14.

330 SOIL MECHANICS

Soil Compaction

SOIL COMPACTION BASICS

Figure courtesy of Soil Compaction: A Basic Handbook by MultiQuip.

Soil Compaction:
Densification of soil by
the removal of air.
Courtesy of http://www.extension.umn.edu
Revised 02/2015 Slide 1 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

WHY COMPACT SOILS?

Revised 02/2015 Figure courtesy of Soil Compaction: A Basic Handbook by MultiQuip. Slide 2 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

MOIST UNIT WEIGHT (γγ) VS.

MOISTURE CONTENT (w)

Conceptual Silty Clay (LL=37, PI =14) Example

(Figure 4.1. Das FGE (2005)) (from Johnson and Sallberg 1960, taken
from TRB State of the Art Report 8, 1990)
Weight (W)
γ=
Revised 02/2015 Volume (V) Slide 3 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

LABORATORY COMPACTION TESTS (i.e. PROCTORS)

Standard Hammer
Ejector

Soil Plug
6 inch
Mold
Scale

Modified Hammer
4 inch Mold
Soil Plug

Typical Proctor Test Equipment

Revised 02/2015 (Figure courtesy of test-llc.com) Slide 4 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

LABORATORY COMPACTION
TEST SUMMARY
Hammer Hammer Compaction
ASTM/
Test Weight Drop Effort
AASHTO
(lb) (in) (kip-ft/ft3)
Standard D698
5.5 12 12.4
(SCDOT) T-99
D1557
Modified 10 18 56
T-180
Revised 02/2015 Slide 5 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

LABORATORY COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY

STANDARD MODIFIED
Test
ASTM D698/AASHTO T-99 ASTM D1557/AASHTO T-180
Method A B C A B C
>20% >20% >20% >20%
Retained on Retained on Retained on Retained on
≤ 20% #4 3/8 in ≤ 20% #4 3/8 in
Material Retained by
≤ 20% < 30%
Retained by
≤ 20% < 30%
#4 Sieve #4 Sieve
Retained by Retained by Retained by Retained by
3/8 in Sieve 3/4 in Sieve 3/8 in Sieve 3/4 in Sieve
Use Soil
#4 3/8 in ¾ in #4 3/8 in ¾ in
Passing Sieve

Mold Dia. (in) 4 4 6 4 4 6

No. of Layers 3 3 3 5 5 5

No. Blows/Layer 25 25 56 25 25 56
Revised 02/2015 Slide 6 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

LABORATORY COMPACTION
TEST SUMMARY

Figure courtesy of Soil Compaction: A Basic Handbook by MultiQuip.

Revised 02/2015 Slide 7 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

LABORATORY COMPACTION TESTS (i.e. PROCTORS)

Automated Proctor Manual Proctor Test

Equipment (“What you WILL be doing”)
Revised 02/2015 (Figure courtesy of Humboldt) (Figure courtesy of westest.net) Slide 8 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

SP-SM
% Fines = 6%
Maximum Dry
Density
MDD or γd,max =
112.2 pcf Zero Air Voids
(ZAV) Line
Gs = 2.6

From Soil
Composition
notes:
γ
γd =
1+ w Optimum Moisture Content
Revised 02/2015 OMC = 11.5% Slide 9 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

ZERO AIR VOIDS LINE

Dry Unit Weight (γd) (i.e. no water):

Weight of Solids (Ws ) γ

γd = =
Volume (V) 1+ w

γzav = Zero Air Void Unit Weight:

Gs γ w Gs γ w γw
γ zav = = =
1 + e 1 + wGs w + 1
Gs
Revised 02/2015 Slide 10 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

FACTORS AFFECTING SOIL

COMPACTION
1. Soil Type
Grain Size Distribution
Shape of Soil Grains
Specific Gravity of Soil Solids

2. Effect of Compaction Effort

More Energy – Greater Compaction
Revised 02/2015 Slide 11 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

TYPES OF Lee and Suedkamp (1972)

COMPACTION CURVES A. Single Peak
(Most Soils)
B. 1 ½ Peak
Dry Unit Weight γd

Cohesive Soils LL<30

C
B
A
C. Double Peak
Cohesive Soils LL<30
D or
Cohesive Soils LL>70
D. No Definitive Peak
Moisture Content w Uncommon
after Figure 4.5. Das FGE (2005) Cohesive Soils LL>70
Revised 02/2015 Slide 12 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

EFFECT OF
COMPACTION ENERGY

In general:

Compaction Energy = γd,max

Compaction Energy = OMC

Revised 02/2015 Figure 4.6. Das FGE (2005). Slide 13 of 38

 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

EFFECT OF COMPACTION ON
COHESIVE SOILS
Dry Side Wet Side

Wet Side
Dry Side Particle Particle
Structure Structure
Flocculent Dispersed
OMC

Revised 02/2015 Figure 4.22. Das FGE (2005). Slide 14 of 38

 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

EFFECT OF
COMPACTION ON
COHESIVE SOILS
Hydraulic Conductivity (k):
Measure of how water flows
through soils

In General:
Increasing w = Decreasing k
Until ~ OMC, then increasing w
has no significant affect on k

Revised 02/2015 Figure 4.23. Das FGE (2005). Slide 15 of 38

 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

EFFECT OF
COMPACTION ON
COHESIVE SOILS
Unconfined Compression
Strength (qu) :
Measure of soil strength
In General:
Increasing w = Decreasing qu
Related to soil structure:
Dry side – Flocculent
Wet Side – Dispersed
Revised 02/2015 Figure 4.24. Das FGE (2005). Slide 16 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

FIELD COMPACTION EQUIPMENT

4 Common Types:
1. Smooth Drum Roller
2. Pneumatic Rubber Tired Roller
3. Sheepsfoot Roller (Tamping Foot)
4. Vibratory Roller (can be 1-3)
Smooth Drum

Pneumatic Rubber Sheepsfoot Vibratory Drum

Revised 02/2015 Tired Slide 17 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

FIELD COMPACTION EQUIPMENT

Photographs courtesy of:

myconstructionphotos.smugmug.com

http://cee.engr.ucdavis.edu/faculty
/boulanger/

Holtz and Kovacs (1981)

Revised 02/2015 Slide 18 of 38

 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

FIELD COMPACTION EQUIPMENT

Fine
Grained
Soils
Coarse
Grained
Soils

Coarse
Grained
Soils
Revised 02/2015 Slide 19 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

FIELD COMPACTION EQUIPMENT

Revised 02/2015 from Holtz and Kovacs (1981) Slide 20 of 38

 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

FIELD COMPACTION TESTING

Relative Compaction (R or C.R.):
γ d ( field )
R(%) = ×100
γ d ,max
5 Common Field Test Methods:
1. Sand Cone (ASTM D1556)
2. Rubber Balloon Method (D2167)
3. Nuclear Density (ASTM D2922)
4. Time Domain Reflectometry (D6780)
5. Shelby Tube (not commonly used)
Revised 02/2015 Slide 21 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

FIELD COMPACTION TESTING

NUCLEAR
SAND CONE BALLOON TDR
(ASTM D2922 &
(ASTM D1556) (ASTM D2167) (ASTM D6780)
ASTM D3017)
METHOD

• Large Sample
• Direct Reading • Fast • Fast
• Large Sample
Advantages • Accurate
Obtained • Easy to re-perform • Easy to re-perform
• Open graded • More Tests • More Tests
material
• Time consuming • Slow • No sample
Disadvantages • Large area • Balloon breakage • Radiation • Under research
required • Awkward • Moisture suspect
• Void under plate • Miscalibration
• Surface not level
• Sand bulking • Rocks in path
Errors • Sand compacted
• Soil pumping
• Surface prep req.
• Under Research
• Void under plate
• Soil pumping • Backscatter
after Soil Compaction: A Basic Handbook by MultiQuip.
Revised 02/2015 Photographs courtesy of Durham Geo/Slope Indicator and myconstructionphotos.smugmug.com. Slide 22 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

FIELD COMPACTION TESTING

Balloon Method
(D2167-08)

F
ig
ure1
2 F
ig
ure1
3

Sand Cone Method Nuclear Method

(D1556-07) (D2922-05 & D3017-05)
Revised 02/2015 Figures courtesy of Soil Compaction: A Basic Handbook by MultiQuip and TRB State of the Art Report 8, 1990. Slide 23 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

FIELD COMPACTION: TEST FREQUENCY

USBR
City of SCDOT SCDOT NAVFAC
Reference Earth FM 5-410
Lynchburg QC QA DM7.02
Manual
Year 2004 1996 1996 1998 1986 1997

1 per lift 1 per lift 1 per lift 1 per lift

Roads per 300 LF per 500 LF per 2500 LF per 250 LF

Buildings or 1 per lift

Structures per 5000 SF

1 per lift
Airfields per 250 LF

Embankment 1 per lift 1 per lift

2000 CY 500 CY
Mass Earthwork per 500 LF per 2500 LF

Canal/Reservoir 1000 CY 500-1,000 CY

Linings
Trenches & 1 per lift
200 CY 200-300 CY
1 per lift
Around Structures per 300 LF per 50 LF

1 per lift 1 per lift

Parking Areas per 10000 SF per 250 SY

1 per areas of 1 per areas of

Misc. doubtful doubtful
Revised 02/2015 compaction compaction Slide 24 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

FIELD COMPACTION: LIFT HEIGHTS

Maximum Lift
State DOTs
Height
Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Max. 0.15 m (6 in) lift
Oklahoma before compaction
Max. 0.15 m (6 in) lift after
Connecticut, Kentucky
compaction

Alabama, Arizona, California, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, Illinois,

Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Max. 0.2 m (8 in) lift before
Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Vermont, Virginia, compaction
Washington, Wisconsin

Louisiana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Texas, Max. 0.3 m (12 in) lift before
Wyoming compaction
Depends on Soil &
New York
Compaction Equipment

After Hoppe (1999), Lenke (2006), and Kim et al. (2009).

Revised 02/2015 Slide 25 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

FIELD COMPACTION: ONE POINT PROCTOR

SC-T-29: Standard Method of
Test for Field Determination of
Maximum Dry Density and
Optimum Moisture Content of
Soils by the One-Point Method

General Procedure:
• Run one (1) Proctor Test DRY
of OMC.
• Plot Test on Family of Curves
• Match to a specific curve:
Take MDD and OMC Values
from Table.
Family of Curves
Revised 02/2015 Slide 26 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

COMPACTION CHARACTERISTICS & RATINGS: USCS SOILS

USCS Compaction γd,max Evaluation for Use as Fill
D698
Sym. Equipment (lb/ft3)
Compression
Embankment Subgrade Base Course
& Expansion
Rubber Tired
Almost
GW Smooth Drum 125 – 135
None
Very Stable Excellent Good
Vibratory Roller
Rubber Tired
Almost Reasonably Excellent to
GP Smooth Drum 115 – 125
None Stable Good
Poor to Fair
Vibratory Roller
Excellent to
Rubber Tired Reasonably
GM 120 – 135 Slight Good Fair to Poor
Sheepsfoot Stable

Rubber Tired Reasonably Good to

GC 115 - 130 Slight
Stable
Good
Fair
Sheepsfoot

after U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station (now ERDC). (1960). “The Unified
Revised 02/2015 Soil Classification System,” Technical Memorandum No. 3-357, Vicksburg, MS. Slide 27 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

COMPACTION CHARACTERISTICS & RATINGS: USCS SOILS

USCS Compaction γd,max Evaluation for Use as Fill
D698
Sym. Equipment (lb/ft3)
Compression
Embankment Subgrade Base Course
& Expansion

Rubber Tired Almost

SW 110-130
None
Very Stable Good Fair to Poor
Vibratory Roller

Rubber Tired Reasonable

Almost Good to
SP 100-120
None
stable when
Fair
Poor
Vibratory Roller dense

Rubber Tired Reasonable

Good to
SM 110-125 Slight stable when
Fair
Poor
Sheepsfoot dense

Rubber Tired Slight to Reasonable Good to

SC 105-125
Medium stable Fair
Fair to Poor
Sheepsfoot

after U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station (now ERDC). (1960). “The Unified
Revised 02/2015 Soil Classification System,” Technical Memorandum No. 3-357, Vicksburg, MS. Slide 28 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

COMPACTION CHARACTERISTICS & RATINGS: USCS SOILS

USCS Compaction γd,max Evaluation for Use as Fill
D698
Sym. Equipment (lb/ft3)
Compression
Embankment Subgrade Base Course
& Expansion

Rubber Tired Slight to Not

ML 95-120
Medium
Poor Stability Fair to Poor
Suitable
Sheepsfoot

Sheepsfoot Not
CL 95-120 Medium Good Stability Fair to Poor
Suitable
Rubber Tired

Poor Stability
Sheepsfoot Not
MH 70-95 High Should not be Poor
Suitable
Rubber Tired
used

Poor to Not
CH Sheepsfoot 80-105 Very high Fair Stability
Very Poor Suitable

after U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station (now ERDC). (1960). “The Unified
Revised 02/2015 Soil Classification System,” Technical Memorandum No. 3-357, Vicksburg, MS. Slide 29 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

DYNAMIC COMPACTION

Figure courtesy of www.betterground.com

US44 Expansion
Figure 1. FHWA-SA-95-037.
Revised 02/2015 Carver, MA. Slide 30 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

DYNAMIC COMPACTION

Revised 02/2015 after Figure 5 (FHWA-SA-95-037). Slide 31 of 38

 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

DYNAMIC COMPACTION: US 44

Revised 02/2015 Slide 32 of 38

 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

DYNAMIC COMPACTION: US 44

Revised 02/2015 (from Hajduk et al., 2004) Slide 33 of 38

 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

DYNAMIC COMPACTION: US 44

Revised 02/2015 (from Hajduk et al., 2004) Slide 34 of 38

 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

VIBROFLOTATION

Photograph courtesy of http://www.vibroflotation.com

Figure 4.18. Das FGE (2005) (after Brown, 1977).
Revised 02/2015 Slide 35 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

VIBROFLOTATION

Figure 4.19. Das FGE (2005) (after Brown, 1977).

Revised 02/2015 Slide 36 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

VIBROFLOTATION
PROBE SPACING

Figure 4.20. Das FGE (2005).

VIBROFLOTATION
EFFECTIVE GRAIN
SIZE
DISTRIBUTIONS
Revised 02/2015
Figure 4.21. Das FGE (2005). Slide 37 of 38
 14.330 SOIL MECHANICS
Soil Compaction

COMPACTION: ASSOCIATED COSTS

Revised 02/2015 Figure courtesy of www.groundimprovement.ch. Slide 38 of 38