Selama ini, terdapat perbedaan teknik pemadatan benda-uji termasuk alat pemadat yang

digunakan antara yang dilakukan di lapangan dengan yang di laboratorium. Di lapangan,

lapisan tanah dipadatkan dengan menggunakan roller (mesin gilas), sedangkan di
laboratorium, benda-uji dalam sebuah cetakan (mould) berfungsi sebagai constrain
dipadatkan secara tumbuk dengan jumlah tumbukan tertentu (25 atau 56 kali).

Selain itu, benda-uji di laboratorium yang akan dipadatkan adalah berupa benda-uji yang
lolos saringan tertentu pula (saringan # 4 atau juga ¾”). Hal tersebut tentu menimbulkan
perbedaan dengan yang terjadi di lapangan, yaitu bahwa di lapangan, tanah dihampar begitu
saja tanpa melalui penyaringan. Dengan demikian lapisan tanah di lapangan mengandung
granular: krikil, batu kecil, sampai batu besar.

Tujuan pemadatan
Pemadatan dilakukan agar butir-butir tanah merapat. Volume tanah akan berkurang. Volume
pori berkurang, namun volume butir tidak berubah. Hal ini dapat dilakukan dengan cara
menggilas atau menumbuk.

Manfaat pemadatan
Manfaat pemadatan adalah untuk memperbaiki beberapa sifat teknik tanah berikut ini:
(1) Memperbaiki kuat geser tanah, yaitu menaikkan nilai θ dan c (memperkuat tanah)
(2) Mengurangi kompresibilitas, yaitu mengurangi penurunan oleh beban
(3) Mengurangi permeabilitas, yaitu mengurangi nilai k
(4) Mengurangi sifat kembang-susut tanah (khususnya tanah lempung)

Pemadatan tanah biasanya dilakukan pada pembuatan bendung, jalan raya, lapangan terbang,
dasar pondasi,dsb. Perubahan yang terjadi jika tanah dipadatkan adalah pengurangan volume
pori tanah sehingga akibatnya:

1) Volume total tanah berubah

2) Nilai c dan e berkurang
3) Berat volume kering (γdry) naik sesuai rumus berikut: γdry = G * γw / (1 + e)
4) Derajat kenyang air naik meskipun kadar air tetap, S = Vs / Vv
Dalam praktek, parameter yang digunakan sebagai ukuran kepadatan adalah berat volume
kering (γdry). Makin padat suatu tanah, maka nilai (γ dry) makin naik. Hasil pemadatan suatu
tanah di sini dipengaruhi oleh:
 1) Tenaga pemadatan
2) Kadar air tanah
Sedangkan pemadatan ditentukan oleh, misalnya pada penggilasan yang menentukan adalah
1) Berat alat gilas
2) Banyaknya lintasan penggilasan (passing)
3) Tebal lapisan
4) Makin besar tenaga pemadatan, tanah akan makin padat, tapi tidak berbanding
linear, dan ada maksimumnya. Tanah dengan kadar basah tertentu digilas dengan
5 kali lintasan (passing) tentu lebih padat daripada hanya dengan 2 lintasan
(passing). Namun, setelah batas tertentu, maka kepadatan tidak bertambah lagi.

Pengaruh kadar air tanah

Tanah kohesif kering merupakan bongkah-bongkah yang sukar dipadatkan. Jika disiram air
akan menjadi lunak dan lebih mudah dipadatkan. Akan tetapi, makin besar kadar air tanah,
akan makin membatasi kepadatan yang dapat dicapai. Tanah kenyang air tidak dapat
dipadatkan. Pada dasarnya, makin basah tanah, akan makin mudah dipadatkan. Karena air
berfungsi sebagai pelumas agar butir-butir tanah mudah merapat. Tapi kadar air yang
berlebihan akan mengurangi hasil-hasil pemadatan yang dapat dicapai. Pada pemadatan suatu
tanah dengan tenaga pemadatan tertentu akan menghasilkan pemadatan terbesar. Kadar air
terbaik tersebut disebut kadar air optimum (Optimum Moisture Content = OMC) = wopt.
Kepadatan terbesar = berat volume kering maksimum (Maximum Dry Density = MDD = γdry
maks).

Jika dipadatkan dengan pemadatan tertentu, nilai OMC dan MDD dari masa ke masa tidak
akan sama. Untuk satu masa (misalnya satu tahun), nilai OMC dan MDD tidak sama jika
dipadatkan dengan pemadatan yang berbeda. OMC dan MDD tidak konstan untuk suatu
tanah.

a. Koreksi terhadap hasil pemadatan laboratorium

OMC dan MDD dari laboratorium digunakan sebagai pedoman pelaksanaan pemadatan
lapangan. Sebelum digilas, kadar air tanah harus di sekitar OMC. Penggilasan baru
dihentikan jika γdry tanah telah mencapai yang disyaratkan (biasanya 90% - 100% terhadap
MDD). Hal yang harus diperhatikan dalam hal ini adalah pengaruh kandungan kerikil dan
bebatuan dalam tanah di lapangan. Di laboratorium, tanah yang akan diperiksa harus disaring
melalui saringan #4 atau ¾ “, sedangkan di lapangan tidak dilakukan penyaringan. Oleh
karena itu, MDD laboratorium harus dikoreksi.

Adapun cara mengoreksi adalah sebagai contoh berikut ini (Atkins, Harold N., subbab 3-2.6,
halaman 112-113):
1) Tanah kering (w = 0%) disaring melalui ayakan #4
2) Tanah yang lolos saringan = L% (terhadap berat kering sampel)
3) Tanah yang tertahan saringan = T% (terhadap berat kering sampel)

Maka,

MDD terkoreksi = L% * MDD + T% * 90%*2,65 dalam satuan ton/m3 atau g/cm3

Keterangan:
 Faktor 90% muncul sebagai faktor reduksi, seperti dinyatakan dalam Atkins: “A corrected maximum dry density can be
calculated assuming that the gravel particles in a soil composed mainly of finer can be compacted to 90% of their theoretical
maximum density”
 Faktor 2,65 merupakan nilai kepadatan maksimum kerikil pada umumnya, seperti dinyatakan juga dalam Atkins: “For gravel
with an RD (Gs) value of 2.65 (often assumed), this would be 90% of 2.65 × 1000 kg/m3”

b. Cara pemadatan di laboratorium

Cara pemadatan di laboratorium ada 2, yaitu: (1) Cara Standard dan (2) Cara Modified. Cara
modified digunakan pada pekerjaan-pekerjaan lapangan terbang dan jalan raya. Untuk
pekerjaan lain, misalnya: bendungan, tanggul saluran, pekerjaan pondasi, biasanya dengan
cara standard.

Dalam Hafez, 2010, dijelaskan bahwa:

Standard Proctor test is known as dynamic compaction test. Proctor was introduced this
method on 1933 for specific amount of compaction energy applied on the soil. This test
consists of compacting soil into a mould as specified. After compaction, the water content
and dry bulk density of the soil are determined. This experiment must repeat with difference
water contents to get the correlation between water content and dry bulk density.

Namun dalam Browne, 2006, dijelaskan juga bahwa:

Proctor impact compaction tests represent the most commonly used laboratory method to
determine the maximum dry unit weight and optimum moisture content of soils in the United
States. Soil compaction methods in the field have changed dramatically over the last 50
years, though the Proctor tests have remained relatively unchanged. One shortcoming of the
Proctor tests is that it uses impact loads to compact the soil in a stiff non-yielding mold. This
technique may not accurately simulate modern field compaction methods, which rely on a
combination of kneading, vibration, and increased normal pressures to achieve high dry unit
weights. Consequently, a more appropriate method of compacting soils in the laboratory is
needed. The research presented herein explores the feasibility of using a Superpave Gyratory
Compactor (SGC) to compact soil specimens. The SGC was created in the early 1990s to
accurately represent in-place asphalt densities. Gyratory compactors simultaneously use
static compression and a shearing/kneading action to compact asphalt mixtures.
Menghitung ( dry unit weight):

Berdasarkan berat benda-uji (weight), tinggi benda-uji (height of soil specimen), diameter
cetakan, dan kadar air, berat kering (dry unit weight) dapat dihitung dengan rumus berikut:

Keterangan:
w : water content of soil specimen
H : height of soil specimen
D : diameter of mold D mm
W : weight of the soil specimen

: dry unit weight of soil specimen

dan bahwa

The gyratory compactor more closely represents field compaction, and has an established
track record of success with asphalt compaction
Gyratory compaction was able to surpass Modified Proctor dry unit weights for three of the
four soils tested.
Increasing the number of test gyrations resulted in higher dry unit weights, especially for
ranular soils.
Gyratory compaction shows considerable promise for compacting free-draining soils.
Traditionally, accurate maximum dry unit weights for free-draining soils have been difficult
to obtain.

Jadi, jelaslah bahwa metode pemadatan secara impact dengan menggunakan Proctor tidak
dapat mensimulasikan metode modern untuk pemadatan di lapangan. Akibatnya, diperlukan
metode yang lebih sesuai untuk pemadatan tanah di laboratorium.

c. Prosedur lapangan

1) Tanah ditimbun dan dipadatkan lapis demi lapis, dihamparkan rata dengan ketebalan
sekitar 20 cm (untuk tanah kohesif) sampai 30 cm (untuk tanah berbutir kasar).
2) Kadar air sebelum tanah digilas harus berada di sekitar OMC. OMC perkiraan untuk
tanah berbutir kasar adalah 5%, sedangkan OMC lempung plastis = 35%. Pada
umumnya berkisar antara 15% sampai 25%.
 3) Penggilasan dilakukan pada tiap lapis sebanyak 6 hingga 10 lintasan sampai
kepadatannya mencapai yang disyaratkan (90% s/d 100% MDDterkoreksi)

Urutan pemeriksaan kepadatan tanah di lapangan:

1. Mengetahui volume alat pengambil sampel, misal = V
2. Menimbang berat sampel yang diambil, misal = W
3. Menghitung berat volume tanah basah, γb = W/V
4. Sampel dikeringkan dengan oven sampai benar-benar kering (umumnya 4 × 24 jam)
5. Sampel yang telah benar-benar kering ditimbang beratnya, misal = Wk
6. Menghitung kadar air sampel, w = (W – Wk) / Wk
7. Menghitung berat volume kering berdasarkan kadar-airnya, sebagai berikut:

d. Pengukuran sampel secara langsung di lapangan

Cara silinder pukul (drive cylinder method): silinder baja ujung tajam, diameter dan tinggi
diketahui tepat, sehingga volumenya dapat dihitung. Silinder diletakkan di atas permukaan
tanah yang akan diperiksa. Silinder dipukul masuk ke dalam tanah. Silinder berisi tanah
diangkat. Tanah yang berlebih dipotong dengan pisau.

Gambar Drive Cylinder

Cara lain yang umum dilakukan juga adalah dengan menggunakan alat Sand-cone. Di negara-
negara yang lebih maju, pemeriksaan kepadatan dilakukan dengan cara yang tidak merusak
(membuat lobang besar) yaitu dengan menggunakan alat nuklir.
Beberapa Penelitian Terkait
(1) Stephen Sebesta (Associate Transportation Researcher Texas Transportation
Institute)
Pat Harris, P.G. (Associate Research Scientist Texas Transportation Institute)
dan
Wenting Liu, P.E. (Assistant Research Scientist Texas Transportation Institute)

Simpulan hasil penelitian mereka adalah sebagai berikut:

Specification of laboratory compaction energy requires balancing materials’ properties in
the lab with consideration of constructability in the field. Lab testing performed indicated
mixed results when utilizing higher compaction energy. With the Spicewood Grade 1
material, modified compaction did little to improve the performance. Additionally, in the
field, Tex-113-E compaction could not be achieved. With the Groesbeck Grade 2 material,
modified compaction did improve the materials’ resistance to shear failure, as measured by
triaxial tests, and also resulted in increased modulus. However, the highest level of
compaction achieved in the field with the Grade 2 material was approximately 98 percent of
Tex-113-E.

Given these observations, the data suggest specification of higher lab compaction energy is
not warranted for Grade 1 flexible bases. The observed improvement of properties with the
Grade 2 material by using modified compaction suggest TxDOT could consider specifying
higher compaction energy for these materials. However, consideration must also be given to
field constructability. With the methods used in this project, Tex-113-E density was not
achievable in the field. However, contractors have reported success in meeting higher
density requirements by using other construction techniques such as reduced lift thickness,
placing the base with base pavers, and performing rolling with equipment that produces
higher contact pressures.

Mereka menyatakan bahwa pemadatan berat dapat dilakukan di lab, namun kesetaraan
tingkat kepadatannya belum tentu dapat dicapai di lapangan dan bahwa pemadatan di
lapangan dapat berhasil dengan baik jika material dihampar tidak terlalu tebal (pada tiap lapis
pemadatan).

Selain itu, mereka juga mengungkapkan pernyataan berikut:

In efforts to improve the relationship between laboratory compaction and field compaction,
prototype lab preparation methods were studied. The potential need for different lab
preparation methods arises due to the potential impact on lab-measured properties from the
spatial variability and soil fabric that the particular lab compaction technique produces.

Several alternative lab compaction methods exist. These methods include: static, vibratory,
gyratory, and kneading. The reason other lab methods may be more appropriate is because
laboratory impact hammer compaction may not adequately replicate the spatial variability of
particles and the soil fabric of field compaction.

Hal terpenting dari pernyataan mereka adalah bahwa pemadatan dengan penumbukan tidak
mampu mereplikasikan variabilitas spatial butir-butir material dan ”serat-serat” tanah di
lapangan.
Penjelasan mengenai Spatial Variability adalah sebagai berikut:

TxDOT test specimens are compacted in lifts of approximately 1.5 in. for soils and 2 in. for
base. Field construction rarely involves such thin layers. Although diligent scarification
between layers in the lab is employed, unrealistic inter-layer barriers can result, particularly
with clayey soils. For example, Figure (Gambar) 2.2 shows a soil (PI = 24; 77% passing
#200) specimen after triaxial testing. During compressive loading, each lift failed
separately in a progression from top to bottom, clearly not the intended result of the test.

lift

lift

lift

lift

Gambar Lapisan tanah setelah diuji Triaxial

(Sumber: Sebesta, et al, 2008)

Penjelasan mengenai soil fabric adalah sebagai berikut:

In addition to spatial variability within samples, the soil fabric can significantly influence the
engineering properties of the soil. Mitchell (1993) states that remolding or compacting a soil
will affect the pre-existing fabric at constant water content by breaking down flocculated
aggregations, destroying shear planes, eliminating large pores, and producing a more
homogeneous fabric (on a macroscopic scale). He also states that compaction technique can
impart a preferred orientation to platy soil particles.

Kirkpatrick and Rennie (1973) remolded samples of kaolin using various molding techniques
and studied the resulting fabrics. They determined that molding water content and method of
remolding greatly affected soil fabric. They also state there is no advantage in using methods
of preparation unless the structure of the sample can be related clearly to the structure of the
soil in the field. Hoeg, et. al. (2000) similarly concluded that when reconstituting specimens,
simply satisfying correct density and particle size distribution is not sufficient: the soil fabric
must be reproduced or analyses based on results of reconstituted specimens may be
misleading. More recent investigations attributed poor correlations between field behavior
and lab specimen performance to differences in particle orientation as a result of
laboratory molding techniques (Weibiao and Hoeg 2002).

Hal terpenting dari pernyataan hasil penelitian di atas adalah bahwa:

Korelasi antara perilaku tanah di lapangan dan benda-uji di laboratorium adalah
buruk dalam hal orientasi butir-butir tanahnya, sebagai akibat dari teknik pembuatan
benda-uji di laboratorium.

(2) Hafez M.A. (1) , Doris Asmani M., Nurbaya S.

(1)
Associate Professor, Faculty of Civil Engineering Universiti Teknologi MARA Malaysia7
egypt8@gmail.com

Simpulan hasil penelitian mereka adalah sebagai berikut:

The Static Packing Pressure as new invention to improve method of compaction in the
laboratory. This technical paper describes static laboratory compaction test is using the
hydraulic pump concept with a new static mould design. Based on the comparison between
static and dynamic compaction test, the results come out from static is higher in OMC and
MDD value compare to dynamic method. Therefore, the static compaction test can be used to
measure the degree of compaction value in the laboratory to correlate with field data of
static compaction technique. The static compaction also can describe as a faster, easier and
simple method that can carried out in the laboratory in short duration time compare to
dynamic concept.

Conclusions of this research are:

(a) During static compaction, the force applied on the soil samples was upward. And
(work done) that applied depends on each soil characteristics.
(b) Five different soil samples were tested and classified by Plasticity Char.
(c) Based on different five types of soil samples The static pressure curves of dry
density plotted against moisture content are similar to the proctor curves in term
of tendency with higher values. The static compaction curves higher than dynamic
compaction curves.
(d) The static compaction can also, described as a faster, easier and simple method
that can carried out in the laboratory in short duration time compare to dynamic
concept.

(3) W. V. Ping, P.E., Guiyan Xing, Michael Leonard, dan Zenghai Yang
Research Report No.: FL/DOT/RMC/BB-890(F), FSU Project No.: 6120-549-39
Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering
Florida A&M University – Florida State University
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
Tallahassee, FL 32310
March 2003
Evaluation of Laboratory Compaction Techniques for Simulating Field Soil
Compaction (Phase II)
Mereka menyatakan bahwa:

Due to the development of much heavier earth moving and vibratory roller compaction
equipment, densities in the field are reaching levels that are not attainable in the
laboratory. Higher compaction efforts, routinely seen in the field, not only result in higher
unit weights (MDD) but also lower optimum moisture contents (OMC) than those found by
the modified Proctor test. The optimum moisture content (OMC) obtained in the laboratory
is often higher than that in the field compaction. Consequently, in the field compaction the
maximum density compacted using the laboratory OMC will be lower than that obtained
using the field OMC. In addition, the impact compaction method does not work well with
the pure sandy soil.

A suitable compaction test procedure is evidently needed, which will produce laboratory
densities as great or greater than those being obtained under field compaction and traffic in
actual pavements and one that will work well for the cohesionless A-3 soil. On the basis of
findings from Phase I study, the gyratory compaction is the potential test procedure to
achieve these goals.

Table Specific Gravity of Soils

Soil Classification Gs
A-1-a 2.68
A-3 2.63
A-4 2.66
A-7-6 2.65

Sumber: Browne, 2006)

Gambar Efek Daya Pemadat pada Kurva Kepadatan

Sumber: Ping et al., 2003

Gambar Posisi Confinement Pressure, Sudut Girasi, dan Benda-uji dalam Cetakan
Sumber: Browne, 2006
Ping et al. memberi rekomendasi sebagai berikut:
Based on this study, gyratory compaction was the most suitable technique to simulate field
compaction for granular soils. The research should be expanded to study the effect of those
gyratory variables on clay soils in laboratory as well as to monitor the performance of the
clay soils under field compaction.
In Florida, most subgrade soils are classified as A-3 fine sand and A-2-4 silty soil. The
gyratory compaction procedure has great potential to be the construction specification for
quality control of field compaction. A further research study is recommended for possible
implementation of the gyratory compaction method in design and construction.