Table 6.

Comparison between experimental and theoretical estimates of e and k for Yolo Loam

ExperimentalFitted k (relative error, %)Fitted parameters in equation (10)
Test numberVoid ratio eHydraulic conductivity k × 107 (cm s−1)Equation (4)Equation (5)Equation (6)Equation (10)CKC × 107 (cm s−1)α
11.2685.795.67(2.1)5.54(4.3)5.64(2.5)5.74(0.8)0.33310.6811
21.0812.432.76(13.5)2.90(19.2)2.80(15.0)2.63(8.0)
30.9971.811.91(5.4)2.02(11.5)1.93(6.7)1.84(1.7)
40.9081.341.24(7.1)1.28(4.2)1.24(7.2)1.25(6.5)
50.8180.9490.77(18.8)0.73(22.8)0.75(21.0)0.83(12.1)
60.7330.6640.46(30.1)0.37(43.8)0.43(34.8)0.56(16.3)
70.6660.4980.30(40.3)0.19(62.5)0.26(46.9)0.39(20.7)