
I3errmanent fiilting Point lJ.D+v 12.h 7.0»* Z.j** 0.60
Field ()apacity 21.0 21.6 11.3 7.8
Bjc>isture Equivalent io.u 2J.o 8.6 2.9 1.2
'Ecatal Carbon 1.8 0.81
sand 513.9 5.1.1 75.8 95.2 97.0
:S:ilt h0.1 59.9 10.2 E-h 1.3
tiaAL’Clay 16.5 cu.8 1o.l u.o l.u
~2/w Clay 15.11
khantmorillonite 0 (j 5 b O
Illite 20 5.) 110 Co 50
Kaolinite 6 11 6 1;) 6
Vtfllume height (gms/cc) 1.5 l.u 1.0
BMoisture Content at;
0.00 Atms 26 28 20
0.01 Atms 2h 25 20
3.0;.) Atms 211 an 19
0.05 tms 25 25 19
0.011 Atlas a} 2:5 16
0.06 Atms :2 22 15
0.53 Atms 20 19 15
1.J0 Atms 19 1c lj
5.00 Atms 1;.0 1q.a 7.5 (.2 1.0
j.JU :1th 13.9 123.3 0.7 (3.1 1.0
6.00 Atms 0.0 11.0 6.0 2.1 1.0
15.00 Atms 7.6 13.5 9.7 1.7 0.35
27.19 Atms 7.5 9.5 5.5 1.6 c.78

\—

* Except when noted figures indicate percent on an oven dry basis.
** Figures include only one determination.

.cmmpuzoa confisc opfim EmoH pawm sampwz how mm>nso mmwmqmu ognpmflom .Hn ausofim

mmumxmmdxe< I onmree ms:bmHCE JHom

 

 

 

3):” or: 06 o.m o.“ 04 mm. on. a... no. we. 2,.
t u _ _ _ _ _ A,

a... w 4 a J

D. I u I

 

ummhznjmum mszqHfi Bzmzmnxmm
azmqtpHmom mzbamHOfi
>9Hof<o aqua

 

 

 

04-

 

00 EHRLSION 1108

T
x

°1M £80 £0 LNSQHBJ - LNWLP

 

 

 

 

 

.111, I I. 1x 1 'o” L‘A: 11* 1.x FIF1_LK*
88.113916: Ill Limb-31' 75 714 {5 7C) 77 7 C
kioz‘izon A Ag 81 Be 851 352
Ikeg>th (inches) 0-11 11-lu 1n-17 17-2u au-zo 20-56
Hyg-fr‘oscopic Coefficient 0.66 0.90 1.11 2.11 0.7) 0.77
iZGifinunent wilting Point 6.2 7.7 9.6 11.7 5.) .6
i9ieald Cayncity 16.8 15.5 19.3 17.2 1n.j
hfoiusture Equivalent 1j.h 16.2 19.6 13.5 0.5 6.
'Ecrtul Carbon 0.79 0.55
C3’3-IIC1 116.5 11.1.1) 1111.1 110.6 03.3 0" .5
Silt 1.1.1. 15.5 52.5 20.0 11.5 2.11
23,xi.C1ay 9.3 10-5 21.2 20.0 11.} 9.5
.2211, Clay 50.5 115.9
I--'i)ntmorilloniLe 0 5 0 10 0 (j
I l lite 20 1.0 10 7o 0 no
Kaolinite 11 12 o 12 o e
“Jelume Weight (gyms/cc) 1.! 1..:, 1 .6 1.7 1.7
f5<>ixsture Content at;
0.00 Atus 2' a5 25 22 19
0.01 Atms 25 20 21 20 lo.
0.02 Atms 2 1) 2 20 17
0.05 Atms 20 10 19 19 16
0.0a Atms 19 18 1: lb 15
. 0.06 itms 13 17 17 10 IA
0.)} Atms 16 15 16‘ 1C) 111
1.00 Atms 15 1h 15 15 15
3.00 Atms 6. 9.5 11.b 14.6 6.4 5.1
5.00 Atms 5.0 7.0 10.1 1§.j 5.0 n.o
6.00 Atms n.o 6.6 9.6 12.5 5.2 M-fi
15.00 Atms j.o 5.u C.u 11.2 a.9 b-1
27.19 Atms 5.6 n.7 6.l»* lJ.n u-h 5.7

a:
**

EX‘ept when noted figures indicate peFC“Ht on an oven dry oasis.
Figures include only one determination.

' \

 

 

 

 

 

q 1~Lg 511‘; (Ctflft1fudit;
t————+——- *“**_ ~ _
;fl1nq)le Number 79 60 61
:“DFiZQn C1 C9 D
U8 g-t‘n (inc 2103 ) 52-1.: ; 3—511 511
:1yQIFOSCQH10 Coefficient 0.nl 0.2o 0.12
£4317nanent Lilting joint 5.1** 2.0+* .2
Eideld Capacity
hfloissture Eguivalent 5.8 5.1 1.7
Total Carbon
Sane 91.2 93.5 '9/.2
S 111: 1 .‘m’ 2.7 1.2
2A.L..(31ay 5.9 5-9 1-0
f 2 A1; Ciay
ambrrtmorillonite 5 0
I ll ite 60 50
fiuo 1 inite c3 1.
yolume Weight (pins/cc)

9'50 i s ture Content at;
0.00 Atms
J.01 Atms
0.02 Atms
0.05 ACmS
J.0u Atms
0.00 Ath
J.55 Atms
1..)1.) tms
5.00 Atns 5.5 2.h 1.2
5.10 Atms 5.2 2.5 1.5
6.00 Atms 5.0 2.2 0.97
15.00 Atms 2.; 2.0 1.0
27 . 1'7" .1th 3.11 1 .5 O .65

* nxcept wnen noted

Figures indicate percent on an oven dry basis.

** Figures incluoe only one determination.

 

 

 

 

 

.Nm ousmwm

.nmopmfim gonads vpfim Edoa zvzmw xom you mo>nzo mmmoac; whopmflofi

O.H

 

nmnmzmm939< I ZOHmzzy mmrwmmoz JHOm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

massive... 22.13.... Emzsgfi .-
Beading @5385 u <
5.85.6 3mg u C

 

fllSICH 1103

v
I

.1

 

.lNOO 3}

H
L

If"

083d -

r:

L

'lM AHG so LN

 

\f',
C.

 

 

od/ILChly

50(1tmorillonite

Illite
Kafihliwite

Volume height (WIS/CC)

£05.3ture Content at:

0.00
0.0l
0.3C
Jon
O.Uu
J.u@
v.55
1.qu
j.UJ
5.00
U.QU
lj.DC

L‘Ol\/

Atms
' 1.11155
Atms
:lttIuS
Atm

Ixtrns
ntms
uth
A C“. 5
ALms
t1 LXI.E$
.x 317.3

ntms

<5
20
6
1.5

5h
50
29
L6
87
it
84
22
1;.J
1J.1
0.6
0.;
[-9

ah
mm,
C(-
I'"\/\

g;

L.)
/-4
40‘}
90;.)

;-§

10(1)

17
10
14.;
l).d
11.0
l../

y.)

 

v mXuept Nnc;

noted fi"ureq

1:4;iculte

LKBFUUIMJ on saw overxciry L

** Figurms include onlj one UGLBTJLJQiiCHo

L PK.) 1 1, 'l‘r* \L .Q‘,‘ ' ‘ if .‘_Q ? I L '51‘ ' T " f
Sanyplo Number ;: 05 a; 85 do
liar‘izon 1. Ag 81? 835 C
Deiith (inches) J-Y [—11 11319 1v-20 jl
ffiyggroscopic Coefficient l.u O.-7 l.yu 1.0 0.00
ENBIunanent wilting Point 9.b M.Y b.) 12.6 0.1
Fixeld Capacity ih.3 aJ.1 17.0 2Q.u 13.5
Kikisture LQinalvnt 4013 13.1 1).? 19.7 15.7
T<Dtmal Carbon 1.9 4.93 '
SaJtd 50.6 55.2** ,3.1 L3.b 58.9
Silt 56.6 3.3.5 2).? 29.5 23..
dadL.L1ay 15.5 1J.1 17.1 da.© 1d.d

C

P‘NfiC

.9

1:")
14
lb
U4
15
15
15
11
9-7
0.;
{.4
9.0

r. 7'
L+.l

- c—9— -—-.—-—.- ”w

 

 

 

‘. \L‘

01.1.15 0

91

 

 

 

.smmpxwm gnnfijs opfim EdoH p®>ocoo how mm>pso mmwmawg oujpmfloa .mm musmwm
mazmmmmng< I onmzze wx:9mHOE qum
ma.>m adma 3.3 o.n o.m o.~ mm. 03. as. «a. ma. as.
‘1

d _1fi a

 

mwdazmommm UZHBAHK Bzmz<fixmm
ezmA<>H23m mxbemHoz

»&Ho<m<o QAMHK

_

_ _

_

 

 

LEG JO LNOQHEd - lMSLNOD BHfiLSIOW TIOS

. LL!“

.2 . ,‘ - 7..
5 ,
Liftk) 1k:

‘

58““:5 .15- I\ built.’
hcrizon

myth (1:10}:
1-.'y;.11‘vbC\)'L‘/i(2 L'wef‘fi
PL: rmanant J". 1 111115;

hiuld Layne

K-I

.. ‘ \‘
t, b I

ity

Aoisture bquivalent

TOtEl Garbo
Sand

Silt

22!» Clay
.Z/u’C1ay
Montmcrillo
Illite
KaoliLite

Volume weight (gms/cc)

I".

nito

Moisture Content at;

l

C.

0.00
0.01
0.08
0.05
0-0h
0.00
0.}j
1.00
9.00
5.30
b.00
).OO

"7 . 1;

11th
Atms

Atms.

Atms
Atms
1'1th
Atms
Atms
Atms
fith
Atms
Atms
Atms

C1-
P01

t
t

d0

0
:1:

U7U;\JCf(.
O

u. :z—r‘: gran-m2: n: :31.
Qd 91 92
Etl big 8
19-h) 84-5' ;¢-Lj
1.4 1./ 1.7
1C.j 11.6 1C.2
10.1 1a.?
19.} 10.; 10.o
QA-g Qb-7 QD-Q
27.6 Eb.d Eb.7
2Q.Q 25.5 25.2
15.5 15.;
O O C
3Q 50 0
6 6 O
1.6 1.6
25 an
22 2h
22 2j
21 Ej
:1 d8
20 22
19 41
18 20
12.1 15.2 lj.¢
11.0 12.0 1:.b

11.5
10.0
U.C

11.6
10.1

H ’7
u o

* ixceyt when noted figures indicate percent on an oven ury basis.
** Figures inclgne only one determination.

C.

 

. Iv 7‘1

 

 

 

 

.C®opnm>mm umpedu oyfim Edoa “swag pom mo>pzo mmaoam; agapmfloa .Jm @uzuwn

 

 

mnmmrmmoze< I onmIMH mzsgmHOfi qwom

 

 

 

 

 

o; «A. on. no. no. mo. rm.

_ _ _ ‘_

II...

IL?

/ xx 1 . o 3

 

m «Hznornh wZHBAH: Bzmz<2xmm u
Ezmq¢>HDwm meumHOE u
wHHodmdu quHm u

 

 

h}

 

I.
1
o

N

III.om

 

JLNOO HHHLPICW 1108

9
l

‘LM 1H0 £0 1HHOHSJ - LN

\\ f
r-.

 

 

 

 

p.31(; 1.1H. m. EiuuyPY LNMC.Y’JMMJ oIIW.1.oMLPILI'IQWT”kJ.W
1511:: 1‘19 1E..u:fc..r 931 =4;- 953 :97 31c
Lorizon AP 12; 315 CR GC
Depth (inchcs) o-o 2-12 12-10 21-27 35
Eygroscopic Coefficigwi U.Yu 1.2, J.1L J.E} 0.5’
Permanent Liltiug Poirt A.5 d.2 1.2 2.1 .6
Field Capacity 17.5 11.7 1a.; 9.6 12.1 f
;oisture Eauivalent 0.9 5.8 2.2 L.9 2.2 }
‘Iotul CarLon u.: J.L/ 5
:ano o‘.o no.) i .9 92.5 ”3.. J
Silt ..7 7.7 4.9 3.7 1.1 .
:2u201uy j.b 2.; 1. j.h 2.5
.qu/Clay
Montmcrillonite 5 (5 U 10 10
Illite 1o 2Q 20 30 50 h~~
Kaolinite 2 6 8 16 8 -“

1

Volume neight (Ems/EC)
uoisture Content at;

0.00 Ltms 52 2E 19 15 15
O.C Atms 51 21 19 15 17
0.02 Atms 50 EU 18 lj 1;
Oij Atms 29 10 1) 11 1A
0.0h Atms d” 2 10 10 lJ
o.o6 Atms 2 lo 10 9 9
0.35 Atms lj " é a 7
1.u0 Atxs j o 5 7 a
5.00 Ltms 5.7 2.6 1.2 2.2 1.7
5.d0 Atms 5.h 5.L 1.5 £.1 1.6
o.oo 1th j.: 2.5 1.2 4.0 1.b
13.00 Atns j.2 5.0 1.2 1.2 1.5
87.19 Atms 1.0 J.yc 1.6 1.3

 

* 5xcogt wnon meted figures indicvtc yerc mt on an oven dry basis.

 

 

1.45:... "

r.)

1

 

 

.noopram aanédc moan “nan mfidoa nodguw pom mo>uso ommoqou now-mflom .mn ouzuan

 

.1 nor

onmwme manmHou doom
“A. 0». nn. «9. mo. H1.

 

NJ

 

 

 

U1 C)

 

(I: {-3) r3

 

3x... “4...... an .5 ,n Had

muaequ Hzmz<axnm

.WHHQ...“ :3 Q .3 H...“

 

DC-

1‘)

 

 

 

1 _

 

JNTIVCO WVGJSICW 1109

LNEOHHK

31 C‘

EH?

0 L15

 

low..‘ _

T1113 XXIII

y, ‘5-“ . . , ‘~_ y,"u‘4('\'v .'- ‘3‘. “I ,‘ .y\v ‘1;-‘_" I - nq.“-’.—,.)\\|-
3'41‘)JL bliTll 1\.II 1'.“‘ 41".”i [(15 \fll-J’ ')IA'H. l‘A'lL 1‘ A 1.'-4L 4'41 "

 

 

Sample Number 99 100 101 CE 105
Horizon A» Eggir 8?? 35 C
Lepth (inches) J; 5 12-16 1o-25 25-29 29
hygroscopic Coefficient U.Q9 2.3 J.uj 0.59~ 0.19
Permanent nilting Point 5.o4* 7.3 2.0 1.b J.96
Field Capacity 9.7 1..5 11.7 5.5 i
hoisture Equivalent 5.6 0.6 2.1 1.5 1.2
Total Carbon 1.; 5.3
Sand o8.5 db.5 95.2 96.9 96.6
Silt o.o L.7 1.5 0.27 0.7h ;
2&c1ay 2-». 9.1 1.1: 1.§ 1.1
.ZA»(Slay i
Rontmorillonite 5 J O {
Illite lJ <10 10 '
Kaolin ite c; o 1. . ”“9“
Volume fieight (gms/cc) 1.5 1.2 1.o 1.5 1.6
Moisture Content at;

0.00 Atms 55 59 CV 82 21

0.3 Atms 55 57 2 20 20

0.12 Atms 5; 5; 2o 2o 19

o.o) Atms 29 51 19 1o 16

0.0h Atms 21 £5 12 11 11

0.06 Atms 19 2 9 a b

0.55 Atms 1o 16 o L 4

1.00 Atms o la 5 5 5

5.00 Atms A 5 7.5 1.9 1 5 1 1

5.00 Atms 5 u 7.5 1.5 1 5 D 9"

c.30 Atms 5 5 5.0 1.6 1 5 0 t7

15.00 Atms 5.1 1.6 1.1 0.77

27.19 Atms 2.9 5.5 1.h 0.99 d.é7

* Except wnen noted fi urea indicate percent on an ovon dry -usis.
** Figures include only one determination.

 

 

'?

 

.uompocMJ awnsdc owuw wuam AoZuwwzam you mobgno yawning mnzuwflog .OA ognwflm

9.0-3.4 I 20.13.59 whxbthDE 1:"qu

,. O
m0.»m o.mH n.u o.m o.m 0.0 mm. co. no. mo. mu. m).

L . _‘ : _ ,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

,«H

 

ém

u
- L7?IWFD WHPTSIUW TIFS

 

JNHOHFJ

 

Rug 1'1 :1 ‘

‘LM

lt‘flll

uwm.;ngzmn maHuq ; azmz<zxm~
.zchpHnwm mxpamfigg
HHHQ<A<J nqadm

.—Q h

00

 

*1 .ST .gnv: \IV I‘ ","7'1."-,“ 1‘1n~.x\’r v 1,4 (\T 17. ‘FL'V':;‘.‘ 7
3311) LL [111 I“. \‘H ""711 V111 LJ.“. 1 LJ'-'1[‘.-" C Lq. L" .\ Viki vl‘.

 

EBaanle Number 10L 105 10C 107 105
TRzrieon. ‘ Aph Ag‘ 81% / $5 C
Lkipth (incnes) 0-0 o- 9 lj-lc 10-21 21
iiyqiroscopic Coefficient 1.h o.¢9 1.b 1.5 0.90
Ffiermanent tilting :oint 11.0 0.7 10.11? 11.9+* 0.7
Ffiield Capacity 19.7 17.7 10.1 7.0
hhbisture Equivalent 15.9 13-h 17.5 17.6 15.9
TRDtal Carbon 1.7 0.5
Sana 119.1 00.1 1133.0 173.5 5nd;
Silt 90.5. 57.9 55.5 5.1.1) :57 .o
Zizu.Clay 1n.a 18.0 19.5 25.6 10.5
.2?/u.C1ay 11.6 12.2
{Lontmorillonite 1<5 0 5 0 5
Illite <13 '20 5o 20 60
Kaolinite (2 10 .111 6 £0
‘Jolume height (gms/CC) 1.h 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.7
IfOisture Content at; ‘
0.00 Atms 29 22 25 2 20
0.01 ntms 27 20 21 19 19
0.02 Atms 27 19 20 19 1“
0.35 Atms 26 19 20 19 d
0.0a Atms 26 5 19 16 18
0.06 ntms 2 17 10 18 17
0.55 Atms 21 15 16 17 15
1.10 Atms 19 1b 15 15 1h
5.00 Atms 12.5 7.0 11.7 15.0 10.5
5.00 Atms 11.0 6.6 10. 11.9 9.1
0.00 Atms 9.5 u.7 9.1 10.7 C.O
15.00 Atms 7.8 h.u 0.5 9.5 6.7
27.19 Atms é.b n.j 7.h 6.2 5.8

* Except when noted figures indicate percent on an oven dry Oasis.

** Figures include only one determination.

 

 

 

.nu:o:u Hones: mpflw :EOH mo:am am>osoo gem m1>aso mmaLHLn cuspmaoh .\n wasmflz

mndmgmonfiec I zohm3fi% mmDHomJi AHQn
.“ o

O.H fl 00. J6. M). NO. as.

 

 

maaacqoxu1 oaaan; pzmz<aam1
azaqaprjm uzpawHos

SEES edE

_:_

‘3‘1ll

 

N00 PVDLSIOW 1108

.J

HHQHSJ - 1N3.

L

p.
/

'1“ ARE A;

100

 

 

 

TLFL XXV
VASIC LATA 0N ‘R{dtv 81.13 LOB SiTi L Bah T‘ uTk- L*
Sample Number 109 110 111 112 115
Horizon A1 AgG BG C D
Depth (inches) 0-7 7-15 11-21 25-29 29-57
hygroscopic Coefficient 0.72 0.WC 0.11 0.10 0.10
Permanent tilting Point 0.9 J.66 2.0 0.65 U.QQ**
Field Capacity 17.6 6.: 6.9 7.5
Moisture iquivalent 9.0 2.5 5.0 1.5 1.2
Total Carbon 1.6 0.05
Sand 62.9 ;6.8 02.4 90.1 9C.0
Silt 9.7 5.6 n.e o.e5 0.7n
Ezu’Clay 5.9 1.1 2.0 0.70 0.59
.2» Clay
Montmorillonite 5 0
Illite 50 10
Kaolinite 6 6
Volume height (ng/cc) 1.2 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.7
Roisture Content at;
0.00 Atms 56 20 17 19 20
0.01 Atms 56 19 15 10 20
0.02 Atms 55 10 5 17 17
0.05 Atms 50 15 10 1Q 15
0.00 Atms 2d 12 ll 9 0
a.oc Atms 26 9 9 C e
0.5‘ Atms 20 5 5 5 5
1.00 Atms 16 5 5 2 5
5.00 Atms 6.7 1.1 2.1 0.79 0.76
5.00 Atms 6.2 1.1 1.6
6.00 Atms 5.5 1.0 1.5 0.60 0.62
.5.00 Atms 5.2 0.36 1.2 0.62 0.50
27.19 ntms 0.75 1.0 0.55 0.56

 

* Except w

hen noted

figures indicate yercent on an oven dry basis.

101

.oxolapaozy gongnfiampfim aon uncxm maumhw

o.ma

m4.~m

com wmbuso wmmmamc muspmwoz .Jn musmfia
322...”...AOUTC4 I
IVS; ; .5; I.., r. .

O.H

.13 h 9:. 2. £25...» H35 1:9“.

mm. no. no. ma. mo.

 

 

 

 

 

cm
H .1

flucahwudnw m,~HH_4H.._. Banzaixmm
62dq<>wnvm flrDBwHOE

u

E

>5H9<L<o QAMH

 

 

__,_,

 

I] i

u.-
uAC
".0

 

3.

OH

,om

on

00

"1108

V
I
I

3801919?

TO

J?OHEJ - lNHLN:

(

H

v

'1“ 1H0 30

Tn LE AiVl

 

 

 

CACIC in.h J. -. 1 L ’ J 1 elf; LL“:0 I .Y'ffiQ'

Sample Number 11h 115 116 117 110 119 120
Horizon A Ag 81 BE 57? C D
Depth (inches) 0-7 7-15 15-20 k0—27 27-56 fic-LT n7-50
Hygrcscopic Coefficient 0.98 0.h0 0.24 0.59 0.19 0.05 1.1
Permanent diltin; Point 5.54» 2.0 2.0 2.Z#* 1.2*» 5.0 11.5
Field Capacity 15.2 10.2 10.9 9.9 lb.5 10.0
Hoisture Equivalent 7.0 0.0 5.1 5.7 2.1 u.b 10.9 I
Total Carbon J.*0 0.20
Sand . 05.5 no.5 93.5 92.8 96.6 92.6 55.5 .
Silt 7.5 c.1 5.0 2.9 3.05 0.95 21.c ;
Z/u.Clay h.0 5.5 2.h 5.5 2.0 6.5 21.2 ;
.2/uIClay i
£ontmorillonite 0 5 0 5 ‘(5 , 5 (5
Illite 3% an 70 hO b0 D0 60
Kaolinite 10 6 16 b 10 o 10
Volume neiéht (gms/cc) 1.5 1.6 1.0 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7
Moisture Content at:

0.00 Atms £0 21 20 19 19 19 lo

0.01 btms 25 21 20 8 18 19 lo

0.08 Atms 2h 21 19 10 U 16 17

0.05 Atms an 20 10 16 16 10 17

0.0n Atms a: 17 1; LA 15 15 lo

0.0c Atms 20 15 15 la a lj 15

0.55 Atms 11 b u 5 5 5 c

1.00 Atms 9 5 n a 2 5 7

5.JO Atms 0.0 2.9 C.U C.j 1.Z 00c 13.0

5.00 Ltns u.5 2.7 1.9 2.1 1.2 3.1 ll.b

9.00 Atms 5.7 &.L 1.9 2.0 1.4 5.0 10.0

15.00 ntms j.u 2.1 1.5 1.3 0.92 2.6 0.5

27.19 Ath 5.1 1.6 l.b** 1.7 0.05 a. 7.0

 

» bxcegt when noted Figures indicate percent on an oven dry basis.
** Figures include only one determination.

 

 

.o..5..mpuos$ conga opwm scam me£ 93.23 .80.... $.30 wmamamc o.§.....w..8.... .mn enema

mumm&mmomh¢ a 20 mzme ampewwok qwaw

‘1).

 

 

.«rm

4; .1) «i: :0 1‘1.) CD

 

 

 

 

'\

. I
‘ \J

 

 

 

Q.

 

 

mmfiummoxmm OAHBAHS
Bgmq<>HDNa mxbemmofi
>BHu¢m<o QAaHh

Bzmz<2xmm

u
.4.

O

OH

.3

.ON

 

 

'0 EWHlSION 7108

s
I

’LM,AHG £0 inaoaad - LNHlN(

10L

 

 

 

** Figures include only one GetxffiluflLlon.

dangle number 121 122 125 12h 125 120
horizon. ‘ 7? A2 321’ 255 55 C
Depth (inches) 0-o 3—1” 10-21 21-55 55-07 07
Lygroscopic Coefficient 0.02 0.75 1.1 1.1 0.02 0.51
Permanent ailting Point 5.5 7.Ct* 11.7 10.0 7.n*# n.5**
Field Ceyacity 17.8 1©.2 l5.u 1n.2 12.7 14.2
Loisture Equivalent 12.9 15.0 16.5 15.7 15.7 12.1
Total Carbon 1.0 0.25
Sfind 62.7 55.2 51.6 51.6 59.5 5u.6
Silt 25.5.. 25.2 25.1 25.c 22.5 21-h
2/u.C1ay 0.1 15.2 22.0 21.7 16.0 10.7
.2/u.Clay 10.6 11.0
Montmorillonite 0 (5 (b 0 0 O
Illite 10 M0 50 50 50 20
hoolinite o 10 2 10 12 0
Volume ngight (gms/cc) 1.5 1.0 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.6
Moisture Content at:
0.00 Atms 25 17 17 10 20 21
0.01 Atms a2 15 16 17 19 2o
0.02 ntms 20 5 lo 17 10 20
0.05 Atms 20 hi lo 17 17 19
0-0h Atms 19 10 15 1 17 10
0.00 Atms 10 15 15 1C lb 17
0.55 Atns 15 1; 1h 15 12 15
1.00 Atms 15 11 15 15 11 11
5.00 ntms 6.7 7.1 12.5 11.5 9.2 7.5
5.00 Atms 5.5 7.0 11.1 10-h 6.2 0.5
0.00 Atms 0.0 6.0 9.9 9.0 7.u 5.5
15.00 Atms 5.7 5.0 0.0 0.5 6.5 n.5
27.19 ntm: 5.7 u.5 {.2 7.2 5.5 5.:
« Except when noted fi;ures indicate perc nt on an oven dry oasis.

' “by

 

he...»

 

 

.mmhgunhpnmSp kxnfiza oufim Edoa Assam oHaUmHHfl; how mo>gzo mmdmam»

)cfiH )aQ 00m QcN

 

mo<ezmoxmm mzflqus Humz¢u mm
azuq<>Hu3m mmpemHoa
weHo<m<o mqum

hardcmmoae¢ I
O.H

ZQHmZAH

Lag. mH 3...“ .391,

mm.

agapwfioa

on.

_

.3: oks¢fiz

no. “0.

_ _

mo.

.:|.mm

on

 

LNRJNOO EHJ1SION 1108

‘1! 133 JO LNSOUSJ -

1 Q

 

11¢

 

 

3.55310 L111 0'; "11111: L I", .11“ . 17:1" '1‘ 1 ' .‘i ‘

dumple inunbur 127 12W 1-)
Eorizon AP B3 C
Depth (1ncacs) 0-7 7-10 10
hygroscoyic Coefficient .2 1.2 1.1
Permanent wilting POLut 12.0 9.] 1d.) ‘
31610 Latacity g
hoisture Equivalent 19.0 1C.l 1,.J ;
Total Carbon .0 U.u2 E
Lona 33.) 47.0 95.0 '
Silt 59.4.1 jJ.D a).a
2/uzC1ay lj.4 19.0 19.2
.2/u/Clay
Montmorillonite 0 (3 j
I llite 13 :3- o .3.
uuolinite o o 18
Volume height (gms/cc) 1.9 1.7 1.7
uolsture Certent at;

3.30 Atms 51 20 22

3.01 Atms 2d 19 20

3.02 Aflvs 2Q 19 19

3.05 Atms 27 10 19

0.0u Atms as 17 17

0.06 Atms 25 17 17

J.§§ Atms 2) 10 15

1.J0 Aims 21 15 1}

joJU kins 12.4 11.3 11.5

5.00 Atms 10.2 9.7 1¢.J

0.00 Aims 0.5 0.) ‘).j

15-JU Atms 0.5 7.3 7.9

27.19 Atms 7.2 6.9 0.8

 

 

31-) $023 (11, )1: all

at Except wncn :lo-‘cexi

*4 UjWQJYBS

.A 'L(' 1. Lid 7;

oven uni

 

.Lsoulhpnoiw LmQSE opwm Edoa :maosw you mosLSQ. magma?“ min». 1.1;...

I'll-=-

/
mcxgmzmwagfiq a 21....Ha7m,

 

0.H

4 .JHHW 4 .14..)7‘
.2 5,9553». \ .

mm.

44,-.) W.-

03 .

K

0 4d .mVoHme firm

no. mo.

No.

a O .

 

‘51.

\J

 

 

 

 

 

3

 

’1”. 11111 310 .LNZN'DHEd - (LN‘ILLNOD 5117018107.” "1108

wu.w-_.1.,fim.5:..mm ma BAH.” Emma.fi.nxnm

1.5. n..~..,wa.a Eiiméez

Ipxnr ..L

2:9... Fag @497.”

FCHar

ll
.4-

 

on

dam 1e 33 um :-
‘Orlzon

_~ +;

m3. .4 f1

/ .
r.“
.A .

fin
.' Q

qugruscogic Coefficieut

.

lbslxi Gatmutity

‘L C; ‘ ( fir" ':1+—;

_ . .r ,~ -. \ . ~
;‘\JA 11,:1".1\/ IIJ. ~4‘1é-
Y

guisturc zguivqiant
lotqi Laruon
331'. 1d

dilt
'4‘ A» Clay
“LAD Llay
Hantmorillvuite
lllite
kaolinits
Volume me 1 ”fit (
molspure Low,eu
0.00
O.Jl
0.06
0.05
Q.Jh
0.06
“'3‘ . 55
l.J0
3.3Q
5.0)
6.03
15.01
27.19

\
’~ ‘V 11

w"

[1:1

Atns
Atms
AtITLS
Atms
Atms
Atms
Atms
A Ems
ALLJHS
5.715
[1th
Atms
Atms

3/00)

E at;

-‘~ ' ;‘~ — ,-\ - A
» axe-pt mica nVLcd
if";

ur;s inciagw

ff) . Wt

OH

PA ."

(5

r1.; -~- L.
‘ ..
¢A1. LIA!
v .V
I 1‘
-....-----
-.---_-..-

1J3

‘ , . qr .’
' ' ‘ - I 1 z ‘ 4

,A. V 1
-‘O--.---- ---- v. Q .. ---‘—c~--‘-- -_ — -
-. v. a - ‘ — ‘ .o- a -. - -. c. - - .. --.-.. .w“ 0 9 -¢— . -“

$21? “JJT, P
.L J-lk- .LL-cq 40
kg. 71.4 J02), "J. 1‘.)
"" (.o(.1 lo?

1.01) 0D 10/.)
.J. ../ -,
g/ CO c.’
I\ f)
C L
d] 25 d1
2: 2 J

‘ \
H ‘
H

II

K {‘4' R \J‘I \)
O
\J

O
R, W \J’

PJK
.

A..-—.--. - -‘fifl‘m—o-“

Farewnt on an oven dry basis.
ination.

 

 

 

 

1&7

 

 

5 ) ‘
.mbfimuzwaasp amness mpwm nmww dxwwuaax how wo>gso mmnmaou

n4«:;mmoge< n onmfigb extmeoa qum

spupwflofl .MJ wuwflfim

we. :01 no.

mo.

 

ma.~m o.m o.o o.n o.m 04H mm.
L

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

wwwm.¢w..._.moxflum 9qu45., 52.)“: 2mm
Haxd<>prfl nzzvmfioa
wwHQ«L£o QAme

4:

’

_

 

 

.om

I
I

\
I

7) EHHLSION TIOS

'r
.\

l

1N3

AHG d0 LNQOHSJ -

'LV

“I“! ‘ w\.rv\. r‘.

KiLFAdhA

 

‘I-‘u

Sample Aumber
Horizon
Ikpth (incnes)
hygroscopic Coefficient
Permanent wilting Point
Field Capacity
moisture Equivuient
Io-al Paroon
Sand
Silt
z/uICIay
.Z/u;Clay
Montmorillonite
Illite
Baoiinine
VolxMBYciEnt (gm/cc)
moisture Content at;
3.00 ABILS
0.Jl Atms
0.02 Atms
U.uj Atms
U‘.J14 Atrns
0.00 Atms
J.55 Atms
1.00 Atmo
5.UU Atfls
5.00 Atms
UouU 13.th
1'). )0 Atms
27.19 Atms

"\ ‘ ' _I ‘I
-fl :‘LJI‘.

f‘f '
-) '\ ‘l

i. I‘I'H'
I
. ‘2‘ .) 3'_

X 1: 1"

‘H\

mm *0"- ‘1'-‘

 

155

16

"‘

2.9
'C,o'i_$

'7
Co}
2.1
2.2

136

821?

C-l:
u.7&

joy

9.5
J.ou

Lil; o )4

5.3

n‘
U“.

HOC

I .
j J

A .
5F
’.-.;d
J. 1.7
{)on

7 -
9109

lot...
‘UO'Jk/3

by
25

’ 2)
‘—

10

11
C
5
5,.
0.05
v.8u
0.oo
o.cu
0.66

2.1

80

1.0

51
2o

16

o O 0 0
\_,‘~ \v\ U] \f' “‘4

H
F-P‘F‘F‘FJv4V-JP4

110

 

# pxcept wncn noted Fi arcs inchate garcont on an oven er basis.
v+ Figures include only one oetcrnlnation.

 

 

 

 

frag: 3.9 r.

at.

,HLK....:..> H L 4

.&I

Tm my aN

3.7L ruawwéuqa. W

ELL.“ «3.

~<

.

4 r1...
.-

‘n.-~L «L

QGI

LN

 

111

4 v .
. .
.. a. u

a b

1....

.. . .I q
.

 

.gawfiw

\ ,~_}

.

.. . .. a

4‘ . II
._’p

_. . ‘ .v

,_-

k.

RV

..‘

u
l

I

.xflmnxasozp gojazs ogfim Ucww oxmmxaax how mm>nzo omawaog enzymflOG .mww ohsxflx

muqmnmw.wm...m.h.w< I

at: .hmHQq. 4H0...“
mm.

om. so. mm. mo.

fio.

 

 

 

 

 

amiaaaummm wszqH; Bamzfifimm.
3.1.44.9 Hpmm MEDBmHOE
:Hofj aqua

   

QC-

_

 

d:_

 

 

'1.“ mo d0 .LN'HOHBJ - LNSLNOO HHfiLSIOI‘I "IIOS'

 

 

 

 

 

35311, L .n l x a in ‘ ‘ -1 )1? h mgfid' I .TFV-JQVEEV*
Sample Nimbcr lnl lgd lgj loo
Horizon Ap 521; ngp C
Depth (inches) 3-3 o-lfi 19-52 20
hygroscopic Coo? ioiant 3.98 J.u9 J.57 J.l§
Permanent nilting ioiut 5.1 ;.8 j.o J.yo
Field Capacity lJ.o a.) . 9.2
Loisture Equivalent 7.2 5.9 { j.o 1.5 1
Total Carbon J.Cl 4.)? f

Jand 60.0 $9.9 9J.i 07.7

Silt 0.9 5.: 5.3 1.9

B/u/Clay 9.1 ¢.y ).o l 9

ogz‘ll/ “ploy

Lontmorillonit: (j

Illite MU

Kaolinite a u 10 o

Volume Leiynt (gms/cc) l ”

moisture Content at;
O..)J.Atms d7 25
Jujl .‘ttth C4 21+

.J¢ Atms cl 2

0.05 ntms 17 15
J.on utms 15 11
3.36 Atms ll
0. jj Atms ‘
1.00 Atms

 

F“ "a I — 'fl.’

 

.1. 5.1. 1.1

7
3.JU Atms n.)
5.00 Atms 5.6 .9 j.2 0.9b
8.30 Atms 5.5 (.5 2.0
17.oo Atms j.l ".) 2.5 0.91
27.17 Atms 5.1 2.) 2.2 o.?6

 

* Except unen nozed figures indicate percent on on oven or; Lasis.

 

 

.ow_,.mm..%fi$..$ gonads ouflm 9.3m dcoHoocaa mm mobhoo omwoaon myopic“... 13 9:61:

mmvmwmmrgugax I 3.5.949.

I

mflém 9.2 9.0 1.1m gym a; R. on. 49.8,. ms. 3.

 

 

 

 

 

1 TILT . Q a d
1 _
mNflu «.MMNuY/T”

L gh‘G/IT o If;

/
/1‘/
/

/
/ /
J/

 

 

,...,.:._o_...35_,.,3 2:53 H..H,..._.,31.,flmm ul
r.._,.aa;.ié £5.» )2 ud
3853 3m: - o

 

1

(fl
-4

Lfi
OJ

.LSIO'A' "[108

N03 8W1

rvqr
WWK L4

7
:1 -

{3 3H3

D13 30 .L1

' I’M

 

 

 

 

 

11;

- 1 131.; 1.1911 1
.1.210 L1151 1. o )AhLV L- . .311 LiJfivbn ?.nfxfiY-nlihu+
ckunple rwnaber lhfl 130 151 lpt 155
E1Jrizon AP 2E 31? B2” C
Depth (inches) o-o 3-13 1;:19 1935J 5d
iygrosoopio Coefficient o.on J.ju o.al 1.6 1.1
Permanent tilting Point 5.9 j.g.* §.5»+ 1J.7 3.9..
Field Capacity 19.h 15.1 Lo.U 17.5 17.5
Moisture Liuivalent 15.7 Q-Q 12.1 17.1 14.5
Total Carbon .2 0.25
Jand 60.5 68.1 51.0 55.5 “You
Silt 25.5 82.7 42.5 13.6 17.6
Z/uzCIay 7.5 3.1 15.0 Bu.0 15.5
.Z/u/C1ay 15.2
Hontmorillonite O U 0 O O
Illite O 10 20 '20 2D
Knolinite 2 2 h 2 6
Vo1ume ne'ght (gms/cc) 1.7 1.7 1.5 1.7 1.5
Eoisture Content at;
o.oo Atms as 1s 17 :1 o
0.01 Atms 25 10 10 21 17
J.dc Atms a5 15 15 20 17
0.05 Atms an 15 1h 19 17
n.1n Atms 25 1g 1 19 16
o.oo Atms 22 15 15 19
J.j§ Ath 19 11 17 15
1.JO ntms lo 1o 15 , lo 15
5.JU Atms 0.6 5.2 o.o 11.9 9.7
).od Atms ).b A.) 9.6 13.6 6.7
o.oo Atms n.s 5.5 5.9 9.9 7.9
19.UU Atms u.1 2.7 u.é a.) 9.0
87.19 Atms 5.? 1.5 h.c 7.8 5.6

 

* Except when noted figures indicate perc
** Figures include only one oetermination.

ant on an oven dry basis.

 

 

 

 

o
.

. .~,:. 3.

p

.
i .7 ... ..~4w,,

1.3;; a.) .
erp.u.\«,Kp\v

22;

7.1.9. w, ..
.nxu .erL.

N H H

01'

 

.osasuzwuozp homszn mva EdoH muddm finpoo you mm>uso onnoamu auzpwfioz .md opswfim

maani

ngnd - stmsz mxspw on qum
.H m“. on. 4.. no. mg.

m%__:,_ _, ::

r-i

 

 

mcmuaucxam c Hagan bwi «ammo
Bzxq<>Huwx mmpamHoa
yaho<m<o aAmHm

II II
o‘ill

 

R

’L% KEG JO LNEOHHJ - LNHLNOO HHHLSIOW 110$

v-V<
A
H
(K
,.
L.
‘ ‘J
5
.15
L
r—V
L

J
(h:
p——
:p
.<
(I
—‘
L
[“1
,-\
F:
(L
r 3
>1
t

 

 

 

 

5&1yle Number
Horizon

Eerth (inches)
hygroscoBic Coefficient

'U

ermanent hiltlflf Point
Field Sagacity
Moisture Equivalent
Total Carbon

pend

Silt

C/U/Cluy

.2/u2C1ay
fiontmorlllonite

Illite

Kaolinite

Volume height (gas/cc)
Moisture Content at;

J.QO Ath
0.01 Ath
3.3d Atms
0.05 [1131113
Q.ufl Atms
0.06 Atm
0.55 11121115
1 .91) 3‘:th
5.00 Ath
5.00 ntms
0..)O 31th
15.00 Atms
4/ . 1‘9 Atms

5o
57
57
5o
5J.o
iy.d

20.7

15.;

12‘). )*'

R
U
0

O
ICIUC1~Q\N(FVJv~

\)~' \J‘.
o

x). n; c\ m ,
«CDC2VJC’V v-qu1
0 O 0 O

P‘C
£7

37.9
87.9
85.6
¢5.1
lj.o

170
32
12—16
5.J
ae.o
5'.’ ~11
59.6

“\y
0 0
U

V¢C\Ri
.
C>u1v~

h?
HF’CCZUPQ

.1
52
52
52
5:
52
51

m»
‘MC,

L;
o

n n,n m
mxg~<

£‘G‘P‘C‘U‘

"T‘
‘1
O

O O C
C \

GJNlc

U1A~N:O\N
0‘ 0 \fl \fl \1 \I— \J-4

15d

U

5.4
25.5

1.1,.) 011,

5-5
7J.5
5J.5

(5.5
C1,,- oj
15.1
22.).

2.).2

1
50-50

 

* Except when noted figures 1

ndicate percent on

** Figures include only one determination.

an oven dry basis.

 

 

117

 

 

.>pufl:p . mess wean away mcweaswl com misuse emcmaoc opopmflog .03 exemflm

\|.]4<\J.q H)\J.-< 4! .4) 1....144. .4 {‘) 4.) .ul..< . ,)
I. . ,,.. r , .4 ' I V _. H . HM ,
13.7.3.9 1 . r: urn... 31:57 .. r .o

mu.~m a... a.» o.m Q.“ o.H m . on. so. mm. mo. Ho.

__ :1 ._ _j_

 

.1‘
(h

L'
1N 1108

y

r‘ _ 7H1-
: A UN Go
H) e L
N. 3
J: H
a... firm
3

O

N

Tm

TS

. V1

 

O,
"N
if

r
-

 

 

 

idflflfld

\
A

1

4

AUG do

I
’L

0 I111

O
(A

dmxuzgozxg mmHBAH; Hzxzmkmam
Hmquwnmwd mmphm 9v
wwmodmm. quHm

l

00

 

a,
.
l-fi‘-

 

a---

 

Samole Number 15y 13o 1C1 1u5
morizon AP an 541% C
Dept}; (inc:nx5) J-o ‘1-12 12-2C) 2o
Hygroscopic Coefficient 2.) 5.J 2.9 2.5
Permanent hilting Point 9.1 1v.o 17.5 15.1**
Field Capacityx¢« 25.7 25.9 21.5 5
Hoisture Equivalent 27.9 2:.2 25.n 25.9 3
Total Carbon 2.5 1.1 _
Sand 2h.9 1y.p 12.0 19.o i
Silt 50.8 55.5 52.9 29.6 ‘
d/u/Clay 55.2 u2.5 u1.5 5u.é t
.2/uIClny 1(.8 25.5 25.n .
gontmorillonite O (5 O (5
Illite 50 5o 23 to fie.
Kaolinite 2 u u a
Volume height (ms/cc) 1.5 1 .5 1 .K 1 .e
fioisture Content at:
O.QO Atms 59 5h 27 25
0.01 Atms 5m 51 2 25
0.02 Atms 55 51 2M 22
U.J5 Atns ju 5i 2a 22
0.0u Atms 52 29 2U 22
o.oo Atms :2 21
0.55 Atms 51 27 21 19
1.00 Atms 51 27 19 18
§.oo ntms 20.2 21.2 2J.U 19.0
5.00 Atms l).2 20.0 19-h 17.h
o.JU Atms l7.d 13.0 17.b 15.9
15.JU Atms 15.5 lo.h 15.0 15.9
27.19 Atms 15.o*t in.5*+ 15.7*~ 12.u

* except when noted fi,ures indicate percent on an oven dry basis.
#* Figures include only one determination.

1*4 Initial moisture determinations used as field ca.

 

11'7

 

o 3 l. ) . \b \IJIx . , &j .; «.lx M
.msonwpnflsp kvpnd: mgwm Edoa ndau QHHflpnp>on to; mq:uzo mmma on epzpmwog . rp41fl~

000 «Jon

3.“

quummnaapm - ngnnMa iguanHas 4

3-H m“. 03. JG. “0. NO. m).

 

‘

meg

rznn

_ _

:mm mapeqH; ezmzmgzmm
BAHJ<> :53 mmm5erfi

wBHo¢a

A

«a oann

.4-

 

_ _ _:4 .

 

 

 

ow

 

 

 

 

 

ififlb XXXV
“ JIM t i =. _.Lu 1 'L In? L" 1 I lnCY’in .
5amgle Number 154 1b) 130 1c?
1:01’1ZQH hp “L” 8'in C
E nth (inches; J-- 1-14 lq—ji ,1
throsnugic Coeffi:iwnt 1.1 1.5 1.u J./©
rermunent nilting Point 1.6 A.fi H.) ;.C

pield tapacity
yiisture Equivalent
Tatal Carbon

$51116 j505 glad 5-)ol 590d
Silt 29.6 )7., :3.J an.1
B/u’Clay 11.2 17.u 15.; lj.d

.d/u, Clay

montmorilljnitc j
Illite 0 :0 50 73
hdolinite 6 u in 16
Volume weight (gms/cc) ’ l

 

JO sture Content at:
0.00 Atms 27 19 15
O.Ul étms LY 25 15 15
U.Qt Ath CO du 10 lj
doOj Atms d Eh 17 1§
lJ.Qu ntms 82 J
J.ub Aims a; a; b 12
U.j§ Atms L 10 17 13
1 .-')U 11th k; 13 131 1")
j.UU itms /.5 1J.3 11.4 9.0
5.00 Atms u.1 y.b 9.3 7.6

c.UO
15.10
5Y.19

Atms
six-111118
1‘. 1,1115

W.O

7.9
7.0

O.Li
y.u

1.5

 

* nxcegt when not 1 figures indie t9 lure

ynt on an oven dry basis.

 

. V . \ ) .u. 15AM ‘
.ozga>9ufl:p gonads opfim EdoH paflw LLQdSUHoo Lou wv>uso mwruqvp mpspwfioi .:4 ml; Hp

mmxmwflnlxfiakm I HMOHmzm

lp’» \

H .
o.m m.H mm. 00. so. no. mo.

'1)

O
o

1“

 

 

_‘ l l ____

.__J‘3
-—

 

 

 

 

III
'O‘CII

nmcuznunnn mzHunH: aéuz<zxmg
Blaq<>Hamm mamammcz
waHomuaq quHm

 

’3

cm

iLSION 1108

I
.1

'JM MM .110 LilHONEId - LNELN<QJO ERI

V‘- '{l
‘1
ll‘val.’

., \r . ‘,
4A1 «Audi J 1

.LLJ.

 

 

 

: ‘ H ‘ F ‘ ‘ ‘ I \- ‘, ,

— - J 1‘» l/-' 1 ‘A k I L 1.. 1 A( 1
‘ -- .“ --~-‘_--- ‘- -m“ — -.- - "G - .“ “--.—.-- “-———.
w I 1 w ‘ 1’ .
Qanwle AUmbkr 11’ 1‘1

1i«)r iz:)xi

. ‘ .‘ ' a ‘. _ .\
1,‘~«'"t/.'L k111'2:1'4‘\51

11:"QI‘OSC',):,iC 11'3')1)l..1(31"‘11L
inr iolit

P8.flfilflent
field Liqunxity
moisture zillvalgnt
Toral pnroon

Sana
Silt

c/u101ay
08M Cl&y
dontmorillonite

Illite

Kaolinite
Volume Weight (

Moisture

0.00
;.ul
J.JL
J.J9
0.01;
‘3.tx)

Jo)5

ntms
2.th
‘Ltms

{ath

‘0' I
Lms/cc)

Content at;

)J
$7
)5

 

Z.)
l/.d
CLOL'

L‘J'ol

 

 

UOl L N
U

loUU Sit-ILS j: 1‘ 1:.
j.JU ntflS LL.J c1.o :1.j
".Jo n m, 1,.j ly.u 19.7
C.JU AkhS 1).} 17.j 1#.E
l).Ju “Ems 1§.j 15.0 19.0
5?.19 Atms lJ.j 11.; lf.6+*
* Except WHCLIIMN«51 {piureu inuicn e percerr
*4 Ti urea include One detwrminutiou.

CU

on an oxen er

DJVJ S.

W” '.

-I- V.

 

a

 

.mmpcpnmwuflnp gonad: mwflm fidoH

 

1;;

-.xml mnkHHAH: “gem m
u4m4¢>Hzrm mmpum
a

 

2 gxwm

H
v')
‘4

l

u u n
O‘-

wHHowm<u A.

>3J
H
1'3..

 

.ma. 1.1“.

mocw11da pom mopxdo omnmqoo ouzwmwod

)
/
r.

 

S

 

 

 

SIGN 110

v

rid.

l.

 

1H

I
1

(‘1

4

LNHlN

 

iOHHd -

I
K

H

.

 

1H0 d0 1

'Lfl

.om

 

 

 

. . -J' 1' 1 v \’ .-v x . > - . 'r < . , w. .‘ 'fi
1 1 .. ‘ I I 1 b (L ,1 1 ,.. . ~.. l‘v' “Ca-1‘, >1 *
l 1 o . 1. .1.. ' 10.. .‘ '1.... I ..K.K' , .« 1 ,. .,.‘.v 11.1.41. J l v..
m.” -o“! b- ~M—‘4 t-vu W'~‘~----.. “’o—‘M H
- -- o” -‘fi---“-‘ -»m*.—’-*

V

 

danglerinunbor 11¢ if; l?1; l]?
Uo:-Za.mi rip A51? Bg- C1
[minim (i.nfiv:s) -1—; vj—1l ll-jt‘ 19-,E}
Ry roscopic Co;?$ioicut 1.o 1." ;.6 L.h
karmancnt tiltinf Point 1,.3 81.; Lg.) 10.314
bible Luyacity*** :;.; 2A.; 59.7
I Eisture gxpiivalent Ev.c 47.1. )1.u) :L.E

" 1.2

Total Carbon

Luna 5;.5 a .f 17.0 19.9
Silt jh.l 35.0 ¢-.t t/.j
azu/Cluy jj.? hJ.j 5;.) 50.2
.E/uIC1ay 11.6 16.0 23.h 21.1
{Loinxmori11<uiiie 0 j 3 0
Illite L3 50 50 L0
Buolinite 6 lo 6 6
‘Volume fleight (gas/to) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.7
Hoistnre Content at;
3.00 Atms 55 £5 £7 '9
0.01 Atms 52 d5 26 19
0.38 Atms a9 a; 26 19
0.05 Atms 29 Zj f5 19
0.0g Atms Ed 2) 25 19
C.OC Atms E7 2; 2h 18
U.j§ Atms 27 81 2h 17
1.00 Atms 46 51 :2 17
j.00 Atms 21.5 21.0 $5.1 22.6
9.00 thS 19.2 10.} Ej.j :J.u
c.00 Atms 17.7 1:.L 23.3 19.6
15.00 Atms lb.0 15.h 19.1 17.5
2/.19 ntms 10.6 11.9*¥ lo.0** 15.1*v

+ Except when noted figures indicate Percent

** Figures incluae only one determinaticn.
*** Initial moisture determinitions unud as fi,ld capacity.

on «n oven dry basis.

 

 

.opwmuapgflxp gepzds mpww 530a anau eoxnmawz pug mc>uxo anamamu w numfioz

’3
0
LP .
O
O
r“\

 

uzg< - onmmmp maubn-aa qficm
o.H mm. on. 30. mn. m

H

.u.
I

.;m 113111

 

 

 

\
umxwmdoxm. mzHBJHJ Hamaqmmmh n
Hz¢4m>Harm rmDHmHQE u
weHodmmo Gamma u

———+Q
C)

 

(V
J

O

\FJSIDN TI

r7
H
.4

>)

I
I

ma 1

Ho

 

 

 

4.

 

R

ELJIC LATR 0N FICKFQRD 81L? CLAY LOAM SITE EULBAM THlnTR-SIX*

Sample Number

Horizon

Depth (inches)

Eygroscopic Coefficient

Permanent wilting Point

Field Capacity

Moisture Equivalent

Total Carbon

Sand

Silt

2A1. Clay

.221» Clay

Nontmorillonite

Illite

Kaolinite

Volume Weight (gms/cc)

Moisture Content at:
0.00 Atms
0.01 Atms
0.02 Atms
0.03 Atms
0.0h Atms
0.06 Atms
0.53 Atms
1.00 Atms
5.00 Atms
5.00 Atms
8.00 Atms
15.00 Atms

27.19 Atms

TABLE XXXVIII

176
AP.
U-U
2.6
17.7
55-11
5?.2
0.0
11.2
h8.l
26.j
11.5
0
10
0
1.1

51
b6
,1

4!
he

. [LS

1111
13

5h
25-9
20.5
18.h
16.0
12.1**

211

25

19.7
1e.o
16.9
15.1
15.u

NC\I\)
HNOOMCNUI
.

56
55
55
3).;
55
5’5
52
51
25.8
25.7
22.5
23.2
17.9

179
5.1
21.j**

\Nv.
()0
0

\Nfl

bJET\Nf0

\)—'

\N\h\N F‘ P'O
firzrvT FJRDC>C>OWx\OIv
O 0

LT

\)~\.N
\NW

\N\.N\N
ter\N

27.7
25.0
2n.1
21.9
19.7

126

* Except when noted figures indicate percent on an oven dry basis.
+* Figures include only One determination.

.---’—4.—

 

 

.xamuhwnwxp ouflm

EdoH hmao pafim whomxuwm new mm>ngo onmwamn muduwdo: .Hm onzmflm

 

mum mmnuee ,2 mm Bmem gnaw
/. mfl.em «.ma 0.0 0.3 a.m 0.” mm. 00. no. mo. mo. Ho.
.._____ ____o
l
.11: OH
111 ow
we

:11 om

 

Eugen urea cthAHz Bzaa<fimmm
HamA<>HD~m mmpHmHoz
M8H94m<o QAMHL

o'dll

 

 

00

'1H 180 JO JNHDHSJ - lNfllNflfl SHULSIOW TIOS

12L

r. rr‘ ‘ v. .v m .
\ .1

 

 

 

 

01C liflJ wfilem,xnia SILT! ~1ACf o 5 1“; b r .EIFKY”'CEVAN*

ohmi1e number lLU 131 CC
horizon A? B21 B22
Lepth (invnes: 0-5 9-9 9-8;
Hygroscoyic Coefficie*t 5.; 5.} j.&
Permanent dilting Point 13.0** ch.) 25.}
Field Capacity :9.b. 5L.9 53.1
moisture Equivalent 91.6 59.1 jo.u
Total Carton 2.9 0.05

Send 0.2 1.7 l.j
Silt 01.5 4L.1 cj.5
c,u/C1ay 01.0 67.7 $0.5
.Z/qulay 1L.b 20.1 95.6
Kontmorillonite 0 . J 0
Illite 10 10 0
Kaolinite u 2 9
Volume height (gms/CC) l.§ 1.h 1.5

fioiature Content at;
0.00 Atms
0.01 Atms
0.02 Atms
3.05 Atms
0.0M Atms
0.00 Atms
0.jj Atms
1 . CC) :3th
5.00 fitms 25.L

10 \J
r1n;mx

~J\1
_,m1ntn:nrm

~' \JV \.\ Kb K)” \F \4\‘:
R‘ \)~ \J
T\,
‘01~4»Jn)h1m)N>NM¢\w

w~v

H I--* H
rm
,43‘

R P‘

[in
P3

27.5 L .
p.00 htms 50.0 ij.o .8 .
{30'ny Atnis 111.7, 211...: d

n
O

f-
.. +~
O
‘1 \.N \J‘. CL ‘0

1F) 0 OK) I'LtIQS 1;). l 2 l o .7],
27.19 Atm: 11.6 10.0

Hf‘.
\£
0

* ixcept when noted fiwures indicate gercent on an oven dry besis.
4* Fiuurcs i cluce only one determination.

 

 

 

.:e>omnmpufl:p Lucfidc ouflm maao mpawm sameOpam new wv>pso emmmaon tnjuwfloe .ux enzafim

. §

wivrmrumhwmmfim I Z.u.—..J.:m.w. _.......:_._..m_. 0...)... AHOm
Ia.>v ).flH 3.0 3.
. . (\

- a.“ q.H mm. mo. so. «a. me. do.

__i_._ _ ___

J

 

)

97. .

ON

 

(\J
\J
m
1»
D
O
O

 

 

.rs.x,oem. 020141. -zflmeeemn

‘O“|I

ft» t . ,lv

Bulqt>Hrwn :flqaoaoz
wHHuiado adumm

L .« C

 

\
J

.S

n

l
\

I

.00 ”flfllSIOW T

I"
M
Le- J-

1"?

LN

U'TGHVd -

T r

Q

«

d0

11V1

‘1

0L.

\

I“ . 4, c v-.‘,
1 I1 11 L 1:) AJ’L;\I‘L

V.‘ '121'; I

. .. 1- , ,‘ A .
. a ~ I g .
.n 2‘41-1'11.L.. ...1..J.. .1431 1J-..'.'

I" : 1:
>511. LUC1’

 

 

 

0amgle humhtr 1 5 lob 1Q?
1713108013 jar) Bag C ,-
._ +‘~ . _ \ Ht R 'l 7 LP
begun (1n0nes; u-U o-l- lg
n .-_ '. .0 ' ‘ I . (
Lygroscopic coeliicieut 1.9 2.2 .

Permanent Lilting Joint
Tield Capacity .1...
Moisture Equivalent du.2 26.b

 

Total Carbon 1.6 0.21
Snud 10.7 12.0 9.5
silt £1-13 57.2 22.:
2,“.C1ay ‘ 91.2 09.9 hh.0
.2.u.Cluy lj.b 20.6 21.j
Lontmorillorite 0 10 O
Illite j” 70 20
Kaolinite 10 1n 6
Volume Weight (fins/cc) 1.h 1.5 1.0
Hoisture Content at;
3. K) ilxns jl 251 25
0.01 Atms 50 25 2h
0.02 Atms 23 21 22
0.0j Atms 27 20 22
0.00 Ath 27 20 22
0.06 Atms 2c 19 21
0.55 Atms 25 19
1.00 Atms 2h 19
5.00 Atns 12.3 19.9 20.3
3.00 Atms 15.h 15-h 9.1
8.00 Atms 15.0 17.1 17.8
19.00 Atms 10.5 5.6 10.0
27.19 Atms 0.9 1;.U** 10.2

* 2Xcupt when noted riiures indicate percent on an oyen dry basis.
*1 Figures include only one determination.
*** Lrained for only 29 nnurs before samples were taken.

quo

 

 

 

 

 

~ I ,v . ).v... 4 1 ‘ 4. A4.-.“ fl...c. ~..
.874.IZ:%434 ndlwugafi» :yx2m thm
‘4 - 3 ,. . )2
H 144>Hpén yLbhmH L

wBHummxu SAMHL

u\

I

OH

\
H

"D
L‘J

AVG a

1

mm

 

om

 

\.’

7”
JJ' _

15;

TABLE XXII

;. r. 7 fl. -\ r . .I
1 T'.
in.) 1.. uh n

Viv. I V I '
' L. 1.1.1.1

) ,7 .f ’1; I.
. 11.1 '.‘

 

Lamile {lunber
horizon

1U0
A?

 

Depth (inches) Q-o o-ll 11-15 lg-;o
Hygroscopic Ciefficient j.c j.u 3.2 j.1
permanent wilting Point do.j do.n 10.9 13.]
F1514 stacity* 20.9 zu.‘2 c7.U l
Roisture Equivalent 49.5 ay.1 c/.l au.a
Total Carton 2.9 l.d
Sand ho.j lfl.h 41.J 1%.c i
Silt 55.5 45.3 a..2 (1.0 E
£1/u»Clay $7.Q 3J.u no.9 Q9.C' }
.t/u.Clay 1/.7 tu.2 aj.9 :4.) i
montmorillonite 0 b (j 5 ¥
Illlte. lo 5o 5o 9o i~
Kaollnite A b c 10
Volume height (gms/fic} 1.“ 1.h 1.5 lJ
Moisture Content at;

0.90 Atms $2 27 ad 55

0.01 Atms 29 25 d7 jl

0.08 Atms 28 25 27 51

o.o; Atms 26 an 2; 5o

o.ou Atms :7 a: 25 50

0.36 Atms 27 2h 26 29

0.35 Atms 26 25 26 29

1.uo Atms 26 25 d5 :9

$.00 Atms 20.9 :8.) 23.7 23.9

j.d0 Atms 13.6 2'.2 19.5 19.6

5.00 Atms 11.9 16.0 1f.8 17.9

15.00 Atms 1o.n 17.& 13.5 16.6

2f.19 Atms 1j.9~+ 15.1»* lu.h~# 1n.5»*

* nxctpt wnon notod figures indicate percent on

4+ Figures include only one dctormfnation.

an oven or; oasis.

.
(hi. .- QEMEJELIS h

.oaflonxonflzw n.9firz oufiw good aaao ogomxoflm Low nm>uso ommmaop mumpwwox .dm cosy“;

0“
' \
4

:1. . o)..f.. I. 1.. . .. ,. . . .421:
WXVAArQVth'HC .I NC. HW...IL..,_ .n.r}~»...m..cl.n. .H

 

 

_ _ ___ _ :Z

.
(u
L!)
O
rarm 2
:u-n

rv‘
,J

 

/
/
l/
.
(S
r 4
£11

 

t—d t"
A I?
L.‘ H
1"”! A:
C... Li
I I II
II<III /’

mmqmgyoxu“ wszoH; ensa<uvwm
hmnq¢>Hnwm .xn,.
waHo<L<oi

 

 

rfi.sm o.nH ..o o.m 0.. o.H mm. as. no. mo. mo. Hg.

L 1".

 

7103

O
n
I.

l

P"

HWRISI

\!

'03

a
A\

qu

f.
l.\.

- L

31

\lu ' DH

Y .

AVG d0

. \L 1"

 

IA’hH xxxxll '

841131 C I)f;. A QJQI .$fil.}.lE<}. 111).! Y 71.:xY' 1.(l:. ' LSI'f’: LiT'LIQ.':{ ?\J:;T‘E'*

 

Sample Number 190 191 132
horizon A? B? C
Depth (inches) J-9 j412 12-15
Kygroscopic Coefficient l.u 2.5 1.7
Fernanent fiilting Point C.J** 15.1 15.2
Field Capacity 15.9 21.7 2o.2 fl
Moisture Equivalent 11.6 22.7 21-h
Total Carbon 1.j o.us 5
Sand 5o.h 2h.o 12.9 1
Silt 2h.L 59.0 29.6 5
;,u/C1ay lw.o no.u 5;.j i
.2 .0. Clay .9 an»)
gontmorillonitc < o (5

2

Illitc

P’O\C\fl(l\
{\D
C)
L‘-
U

. .. M“
(aolinitc ; J
Volume ”eight (gms/cc) .é 1.6 1.é
Moisture Content at;

o.oo Atms 55 23 an
Q.Jl Atms 21 22 2j
O.Q2 Atms 2O 21 25
0.oj Atms 20 21 21
0.9b Atms 19 2O 21
0.06 Atms 19 20 20
O.jj Atms 19 20 20
1.JO Atms 13 lb 10
j.JO Atms 11.2 1c.o 1o.5
Atms ld.b 15.5 5.b

5.00
O

.0” Atms
13.03 Atms
27.19 Atms

lu.5
15.1
11.7

 

. Except when noted figures indicate ptrcent on an oven dry basis.
*4 Figures include only onm determination.

 

 

mocnm xuflxaom Lop wo>uoo omwoqtn onopmwo:

:xmh mmb9mwufl AHam

 

«x:

 

 

 

Hzmqa>Hu~m meBmHOE
wBHgdmd; mqum

04-

 

OH

.0
C

on

 

i 7109

Y.

nlNOD HHHLSIC.

Y “7"

.111».

NJOHSd -

so 1

183

O :L"_.

.ii ....I..lld. .. ....r.........u. ..n. .Iffl.....u. .0 .. 5:va .

1 ,‘ Nov 21’57
W‘

at“

“W “SE

.mr . . I C
.. . Luffhvfll

n... druid)» . affixing“? if...» .72... ., . r

.. a II 7.1%....

1'33
ll'h

M.

113331;} 133

a [1.1.1'l-l