You are on page 1of 40


• Various Methods
• Advantages
• Choice of Method
• Lab Compaction Test
• Field Compaction Test
• Compaction Control Test
• Dynamic Compaction
• Application
• Introduction
• Why we use
• Advantages and Disadvantages
• Practical Considerations
• Important parameters
• Limitations
• Suitability of Deposits
• Design Steps
• Quality Control


• “Load Compaction” of Trestle Fills - In the early days large embankments
were constructed by side-dumping rail cars or wagons from temporary
wooden trestles, as shown at left. Engineers assumed that, after placement
and infiltration by rain, the soil would ‘compact’ under its own dead load.
• The first sheepsfoot rollers- The first sheepsfoot roller was built in Los
Angeles in 1902, using a 3-ft diameter log studded with railroad spikes
protruding 7 inches, distributed so the spikes were staggered in alternate
rows. This layout was soon modified to increase weight and efficiency,
initially by increasing its length to 8 ft.
• The roller’s weight was then increased to about 5000 lbs by filling them
with sand and water (drained when moved). The 7-in spikes were
enlarged to a contact of area of 4 sq inches. This increased the load bearing
on each spike to 300 lbs, or about 75 psi contact pressure


• “Fitzgerald Rollers” 1906-23 : The roller was patented by John W. Fitzgerald
in 1906, who worked for Walter and Harbert Gillette, owners of the
Petrolithic Paving Co. of Los Angeles It was modified with a counter-
balanced tow frame and hemispherical fender, is was manufactured by the
Killefer Mfg. Co. of Los Angeles and marketed nationally as the “Fitzgerald
Roller.” The number of spikes was reduced to either 10 or 11 per row, to
bring the contact pressure up to 100 psi. It was first used to compact an
embankment dam by Bent Bros Construction in El Segundo, CA in 1912. 
Thoughtful imitations soon appeared, and when the patent expired in
1923, it was not renewed.
• First dams compacted with sheepsfoot rollers: The first earth
embankments compacted with sheepsfoot rollers were the Lake Henshaw
Dam in southern California in 1920-23 for the Vista Irrigation District in San
Diego County, shown at left. This was followed in 1926 by Philbrook Dam
for PG&E by R.G. Letourneau, and the Puddingstone Dam for the LACoFCD
in 1925-27, using a new roller patented by contractor H.W. Rohl that
employed ball-shaped heads. The first earth dam compacted by
sheepsfoot roller for a federal agency was Echo Dam in Utah for the Bureau
of Reclamation in 1928. The sheepsfoot roller’s narrow spikes induced
kneeding compaction, critical for densifying clayey soils.

• First compaction test procedure (1929) :


• Ralph Proctor of the Proctor Compaction Test • Ralph Proctor was the resident engineer for the ill-fated St. 6 . This led to his role in developing a method for evaluating soils compaction as the resident engineer for the Bouquet Canyon Dams. Francis Dam during its construction in 1924-26.

Introduction • What is compaction? • A simple ground improvement technique. 7 . where the soil is densified through external compactive effort.

depth of layers.).etc. specify placement conditions (water content.Prolongs durability Strategies for compaction process are • In the case of constructed fills.Reduces liquefaction potential • 5. statistical evaluation.).Reduces permeability • 4. density. • Set up adequate control procedures (type and number of tests.) • Select appropriate equipment (roller compactor. etc.etc.Controls swelling and shrinking • 6. tamping) and method of operation (number of passes. patterns of tamping.Increases shear strength • 2.ADVANTAGES Advantages of Compaction • 1. 8 .Reduces compressibility • 3.

Dynamic • Vibro-flotation and Vibro-replacement • Stone Column • Explosives 9 .Mechanical Methods • Compaction. Impact.

Vibro replacement 10 .MECHANICAL METHODS • Choice of Method • Purpose • Compaction • Shallow Surface Compaction • Deep Compaction .Dynamic Consolidation .Vibro Compaction .

• CHOICE OF METHOD .Type of soil.Damage to adjacent structures .Time . geological structure .Durability (whole life considerations) 11 .Type & degree of improvement required .Cost .Available equipment .

7 kg hammer • 4.9 kg hammer • 300 mm drop • 450 mm drop 1000 ml compaction mould 12 12 . Standard Proctor: Modified Proctor: hamme r • 3 layers • 5 layers • 25 blows per layer • 25 blows per layer • obtain the compaction curve and define the optimum water content and maximum dry density for a specific compactive effort. .


Variation of Dry Density With Water 14 .

low permeability optimum water content Water content 15 . max . Soil grains densely packed Dry density (ρd) .good strength and stiffness ρd.

Dry density (ρd) D .corresponds to 100% saturation R Y D Zero air void curve (S=100%) E Gs ρ w N Eq : ρ d = S 1 + wGs I S<100% T Y S>100% (impossible) All compaction points should lie to the left of ZAV curve Water content 16 .

Dry density (ρd) Increasing compactive effort results in:  Lower optimum water content E2 (>E1)  Higher maximum dry density E1 Water content 17 .

Dry density (ρd) Compaction curves for different efforts Line of optimum Water content 18 18 .

Filed Compaction Different types of rollers (clockwise from right): Smooth-wheel roller Vibratory roller Pneumatic rubber tired roller Sheepsfoot roller 19 .

20 .

Compaction Control Test ρd Compaction specifications Compare! ρd.field = ? w wfield = ? compacted ground 21 .

Dynamic Compaction Pounder (Tamper) Mass = 5-30 tonne Drop = 10-40 m 22 .

In-Situ Improvements • Dynamic Compaction 23 .

land fills and karst terrain with sink holes. solution cavities in Pounder (Tamper) limestone Crater created by the impact (to be backfilled) 24 . Dynamic Compaction .pounding the ground by a heavy weight Suitable for granular soils.

Dynamic Compaction • Existing surface or near surface soil is poor • Repeatedly dropping heavy weight • From high distance • Wrecking ball or designed mass weight • Typical weight range: • 2 to 20 ton or higher • Typical dropping distance: • 10 to 40 meters • Heavier the weight greater the dropping distance and greater the compaction effort 25 .

Reduce foundation settlements .Induce settlements in collapsible soils 26 .Permit construction on fills .Improve mine spoils .Reduce seismic subsidence .Densify garbage dumps .DEEP COMPACTION TECHNIQUES • Dynamic Compaction Applications .

5 to 10 drops per grid point) 27 . Dynamic Compaction • Used for cohesive and cohesionless soils • Compacting buried refuse • Not done by dropping weight randomly • Closely spaced grid pattern • Preliminary work done to determine: • Grid spacing • Weight • Height • Number of drops (typ.

Dynamic Compaction • Applicable – Loose sands. fills. mine refuse. collapsible soil and sanitary landfills – Up to depths of 40-feet – Not typically used in urban areas – 25-50 meters clearance to any structure – GWT > 6’ below grade or 2’ below bottom of craters 28 .

Dynamic Compaction • Advantages – Relatively inexpensive • Disadvantages – Extremely invasive – Multiple passes required / progressive consolidation – Granular fill to stabilize loose surface soils – Too many drops may cause adjacent heave – Requires careful monitoring 29 .

Dynamic Compaction • Practical Considerations – Drops from 10-40 meters – Weight 40(+) tons. shape doesn’t matter – Stratographic profiling for tamping pattern – Max economic limit = 10 drops/location – Requires horizontal pumps or drains – Vibration sensitivity analysis recommended – Crane Safety Program 30 .

31 .

5*2.5m to 7*7 m 32 .• Important terms • Effective depth-max depth of ground improvement • Zone of major densification-About upper 2/3 of effective depth • Energy level-Energy per blow (weight times drop height) • Energy intensity factor.Involves energy level.Impact grids of 2.spacing.Drop heights of 17m to 35 m . no of blows Typical Dynamic Compaction Program involves .Weight of 10 to 30 tons .

Review site for vibration sensitivity 33 .Min 35-50 m clearance from any structure .Important Dynamic Compaction Geotechnical Parameters • Soil Conditions • Groundwaterlevel • Relative density • Degree of saturation • Permeability Important Dynamic Compaction Construction Conditions .

34 .

Limitation 35 .

Suitability of Deposits for Dynamic Compaction 36 .

Dynamic Compaction Design Steps • Perform site investigation • Development influence diagrams • Develop initial dynamic compaction program • Develop numerical performance prediction • Develop QA/QC plans Dynamic Compaction Performance Prediction Requires 37 .

Depth of influence of dynamic compaction 38 .

39 .

40 .

SPT .Dilatometer Test(DMT) .Pressuremeter test(PMT) .Dynamic Compaction Quality control • Crater depths (map) • Surface elevation monitoring • Decrease in depth of weight penetration with successive drops pore pressure • Geophysical monitoring DYNAMIC COMPACTION ACCEPTANCE TESTING .CPT .large scale load test(where CPT &SPT are unreliable .Shear-wave velocity profile 41 .