Journals / Maden Tetkik ve Arama Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 176 Sayı: 176

Reply to: “Discussion: Determination of Atterberg Limits Using the Vane Shear Test Method [Bull. Min. Res. Exp. (2024) 174: 1–10]”

Prof. Dr. Kamil Kayabalı(Ankara University, Geological Engineering Department, Ankara, Türkiye)0000-0002-0228-0777
Honne Nagaraj(H. B. Nagaraj, B.M.S College of Engineering, Bangalore, India)0000-0002-1687-6133
Deniz Yılmaz(Fugro Sial Yerbilimleri, Ankara, Türkiye)0000-0003-2860-6154
Muhammet Beyhan(Öksüt (Centerragold) Madencilik, Ankara, Türkiye)0000-0002-8448-6516
Pages
154–157
Publication Date
2025-04-25
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Further, discussers argued that the approach proposed by Kayabalı et al. (2024) led to erroneous results in determining soil classes.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The main focus of the criticisms raised by O'Kelly and Soltani (2025) (hereafter referred to as discussers) to the authors' article in Bulletin of Mineral Research and Exploration (174, 1-10) is to examine the veracity of the strength-based equations presented by Kayabalı et al. (2024).
📊
Key Findings & Data:The discussers applied the predictive equations proposed by the authors to dissimilar soils in the two articles (Kayabalı et al., 2015a; Kayabalı et al., 2015b) published earlier by the lead author with his research group.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Further, discussers argued that the approach proposed by Kayabalı et al. (2024) led to erroneous results in determining soil classes.
🔬Design:Diğer
📍Scope:2025 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Fine-grained soil · Liquid limit · Plastic limit

Abstract

The main focus of the criticisms raised by O'Kelly and Soltani (2025) (hereafter referred to as discussers) to the authors' article in Bulletin of Mineral Research and Exploration (174, 1-10) is to examine the veracity of the strength-based equations presented by Kayabalı et al. (2024). The discussers applied the predictive equations proposed by the authors to dissimilar soils in the two articles (Kayabalı et al., 2015a; Kayabalı et al., 2015b) published earlier by the lead author with his research group. The discussers showed that the predictive equations 6 and 7 given by Kayabalı et al. (2024) yield extremely high values of liquid limit (LL) and plastic limit (PL) when applied to dissimilar soils. Further, discussers argued that the approach proposed by Kayabalı et al. (2024) led to erroneous results in determining soil classes.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kayabalı, P. D. K., Nagaraj, H., Yılmaz, D., Beyhan, M. (2025). Reply to: “Discussion: Determination of Atterberg Limits Using the Vane Shear Test Method [Bull. Min. Res. Exp. (2024) 174: 1–10]”. Maden Tetkik ve Arama Dergisi, Cilt: 176 Sayı: 176, 154–157. https://doi.org/10.19111/bulletinofmre.1647260

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (4)

  1. Kayabalı, K., Aktürk, Ö., Fener, M., Üstün, A., B., Dikmen, O., Harputlugil, F., H. 2015a. Evaluation of undrained shear strength of fine-grained soils in consideration of soil plasticity. Yerbilimleri – Bulletin of the Earth Sciences Application and Research Centre of Hacettepe University 36(3): 121–136.
  2. Kayabalı, K., Aktürk, Ö., Fener, M., Dikmen, O., Harputlugil, F., H. 2015b. Revisiting the Bjerrum’s correction factor: Use of the liquidity index for assessing the effect of soil plasticity on undrained shear strength. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering 7(6): 716–721.
  3. Kayabalı, K., Nagaraj, H. B., Yilmaz, D., Beyhan, M. 2024. Determination of Atterberg Limits using the vane shear test method. Bulletin of the Mineral Research and Exploration 174(174): 1–10.
  4. O’Kelly, B. C., Soltani, A. 2025. Discussion: Determination of Atterberg Limits Using the Vane Shear Test Method [Bulletin of the Mineral Research and Exploration (2024) 174: 1–10].