Comparative accuracy of photogrammetry for volume measurements in shrinkage limit tests of soils with varying plasticity

The use of photogrammetry for measuring specimen volume in shrinkage limit tests was evaluated. Photogrammetry (M3) was applied to four soils, from low-plasticity clay (CL) to high-plasticity clay (CH), in rings of approximately 40 mm × 12 mm. The results were compared with shrinkage limits determined with ASTM D4943-08 (Archimedes’ principle, M1), the reference method, and with calipers (M2). Three-dimensional models were generated from digital camera images. For Soils 1 to 3, the shrinkage limits from M3 were within 0.5 to 2.0 percentage points of M1, compared with 1.4 to 2.4 percentage points for M2. Soil 4 was too plastic to test. For a solid object with well-defined dimensions, the volumes were 168.3, 168.9, and 167.8 cm3 with M1, M2, and M3, and the errors of M2 and M3 were 0.39 and 0.26%. Photogrammetry is therefore a promising non-contact method for determining soil volume and the shrinkage limit.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Geotechnical Engineering
Published
2026-11-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/19386362.2026.2759724
Primary Topic
Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative accuracy of photogrammetry for volume measurements in shrinkage limit tests of soils with varying plasticity

Zana J. Taher
International Journal of Geotechnical Engineering
Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
article

Comparative accuracy of photogrammetry for volume measurements in shrinkage limit tests of soils with varying plasticity

Zana J. Taher
article en

Abstract

The use of photogrammetry for measuring specimen volume in shrinkage limit tests was evaluated. Photogrammetry (M3) was applied to four soils, from low-plasticity clay (CL) to high-plasticity clay (CH), in rings of approximately 40 mm × 12 mm. The results were compared with shrinkage limits determined with ASTM D4943-08 (Archimedes’ principle, M1), the reference method, and with calipers (M2). Three-dimensional models were generated from digital camera images. For Soils 1 to 3, the shrinkage limits from M3 were within 0.5 to 2.0 percentage points of M1, compared with 1.4 to 2.4 percentage points for M2. Soil 4 was too plastic to test. For a solid object with well-defined dimensions, the volumes were 168.3, 168.9, and 167.8 cm3 with M1, M2, and M3, and the errors of M2 and M3 were 0.39 and 0.26%. Photogrammetry is therefore a promising non-contact method for determining soil volume and the shrinkage limit.

International Journal of Geotechnical Engineering
Openalex Percentile: Top 20%
Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon