Long Term Recovery Meeting 7/1/09 - Failure Analysis Presentation
Submitted by nomorelifeonswanpond on July 2, 2009 - 12:53pm.
Here is a link to the downloaded file (audio) of last nights Long Term Recovery meeting. TVA discussed the Failure Analysis... and was questioned regarding some statements made.
I haven't listened, but did they say the "water content" or "moisture content" was 140%?
It is calculated as the mass of water divided by the mass of the soil. (you weigh a sample, oven dry, weigh again)
So, a saturated sample of a very light weight material could have a water/moisture content over 100%. It wouldn't happen with a natural material.
Submitted by WhitesCreek on July 2, 2009 - 3:27pm.
he was speaking about the water content of the ash/sediment layer. I don't necessarily question that a relative saturation content could be over 100 but not a content.
Well, "water content" in this context is a specific property used by soil engineers/scientists that can be over 100%.
Taken out of this context, and in lay terms, it would seem to most people that a "content" could not be over 100%.
I'm still trying to figure out how something can be 140% water.
I haven't listened, but did they say the "water content" or "moisture content" was 140%?
It is calculated as the mass of water divided by the mass of the soil. (you weigh a sample, oven dry, weigh again)
So, a saturated sample of a very light weight material could have a water/moisture content over 100%. It wouldn't happen with a natural material.
... to a super-saturated solution.
RB
he was speaking about the water content of the ash/sediment layer. I don't necessarily question that a relative saturation content could be over 100 but not a content.
Well, "water content" in this context is a specific property used by soil engineers/scientists that can be over 100%.
Taken out of this context, and in lay terms, it would seem to most people that a "content" could not be over 100%.