Introduction
In geotechnical engineering practice, soils at a given site may be loose or highly compressible so that the induced load from the superstructure is higher than the bearing capacity of soil, leading to soil failure and excessive settlement. In such cases, there are three alternatives for construction on such weak soils, including: (a) Use of pile foundations; (b) Soil replacement; and (c) Ground improvement . The purpose of ground improvement is to enhance the geotechnical engineering properties of soil by one of the following methods: Chemical treatment (e.g. lime, cement or flyash); Soil reinforcement (e.g. geosynthetics); and Soil consolidation (e.g. vertical drains with preloading) Soil compaction. In our course, only soil compaction will be studied in some detail.
Geotechnical Engineering 367 Dr Mohamed Shahin Curtin University Page 2
Handle
Base plate
50 mm
The bulk (total) unit weight, t, and the associated water content, mc, of each compacted sample are measured. The dry unit weight, d, of each sample is calculated from the known t and mc as follows:
d =
t
(1 + mc )
(1)
The dry unit weights are plotted versus water contents and the compaction curve is drawn from which dmax and OMC are obtained, as shown in Figure 2.
Geotechnical Engineering 367 Dr Mohamed Shahin Curtin University Page 7
dmax
OMC
The compactive effort (energy) supplied in this test is 596 kJ/m3 and can be calculated as follows (Holtz and Kovacs, 1981): Energy = (weight of hammer drop height number of layers number of blows per layer) / (volume of mould) Energy = (2.7 kg 9.81 m/s2)(0.3 m)(3 layers)(25 blows/layer)/1000 10-6 m3 = 595957.5 J/m3 = 596 kJ/m3
Geotechnical Engineering 367 Dr Mohamed Shahin Curtin University Page 8
The following observations can be obtained from the compaction curve in Figure 2: Below the OMC (i.e. in the dry side of optimum), d increases as the water content increases. This is because the soil particles develop water films around them, which tend to lubricate the particles and make them easier to be reoriented into a denser configuration, thus, d increases. Above the OMC (i.e. in the wet side of optimum), d decreases with the increase of water content. This is because soil starts to be very wet and there is little or no air left in the voids and it thus becomes very difficult or impossible to compact the soil more. Also, as mentioned previously, at the wet side of optimum water starts to replace the soil particles in the mould, and since w < solids, d decreases. It is possible to calculate and superimpose the curves corresponding to different air contents or degrees of saturation into the compaction curve, as shown in Figure 3, from which the following two observations are derived:
Figure 3(a) indicates that because of the random shape of solid particles, it is not physically possible to remove all the air content from within a volume of an unsaturated soil. Figure 3(b) shows that the OMC has been achieved at a degree of saturation, S, of less than 100% and this is true for most soils. In other words, it is not possible to achieve full saturation through compaction.
Av = 5% Av = 10%
(a)
S = 80% S = 70%
(b)
Figure 3: Compaction at different degrees of: (a) air voids; (b) saturation
Geotechnical Engineering 367 Dr Mohamed Shahin Curtin University Page 11
(1 Av ) =
(Vs + Vw ) Vt
Vt =
(Vs + Vw ) (1 Av )
d =
Vs =
t
(1 + mc )
Ws Gs w
Vw =
Ww
mcWs
d =
Gs w d = mG 1+ c s S
(3)
S=
1 Av A 1+ v mc Gs
(4)
If the mould used has a mass of 1152 gm and volume of 950 cm3, determine the following: (i) Draw the compaction curve and obtain the OMC and dmax; (ii) Draw the 80% and 100% saturation lines; and (iii) Calculate the degree of saturation at the maximum dry unit weight.
21
Well-graded sand/gravel
20
19
18
17
Moisture content
Figure 5: Effect of compactive effort on soil compaction
Geotechnical Engineering 367 Dr Mohamed Shahin Curtin University Page 17
The effects of magnitude of compactive effort and water content on compaction of cohesive soils are similar to those of cohesionless soils. The effects of other factors will be discussed in some detail next.
(b)
Higher swelling/shrinking
Lower swelling/shrinking
From the study of the factors affecting compaction of cohesive soils, it is important to keep in mind that successful compaction is achieved when the desired engineering properties of the compacted soil is obtained, not just the maximum dry unit weight and optimum water content. For example, compaction in the dry side of optimum is more appropriate for construction of foundations because it will increase the strength and bearing capacity of compacted soil, whereas compaction in the wet side of optimum is more favourable for the construction of seepage barriers (e.g. earth dams) because the compacted soil will be less permeable.
RC =
100
(5)
As an example of using Equation (5), if a certain soil has dmax-lab of 18 kN/m3 and the project specifications require RC 90%, then the contractor must compact the soil in the field to d-field 16.2 kN/m3. The field dry unit weight, d-field, is determined for each layer of the compacted fill while compaction is progressing. The determination of d-field will be discussed later. Table 2 shows the typical requirements of RC for some projects (Coduto, 1999).
Table 2: Typical compaction specifications
Type of project Fills to support buildings or roadways Upper 150 mm of subgrade below roadways Aggregate base material below roadways Earth dams
As mentioned previously, compaction of cohesionless soils of clean sands and gravels is not limited by the moisture content and the specifications are sometimes written in terms of the relative density, Dr, as follows: d field d min lab ) d max lab (emax lab e field ) Dr = (6) Dr = or d max lab d min lab ) d field (emax lab emin lab ) The minimum laboratory dry unit weight , dmin-lab, that gives the maximum void ratio, emax-lab, can be obtained by filling a mould of known volume with dry soil using a funnel, in a steady stream, free of vibration. After levelling the soil, the mass of the mould and its contents is measured, then the dry unit weight is calculated which would be the minimum dry unit weight, dmin-lab. The laboratory maximum dry unit weight, dmax-lab, that gives the minimum void ratio, emax-lab, can be determined using the vibratory table (Figure 10), in which a mould of known volume is filled with wet soil using a scoop while the table is oscillating at a nominated rate (e.g. 3600 vibrations/minute). A surcharge load is lowered to the surface of the soil and the vibrator is set for about 10 minutes or until no more soil settlement is occurred. The surcharge load is removed and the soil is levelled. The content of the mould is placed in an oven for 24 hours at 105oC. The maximum dry unit weight, dmax-lab, is then calculated by dividing the dry mass of soil by the volume of mould.
Geotechnical Engineering 367 Dr Mohamed Shahin Curtin University Page 27
The following ranges of Dr can be used to measure the quality of compaction: Very loose : 0 < Dr < 0.15; Loose : 0.15 < Dr < 0.35; Medium dense : 0.35 < Dr < 0.65; Dense : 0.65 < Dr < 0.85; Very dense : 0.85 < Dr < 1.00 The relationship between RC and Dr can be obtained using Lee and Singh (1971), as follows: RC = 0.8 + 0.2Dr (7)
It should be noted that although RC and Dr measure similar soil properties, they are numerically different. Some engineers/contractors incorrectly use the term relative density to describe the relative compaction. This is often a source of confusion, so it is important to be careful when using these terms.
Geotechnical Engineering 367 Dr Mohamed Shahin Curtin University Page 28
Bulking
Transportation
Compaction
Fill area
The net change in volume from the cut soil to the compacted fill is called shrinkage factor and may be calculated as follows:
V d fill = 1 V fill d cut
(8)
where; V = net change in volume from the cut soil to the compacted fill; Vfill = volume of compacted fill; dfill = dry unit weight of compacted fill; and dcut = dry unit weight of cut soil. It should be noted that the volume or weight of dry soil (i.e. solids or soil particles) of the cut material and compacted fill are the same.
(11)
Figure 13: Balloon method for measuring in-situ dry density (after Holtz and Kovacs, 1981)
A number of techniques exist that enable the direct determination of the bulk unit weight of compacted soil in the field, including: Nuclear densometer method; The penetration needle; and Core-cutter method.
Nuclear method:
This method involves a gamma radiation source which is located at the end of a probe that is placed in the compacted soil at a known depth. Detectors located within the instrument monitor the amount of scatter of radiation from the source. The scatter is related to the bulk unit weight of the material, and the moisture content can be also determined, see Figure 15.
Figure 15: Nuclear method for measuring in-situ dry unit weight (after Holtz and Kovacs, 1981)
Core-cutter method:
This technique is to drive a tube into the soil (see Figure 17), usually a cohesive material, which is later extruded in the laboratory. The dimensions of the sample, diameter and length, can be measured (giving the in-situ volume), as well as the weight, yielding the bulk unit weight.
Note: Typical specifications require a new field test of dry unit weight for every 1000 to 3000 m3, or when the borrow material changes significantly.
(photo by Caterpillar)
Rubber-tyred Roller
Two-axles roller that employs from 7-13 wheels mounted in two rows and spaced so that the wheels of the front row track in the spaces between those of the back row 80% coverage under the wheel Suitable for most coarse-grained soils with some fines Static compactive effort and kneading Used for compaction of subgrades, highway fills; and earth dams
(photo by Caterpillar)
Sheepsfoot Roller
Has many round or rectangular feet attached to one or two hollow steel drums 8% to 12% coverage under the wheel Static compactive effort and kneading Suitable for fine-grained soils Used for compaction of embankments and earth dams
(photo by Europe-machinery)
Tamping-foot Roller
Has many tamping feet attached to one or two hollow steel drums 40% coverage under the wheel Static compactive effort and kneading Suitable for fine-grained soils; sands and gravels with fines > 20% Used for compaction of subgrades; embankments; and earth dams
(photo by Caterpillar)
Vibrating plate
Vibrating rammer
Impact Roller
Has gained much use recently. The impact roller is a square or triangle roller with rounded corners that when towed behind a vehicle, compacts the soil by the action of the falling weight of the roller. Static compactive effort and impact forces Suitable for most soil types Used for compaction of large reclamation projects as it is efficient and cost effective.
Dynamic Compaction
Has been employed for the compaction of large areas Consists of repeatedly dropping a very heavy weight (usually between 10200 tonnes) dropped from a height of up to 40 metres by means of massive cranes The impact produces shock waves that cause densification Suitable for unsaturated granular soils Used for compaction of large areas
Vibrocompaction or Vibroflotation
This method employs a giant cylindrical vibrator that is suspended from a crane. The vibration from the vibrator liquefies the soil and causes immediate settlement. Water is pumped (jetted) through the vibrator to aid the compaction process and to permit penetration of the vibrator up to 15 metres in depth. Suitable for loose sands where water in the voids is free to drain and will not affect compaction. Used for compaction of sand deposits for depths up to 30 m, and can also be used below water table.
(Das, 1998)
Typical application
Base courses; asphalt pavement Subgrades; highway fills; earth dams Earth dams; embankments Earth dams; embankments; subgrades Subbase courses; subgardes Embankments; subgrades Trench backfills; difficult access areas Large reclamation areas Compaction of large areas Free-draining sand deposits of depths up to 30 m
Note: For most compaction projects, the minimum recommended number of passes to compact a single lift of soil is 4-8.
Geotechnical Engineering 367 Dr Mohamed Shahin Curtin University Page 49
References
Aysen, A. (2005). Soil mechanics: basic concepts and engineering applications, Balkema Publishers, London. Coduto, D. P. (1999). Geotechnical engineering: Principles and practices, Prentice Hall, NJ. Das, B. (1998). Principles of geotechnical engineering, PWS Publishing Company, Boston, MA. Holtz, R., and Kovacs, W. (1981). An introduction to geotechnical engineering, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Lee, K. W., and Singh, A. (1971). Relative density and relative compaction Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, ASCE, 97(SM2), 1049-1052. Nikraz, H. (2005). Geotechnical engineering 268, BS 1737, Curtin University of Technology, Perth.