Transportation Geotechnics 17 (2018) 24–34

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Transportation Geotechnics
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/trgeo

Engineering Advance

Review of soil compaction: History and recent developments T

⁎
Jayantha Kodikara , Tanvirul Islam, Arooran Sounthararajah
Dept. of Civil Engineering, 23 College Walk, Monash University, Clayton Campus, VIC 3800, Australia

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Compaction of soils is a major construction activity in civil engineering, and particularly in the transport in-
Compaction curves dustry. This paper presents a brief historical account of soil compaction development with special emphasis on
California Bearing Ratio (CBR) transport geotechnics. Proctor’s curves and California Bearing Ratio (CBR) are reviewed and the associated state-
Road pavements of-the-art field specifications are discussed. The properties of compacted soil and the typical behaviours of
Intelligent Compaction (IC)
compacted fill under in-service conditions are discussed. Intelligent compaction is being increasingly adopted
Equilibrium moisture content
with a view to increased uniformity in compaction, lack of which is a major cause of premature pavement
Environmentally Stabilised Curve (ESC)
Compacted soil behaviour failure. However, it needs further advancement to make it more intelligent. The current state of the ability to
predict compacted soil behaviour is reviewed and the limitations are identified. Of more recent developments,
interpretation of compacted soil behaviour with a three-dimensional state boundary surface is highlighted, and
simplified behaviour can be interpreted and used in routine practice. Areas that need further advancements in
theory and practice are highlighted.

Introduction advancing practice, in particular in relation to performance prediction.

Densification through soil compaction improves soil properties. It
increases soil strength and bearing capacity, and reduces compressi-
bility and permeability. Therefore, even in ancient times, when road
builders were not aware of soil mechanics, it was known that com-
paction of soil produces better quality roads. Even today, soil com-
paction constitutes one of the most commonly practised construction
activities in civil engineering, with particular application in the trans-
port industry. The development of the Proctor curve in 1933 re-
volutionised the compaction process and the parallel development of
the California Bearing Ratio (CBR) added to that advance. The novelty
of these developments is evident, since these concepts are still used in
the industry as routine practice. Although soil compaction appears to be
a simple practical process, analysis of the behaviour of compacted soil
under external loads and environmental loads due to atmospheric in-
teraction can be quite complex. Compacted soil can display various
behavioural patterns, such as plastic deformation, in particular, swel-
ling and collapse compression under wetting, and cracking under
drying. In addition, it can undergo changes in density due to wet/dry
cycles.
This paper presents a review of the historical development of
compaction theory, field specifications and methods of analysis. In
addition, it examines more recent developments with a view to
Combined with advances in sensing technologies such as intelligent
compaction where automated rollers equipped with multiple sensors
are used, the paper examines the possibilities in the future of auto-
mating the compaction process for performance-based construction.
Historical development of soil compaction and road building
Soil compaction by various means has been practised for ground
improvement in road building dating back to Roman times and even
earlier. Particularly in the early 18th century, the strategic importance
of inter-urban travel was recognised, and the need arose for high
standard roads leading to the establishment of the Engineering Corps
and the School for Bridges and Roads in France during that period. In
1765, a graduate from that school, Pierre-Marie Tresaguet, followed
Roman work and continued the development of road pavement struc-
tures with sub-base layers [26]. At the same time, Thomas Telford from
Scotland and John Metcalf from England applied similar design philo-
sophies in Britain. A major issue with their design was the use of large
stones in the foundation of the pavement, which made pavement
building slow and expensive. Later, John McAdam from Scotland made
a significant innovation by suggesting a dense layer of smaller-sized
rocks instead of large stones [26]. Due to particle interlocking, these
layers of small rocks provide equivalent support to a large-sized stone

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: jayantha.kodikara@monash.edu (J. Kodikara), tanvirul.islam@monash.edu (T. Islam),
arooran.sounthararajah@monash.edu (A. Sounthararajah).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trgeo.2018.09.006
Received 29 August 2018; Received in revised form 17 September 2018; Accepted 20 September 2018
Available online 22 September 2018
2214-3912/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
J. Kodikara et al.
foundation. Even then, manual labour was the primary mode of con-
struction and neither the underlying soil nor the pavement layers re-
ceived significant mechanised compaction. This led to the development
of compaction equipment in road pavement construction.
It appears that the introduction of rollers for soil compaction was in
France in 1830, and the roller was drawn by horses [26]. After the
invention of steamrollers in 1860, road building took a new turn as the
level of compaction changed completely. The sheep foot roller was
invented in the United States in 1906 inspired by the cattle and sheep,
which were used in England in 1820 to compact material in earthfill
dams. The initial sheep foot rollers were light in mass, ranging from 2.7
to 4.5 tons, with a footprint pressure of 414–690 kPa. After the inven-
tion of internal combustion engines in 1876, the mass-carrying capacity
of the rollers was raised to 30 tons. Most subsequent development in
sheep foot rollers was not weight-wise but in the shape of the foot and
mechanical developments. After the Second World War, most sig-
nificant developments took place in the field of vibratory compaction.
At present, vibrating rollers feature very prominently in road con-
struction and have become very effective in producing high-density
granular pavement layers.
Proctor’s compaction curves
A study by the California Highway Department between 1928 and
1929 showed that the primary reason for road failures is the uneven
degree of compaction which gives insufficient capacity of the subgrade
soil [26]. In order to address this in practice, two major developments
occurred during the 1920s and early 1930s, namely, the development of
Proctor compaction curves [55] for compaction specification and the
California Bearing Ratio (CBR) for pavement design [22]. Since then,
these two tests have been used in the laboratory to develop the re-
lationship between dry density, γd (or void ratio, e), and moisture
content (w) for a given soil with a certain gross energy input. The en-
ergy is input by compacting moist soil in layers into a cylindrical mould
using a hammer (for more details, see [16,11,9]). This relationship
gives a typical compaction curve with an inverted parabolic shape in
the γd - w plane, identifying the maximum dry density γd, max and the
corresponding optimum moisture content wopt for that energy input.
The original test devised by Proctor is standardised as the standard test
for a gross energy input of 600 kN-m/m3 (=12,400 ft-lbf/ft3), some-
times referred to as 1Ec. Later, the test was modified to simulate heavier
compaction equipment in the field by imparting higher gross energy
input 2,703 kN-m/m3 (=56,250 ft-lbf/ft3 and referred to as 4.5Ec) and
is standardised as the modified Proctor compaction test. In current
practice, compaction curves corresponding to lower energy levels are
also used to simulate hand-held compaction equipment in some cases,
producing a family of compaction curves [48,64].
Since the pioneering work by Proctor, researchers have attempted to
Fig. 1. (a) Typical compaction curves and features; (b) Depiction of (unloaded) compaction curves in e−e w plane (modified from Kodikara [43]).
25
Transportation Geotechnics 17 (2018) 24–34
explain the inverted parabolic shape of the compaction curve. Proctor
[55] argued that water has a dual effect of capillarity (or suction) and
lubrication. He argued that, due to high capillarity the dry density is
lower for dry soil and as water is added, the capillarity is reduced, and
water also lubricates the particle interaction, giving rise to increased
dry density up to the maximum dry density. However, Horn [37]
showed that the concept of lubrication may not apply for all soils, since
some soils display higher friction under wet conditions than under dry
conditions, yet the compaction curves have similar shapes. Hogentogler
[35] proposed that soils go through four stages of wetting during
compaction: hydration, lubrication, swelling and saturation. This ex-
planation was based on the formation of a viscous adsorbed water layer
on soil particles and its growth with the addition of water. However, a
number of researchers have shown that the adsorbed layer does not
grow as suggested for most soils (c.f. [28,57]). Furthermore, with in-
creasing moisture content abovewopt , soils hardly reach full saturation
during compaction, but rather approach it with a continual decrease of
dry density.
Hilf [32] proposed an explanation on the basis of the function of
pore water (u w ) and pore air (ua) pressures during compaction. His
explanation indicated, similar to Proctor, that capillarity [or pressure
deficit (ua -u w ) or soil suction, S] reduces with increasing moisture
content, assisting compaction, and hence increasing dry density. As soil
reaches the optimum water content, air is trapped and cannot escape, as
in the case of dry of optimum. Compaction beyond this moisture con-
tent gives rise to increased air pressure, thereby reducing the effec-
tiveness of compaction and dry density. The research undertaken by
Gilbert [30] and Langfelder et al. [46] supported Hilf’s explanation and
showed that the air permeability is zero at the optimum moisture
content. Lambe [45] also explained that the soil structure of clay soils
dry of optimum may be flocculated and more dispersed fabric develops
wet of optimum. Olson [54] and Barden and Sides [13] also explained
that the shape of the compaction curve can arise due to change in shear
strength with change in degree of saturation, Sr . Hence, it is related to
suction or capillarity that gives rise to increased effective or soil ske-
leton stress. It is considered that the capillarity- and effective stress-
based explanation is more applicable to the compaction process and the
development of the compaction curve [33].
Fig. 1(a) shows several compaction curves for different energies
shown in idealised form. It should be noted that compaction curves can
vary from this idealised form, particularly towards the very dry side,
and in some instances show dual or multiple peaks. Nonetheless, for the
practical field soil compaction, the idealised form can be considered to
be applicable. A common line of optimums (LOO) is identified and this
demarcates the boundary where the air phase is trapped. The formation
of an aggregated structure (with more flocculated fabric) on the dry
side of optimum and a more intact structure (with more dispersed
fabric) on the wet side of optimum is also reported [45,23]. However, it
J. Kodikara et al.
is found that, on the dry side of the LOO, flocculated structure occurs
mostly within aggregates but large macro pores can develop among
aggregates, usually giving high saturated permeability. In particle size
mixtures, clay particles tend to aggregate around large particles like
sand forming buttresses, forming a structure with larger void ratio
contributed by significant macro voids. However, as the degree of sa-
turation increases (for the same density), amount of macro voids con-
sistently reduces [64]. Fig. 1(b) shows the depiction of the compaction
curves in the e−e w plane, where e w is the moisture ratio. The moisture
ratio is defined as the volume of water/the volume of solids, given by
wGs, where Gs is the average specific gravity of soil particles. This re-
presentation is a simple transformation of dry density to void ratio,
since γd = Gs γw /(1 + e ) , and was originally introduced by Hilf [33] and
followed on by Kodikara [43]. This representation has some advantages
since void ratio is a fundamental state parameter that is used in con-
stitutive modelling and interpretations, such as deformation and swel-
ling/collapse. Fig. 1(b) also shows the typical suction contours on the
unloaded compaction plane, in other words, the measured suction on
unloaded samples after the compaction is complete. It is clear that
suction contours become predominantly vertical (constant suction ir-
respective of moisture content) away from the LOO on the dry side and
are slanted towards the saturation line on the wet side. This seems to be
a reflection of the formation of aggregated and dispersed structures on
the dry and wet sides.
California Bearing Ratio (CBR)
The CBR test uses soil compacted in a cylindrical mould to under-
take loading tests on the soil surface using a plunger (for more details,
see [17,12,10]). On the basis of the load-displacement curves obtained,
the CBR value is computed as a percentage ratio of the load measured at
designated displacements to standard loads at those displacements.
Since the loads are referenced to specific displacements, the CBR is a
measure of the relative stiffness of the compacted soil under monotonic
loading. The test can be conducted under unsaturated or as-compacted
conditions or after conditioning to a known moisture content, such as
the expected equilibrium moisture content under field conditions or
under soaked conditions to simulate water-logged scenarios. Due to its
simplicity and apparent useability, in some road pavement designs, the
presumptive value of resilient modulus of the subgrade is taken as a
multiple of CBR [for example, 10 x CBR in MPa in Austroads [3]].
However, detailed theoretical and experimental investigations of the
CBR and its relevance to compacted soil behaviour are still required.
Some phenomenological observations made in the research literature
are discussed below.
Some researchers have measured the suction development during
CBR testing by modifying the standard CBR apparatus by instrumenting
it with tensiometers (c.f. [56,66]). Fig. 2(a) shows the as-compacted
CBR contours for a lateritic gravel from Kenya [gravel 61%, sand 26%,
silt 5%, clay fraction 8%, liquid limit (LL) 56%, plastic limit (PL) 27%,
shrinkage limit 24%] reported by Toll [66]. As Fig. 2(a) also shows, Toll
[66] reported that, for a certain compaction level, CBR increases to a
peak on the dry side (at about 15% moisture content) and reduces again
for lower moisture contents. Purwana and Nikraz [56] also reported
similar behaviour for clean sand. However, for clayey soils, such a
marked decrease in CBR has not been reported (c.f. [2,56]), although it
may level off for low moisture contents. On the wet side of the peak, the
CBR drops rapidly as moisture content increases towards saturation.
This behaviour is also shown in the inset. This means that for this kind
of soil, by compacting dry of optimum, a maximum CBR can be ob-
tained. Toll [66] attributed this behaviour to the contribution of in-
creasing suction and ‘suction stress’ (given by χs , where χ is the
Bishop’s effective stress parameter) towards the dry side (as shown by
suction contours) to soil stiffness. The subsequent reduction of CBR
with further decrease of moisture content is attributed to the reduction
of suction stress, despite the additional increase of suction. Since the
26
Transportation Geotechnics 17 (2018) 24–34
compaction curve and the CBR contours follow similar trends, a sig-
nificant change in shape of the compaction curve (even an upward
trend at low moisture contents) can be considered to be indicative of
this behaviour. Direct correlations of as-compacted CBR with as-com-
pacted γd dry density and Sr have been established considering a range
of soils [62–66] and is typically given as CBR = fCBR (Sr )(γd/ γw−b)c ,
where fCBR (Sr ) is a monotonically decreasing function of Sr , and b and c
are empirical constants. They highlight the importance of as-compacted
Sr in addition to the dry density on compacted soil strength and stiff-
ness. This behaviour means that it may be possible by compacting the
dry side of optimum to obtain high base/subgrade CBR and, therefore,
smaller pavement base thickness (on the basis of empirical pavement
design methods), but it may also be necessary to consider the moisture
content change that would take place during operation with potential
wetting, especially if the pavement is prone to flooding or water-logged
conditions. To cater for worst-case scenarios, CBR is used when the
compacted soil is soaked prior to testing, giving a soaked-CBR value.
Fig. 2(b) shows the contours of soaked-CBR obtained for compacted
basaltic clay soils, which are generally highly moisture-reactive
(shrinking/swelling). Typical basaltic clay has high liquid limit (≈127)
and plasticity index (≈101). Linear shrinkage of typical basaltic clay is
around 22%. It can be interpreted that, due to swelling, the soaked-CBR
can be similar for soils compacted at significantly different initial (e , e w )
states, since the soaked (e , e w ) states can be close to each other. A si-
milar inference can be obtained from Fig. 2(a), but the amount of
swelling may be very limited for lateritic gravel [i.e. conservatively
considering a horizontal line to bring a certain initial (e , e w ) state to
saturation]. Since the soaked CBR condition can be very conservative,
detailed assessments of moisture variation under field conditions are
required for more rational pavement designs. Tatsuoka [62] presented
empirical correlations relating soaked-CBR with Sr . This is in line with
the results shown in Fig. 2(b), which shows soaked-CBR contours
generally follow the constant Sr lines.
Field compaction and specification
Specification of compaction for field soil is a major undertaking in
construction projects. The specification can include information on soil
preparation requirements, minimum density to be achieved, moisture
range, degree of saturation limits, layer thickness ranges, roller types
and characteristics, and other specific features, such as shoulders and
edges of embankments. In terms of dry density, it is common to specify
the compaction by specifying the minimum dry density to be achieved
as a percentage of the laboratory maximum compaction achieved for
that soil on the basis of the compaction curve. For example, the
minimum dry density to be achieved could be 95% of either Proctor or
modified Proctor maximum density, but the latter is more commonly
used. The moisture content specification may also be with respect to
relevant laboratory optimum moisture content (OMC), in many cases to
cater for ease of compaction, and more than OMC is specified de-
pending on field requirements. However, prior to sealing or placing
another layer on top of the compacted layer, it may be specified to have
a limit on the degree of saturation, which is a function of the dry density
(or e) and moisture content (Sr = e w / e ). If a high moisture content is
used at compaction, the compacted soil may end up with a high degree
of saturation soon after compaction more than that corresponding to
the LOO. Higher than LOO saturation may also occur due to over-
compaction, when densities higher than those specified at a particular
moisture content are achieved in the field. In some cases, this may be an
inadvertent but undesirable outcome, since the properties of clay soils
on the wet side of the LOO may be significantly different, as discussed
previously. Some road authorities require a degree of saturation less
than 70% to be specified at the time of sealing (e.g. [25]), which may
require drying back of the pavement layer after compaction. This re-
quirement appears to have arisen from repeated load triaxial testing to
prevent excessive pore pressure development and associated rutting
J. Kodikara et al.
Fig. 2. (a) Contours of CBR and compaction curves for as-compacted lateritic gravel with different moisture contents in e−e w plane [data from Toll [66]]; (b)
Contours of soaked CBR plotted against as-compacted (e, e w ) for compacted basaltic clay soils [data from Hillard [34]].
failure. It is, however, not clear the influence of loading frequency on
these findings. The layer thickness specification can range from 75 to
250 mm typically, depending on the material. On the basis of field tests
undertaken, Tatsuoka [62] indicated that a lift thicker than around
300 mm may result in significant decrease in dry density with depth in a
single soil layer, even when heavy compaction machinery is used. In
relation to roller specification, vibratory rollers are commonly specified
for granular layers, whereas pad-footed rollers are preferred for clay
subgrades.
Significant research has been undertaken by Tatsuoka and Gomes
Correia in relation to more rational approach to compaction specifica-
tion and control (e.g. [62–66]). Their research highlights the sig-
nificance of controlling Sr in the compacted fill, which can potentially
avoid soil reaching high saturation due to over-compaction when only a
degree of compaction or a target density is specified with respect to a
laboratory energy level (for instance, Proctor energy). In addition, their
research has found that the field and laboratory compaction curves
27
Transportation Geotechnics 17 (2018) 24–34
when normalised to respective γd, max is reasonably a unique function of
(Sr −Sr , opt ) for similar soils, irrespective of the energy levels or rollers
used. This relationship is expressed as: γd / γd, max = fγd (Sr −Sr , opt ). Fur-
thermore, on the basis of extensive experimental evidence, they argue
that Sr , opt does not vary very much and can be considered a constant
(around 80% typically for clay soils) for a certain field soil type. Hence,
once this relationship (i.e. fγd ) is established through laboratory com-
paction, it is possible to use it for field compaction control. For instance,
if a field measurement is made on (γd,Sr ), it is possible to estimate γd, max
and relative compaction, and compact further to achieve a desired Sr .
Intelligent Compaction (IC) is a more recent and evolving compac-
tion technology which uses modern vibratory rollers equipped with
various sensors, including accelerometers, a highly accurate global
positioning system (GPS), an on-board report system and a feedback
control system. In addition, during the compaction of asphalt materials,
IC rollers are widely equipped with infrared temperature sensors to
monitor the surface temperature of the newly-laid asphalt material. The
J. Kodikara et al.
IC technology was first introduced in the late 1970s in Europe [15].
This technology facilitates the real-time monitoring of material com-
paction with automatic adjustments to the compaction process to meet
the soil stiffness requirements specified by the user. During the com-
paction process, IC rollers continuously generate colour-coded maps
that show the number of roller passes at a particular location, the
roller’s precise location and its speed, and level of compaction. The
material response, level of compaction and applied compaction effort
are monitored with accelerometers mounted to the roller drum. The
main benefits of IC technology include compaction achieved to con-
sistently satisfy a prescribed stiffness criterion, optimised number of
passes, better quality, improved productivity and real-time temperature
mapping. However, the cost of using an IC roller in a project is nearly 3
to 5% higher than the cost of using a conventional roller [53].
Achieving the maximum density of subgrade uniformly is an issue
with the current methods using conventional rollers, but IC technology
attempts to addresses this problem by varying the frequency and am-
plitude of the rollers automatically to optimise the compaction process.
IC rollers report the level of compaction in terms of a pseudo modulus,
which is commonly referred to as IC-estimated modulus. It mainly de-
pends on the applied stress and strain levels, the loading rate, the
moisture content of the material being compacted, and the number of
roller passes [15]. IC technology is still unable to measure directly the
elastic modulus of the compacted soil layer [73]. The elastic modulus
(with units such as MPa) is generally considered a true property of the
compacted material, whereas the stiffness of the compacted material
measured in the field relies on roller parameters, such as the size and
shape of the roller (and may have units such as MPa/m, highlighting
the scale dependency). However, a standard method for the char-
acterisation of the elastic modulus of subgrade materials using IC
technology has not yet been established [53], hindering the full po-
tential application of this technology in construction practice. During
the application of modulus-based compaction control, conventional in
situ measurements, such as nuclear density gauges (NDGs) and plate
load tests, are typically employed to compare the IC-estimated modulus
[15,14]. For instance, Barman et al. [14] studied the applicability of IC
technology for the estimation of the modulus of a stabilised subgrade in
three different case studies. The compaction level of the stabilised
subgrade was monitored in terms of the modulus estimated with an IC
roller and the density measured with an NDG. They found that the
variation in the estimated modulus was in good agreement with the
corresponding variation in the measured density at various locations,
and established a linear correlation between these properties. It is,
however, not clear how the modulus derived from IC compares with the
resilient modulus derived from other methods.
It is argued that the IC technology can be further advanced by
measuring dry density and moisture content, which will also give the
degree of saturation and relative compaction, in addition to the stiffness
currently measured. It is then possible to compact to a suitable field
criterion to satisfy uniformity in compaction and a designated perfor-
mance requirement, such as compacting to Sr , opt as advocated by
Tatsuoka and Gomes Correia [64]. However, this means rollers need to
be equipped with more sensing capability in future and further analy-
tical methods of compacted clay performance need to be developed. A
possible approach for the latter is described later in this paper.
Properties of compacted fills
It is well established that the behaviour of compacted clays can
differ when compacted on the wet or dry side of the LOO. Some of these
characteristics can be summarised as follows:
• Soil stiffness and shear and tensile strengths tend to be higher when
compacted on the dry side of optimum, but many soils tend to peak
at some moisture content drier than optimum, and then even show a
reduction in stiffness or strength with the decrease of moisture
28
Transportation Geotechnics 17 (2018) 24–34
content (c.f. [59]). This is primarily due to the reduction of suction
stress (discussed earlier) with the reduction in moisture content.
• Saturated soil permeability tends to be orders of magnitude higher
when compacted dry of optimum and would normally achieve a
minimum few percentage points wet of optimum. As noted earlier,
this significant change in permeability arises due to the aggregated
structure that develops on the dry side with significant macropores
at a given void ratio [23]. On the basis of a range of test results,
Kodikara and Rahman [44] indicated that the moisture content that
gives minimum hydraulic conductivity is about 0.151 x PI wetter
than the optimum, where PI is the soil plasticity index. This is why
landfill hydraulic clay barriers are normally compacted wet of op-
timum, targeting the lowest permeability achievable for a certain
compaction energy. However, for pavement bases, this requirement
is not normally applicable.
• When the soil is compacted wet of optimum, the likely shrinkage
during initial drying tends to be higher, which can increase the
potential for cracking and the severity of cracking during desicca-
tion [23].
• The soil swelling percentage (or strain given with respect to a soil
volume) tends to be higher when compacted on the dry side of
optimum than on the wet side. Fig. 3 shows variation of swelling
percentage with respect to the original volume at nominal stress
when subjected to initial major wetting. For this soil, it is evident
that the percentage of swelling does not vary very much at the same
as-compacted void ratio for Sr less than 0.62, meaning that the
swelled position on the saturation line (void ratio) would be ap-
proximately the same, as shown by arrow 1. However, as the soil
initial compaction state approaches close to the LOO, the swelled
position (and the amount of swelling given by efinal) drops along the
saturation line (as shown by arrows 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6). Arrow 7 shows
the swelling that can occur when starting from a high density (lower
void ratio) but significantly dry of the LOO. However, it should be
noted that this amount of swelling is for the first swelling, and if
significant wetting/drying takes place, this final saturated position
is considered to move up or efinal may increase further. In general,
the application of wetting-drying cycles to an unsaturated expansive
clay may result in expansion or compression, depending on the
value of confining stress. A discussion of this behaviour may be
found in Alonso et al. [7] and is also described later in this paper.
In general, the volume change behaviour of unsaturated compacted
fill has been extensively researched in the past (e.g.
[24,36,51,21,5,47,60]). In general, in addition to the soil type, the
collapse strain experienced by compacted soils depends on initial
moisture content (or suction), density (or void ratio) and the opera-
tional stress at wetting. Usually, the collapse strain increases to a peak
Fig. 3. Variation in swelling percentage under nominal vertical stress for first
major wetting [based on Holtz and Gibbs [36]].
J. Kodikara et al.
Fig. 4. Schematic representation of progressive moisture variation of subgrade
after compaction.
as the operational stress increases and then decreases. Kodikara [43]
argued that this peak collapse strain coincides with the maximum stress
(or compaction stress in static compaction) to which the soil was sub-
jected to during the compaction process. Furthermore, it was found that
if the soil is initially compacted to wet side of the LOO, then it does not
undergo much collapse strain [5,47]. If the soil is heavily compacted
and wetted at a much lower stress, then the soil may undergo only
swelling strains without any collapse strain at all. Therefore, in a rea-
sonably high fill, where overburden stress could vary over a wide range,
it is possible for the top of the fill to swell and the bottom to undergo
collapse. For more detailed descriptions of compacted soil wetting be-
haviour, readers are referred to above publications.
Typical behaviour of compacted fills
Once a compacted fill or a pavement subgrade/base is compacted,
its moisture condition can change over time. Fig. 4 shows a depiction of
plausible moisture changes within a fill layer during its operation. It is
considered that there exists an equilibrium soil suction that is ther-
modynamically applicable to the layer depending on the surrounding
layers, the watertable (if present in the vicinity) and the atmospheric
interaction of local climate. Past research has developed links between
climate [characterised by the Thornthwaite moisture index (TMI)] and
equilibrium suction (commonly given in pF or log of water head given
in cm) [58]. This approach is relevant when the water table is well
below the ground surface, otherwise its influence may dominate. The
moisture content that the layer will achieve at equilibrium (sometimes
referred to as the equilibrium moisture content) is based on the soil
water retention properties applicable to the soil stress/strain state. Al-
though the target should be to compact soil at the likely equilibrium
moisture content, the initial moisture level can commonly be higher or
lower than the equilibrium moisture content, and the moisture content
will change towards the equilibrium value as shown. The further the
initial moisture content from the equilibrium value, the larger the
variation during moisture equilibration. This variation will give rise to
variations in the soil properties from as-compacted conditions, and
unless the design has taken into account such variations, pavement
performance will differ, accumulating more distress if further wetting is
the direction taken. Over the long term, moisture content may fluctuate
around the equilibrium during seasonal variations if they are sig-
nificant. With pavement seal deterioration (if appropriate maintenance
is not undertaken), equilibrium moisture content can also vary in the
longer term. In addition, extreme events such as flooding or droughts
can also change the long-term moisture content, as schematically
shown in Fig. 4.
29
Transportation Geotechnics 17 (2018) 24–34
Prediction of compacted fill performance
When fills are compacted, either as a subgrade/base of a road pa-
vement or as an embankment, they may be subjected to a range of
environmental and external loads during operations. These include
overburden stress, cyclic loading due to road traffic or static loading
due to buildings, and environmental loadings due to wet/dry cycles.
Some of these will apply in combination and, therefore, hydro-me-
chanical coupling effects need to be modelled in performance predic-
tion. Detailed modelling of these processes is very complicated, re-
quiring sophisticated constitutive models and discretised numerical
schemes, even under monotonic loading conditions. Commonly, the soil
constitutive behaviour is considered under volumetric and shear (de-
viatoric) conditions. While the volumetric behaviour for most saturated
soils is relatively straightforward (the relationship of e−lnσ ' ), for un-
saturated soils, it is complicated, since another variable is involved
(either s or e w ), which can represent a space for behavioural changes
that may include collapse, swelling, shrinkage and cracking in addition
to normal yielding under loading [50,43]. Current constitutive mono-
tonic modelling of external and environmental loads can be explained
by following Houlsby [38], who developed the work input (dW ) into
unsaturated soil, as given in two forms by Eqs. (1) and (2).
s
dW = −σij dεij− de w
(1 + e ) (1)
dW = −(σij + Sr sδij ) dεij−nsdSr (2)
Here, σij represents the net normal and shear stresses and dεij is the
strain tensor. On the basis of Eq. (1), volumetric behaviour is captured
by the mean net stress p (with volumetric strain, de /(1 + e ), as the
conjugate) with suction (more precisely, s /(1 + e ) with de w as the
conjugate). The so-called independent stress variable approach [29]
follows the definition given by Eq. (1), where the net stress and suction
are considered as independent. A partial approach to this conjugacy
was used by Alonso et al. [6], who pioneered the development of the
Barcelona Basic Model (BBM) for unsaturated soils under triaxial con-
ditions, where only the −σij dεij component (Eq. (1)) is used but the
stiffness is considered to be a function of suction, based on constant
suction testing for parameter determination (using e−ln(p) , p mean net
stress at constant s ). The relationship to water content (i.e.e w ) can be
considered using a water retention curve (i.e. a relationship between
e w−s) , although it is not coupled with soil deformation. Kodikara [43]
(under K o conditions) and Abeyrathne [4] (under triaxial conditions)
presented an alternative approach to the use of Eq. (1), where the
−σij dεij component was used but the stiffness was considered to be a
function of e w , based on constant water content testing for parameter
determination (using e−ln(p) , p mean net stress at constant e w ). This
approach identified a direct connection to the compaction curve in
constitutive modelling, and will be illustrated further in the context of
K o or 1-D modelling in a subsequent section of this paper.
Some researchers have followed a modified version of Eq. (2) uti-
lising −(σij + Sr sδij ) dεij as an effective stress by replacing Sr with an
effective stress parameter, referred to as χ (e.g. [49]). In this usage, soil
stiffness is considered to be a function of suction (through suction-
controlled testing) as in BBM, although it is represented with respect to
the effective stress. More recently, effort has been directed to the de-
velopment of coupling of soil deformation to water retention char-
acteristics (referred to as hydro-mechanical coupling) (c.f. [69,71,72]),
which has attempted to utilise Eq. (2) in a complete sense. Note that
due to the presence of a predominantly aggregated structure on the dry
side of the LOO, it may be argued that the independent stress approach
is more applicable to this region, as used in the BBM [6]. In this region,
the effective stress is more applicable to the individual aggregates (for
cohesive soils), as formulated by Alonso et al. [7] particularly for ex-
pansive clay soils, but the interaction between the aggregates was
captured through net stress and suction as independent variables. On
J. Kodikara et al.
the wet side of the LOO, the clay structure is dispersed and less ag-
gregated. Hence, effective stress is considered to be more applicable
and allows natural transition to the saturated state.
As indicated previously, road pavements are subjected to cyclic
loading due to moving traffic in addition to possible cyclic variation of
environmental loading from changing moisture content. Typically,
several approaches are used in the analysis of these loading conditions,
which can be grouped into empirical, mechanistic-empirical and purely
mechanistic models [20]. Empirical models are based on the results of
experiments undertaken on real test pavements. For instance, the
AASHO Road Test for flexible pavements [39] was a series of tests
undertaken in the 1950s in Ottawa, Illinois, US, and comprised re-
peated loading by various vehicle types and weights. The results of
these tests were used to develop various design concepts, such as
equivalent axle, where the pavement damage due to different axle types
and loads is designated by the so-called “4th power law”, which is still
used in empirical pavement design methods. Since the pavement
structure comprises, bitumen, base and subgrade layers, the concept of
a structural number (SN) incorporating the influence of all layers was
devised to capture pavement performance. Later, empirical design
methods evolved to use empirical data on the basis of correlations with
the CBR of the subgrade (or subbase) to determine the thickness of the
layer required to satisfactorily support certain traffic repetitions during
pavement life (for standard equivalent axles). However, a major lim-
itation of the empirical methods is that they mostly reflect the test
conditions under which the original experiments were undertaken, and
extrapolation to other pavement conditions may not be entirely reli-
able.
Mechanistic-empirical design methods are an advance on the purely
empirical approach to consider the stresses and strains experienced by
pavement during traffic loading [1,3], and are the most commonly used
methods in pavement design at the present time. These methods mainly
consider the pavement layers, including the subgrade, to be elastic and
use a pseudo-static approach to analyse the pavement structure under
moving loads. Damage to each layer may be considered separately
using a certain (high-cycle) fatigue failure criterion. For instance, rut-
ting damage to the subgrade layer may be considered by allowable load
cycles (Nall ) , which may be given as k /(ε v )m , where ε v is the vertical
strain on the subgrade, and k and m are empirical constants (e.g. [3]).
Alternatively, the accumulation of plastic displacement or rutting may
be computed with number of load cycles with respect to the vertical
strain ε v on the subgrade, using an empirical power law formula [1].
Typically, resilient moduli are used in the elastic analysis with the as-
sumption that the pavement behaves elastically, implicitly assuming
that the subgrade (and other layers) reaches elastic/plastic shakedown
and rutting damage becomes unacceptable only towards the end of the
pavement design life. Miner’s rule may be used to compute damage
accumulation due to various axle configurations or the traffic spectrum
converted to the standard axles.
Purely mechanistic approaches follow the use of theoretical mod-
elling using classical plasticity approaches to predict pavement layer
performance under cyclic loading. One approach is based on the sha-
kedown concept, where pavement material is considered to behave
linear elastically if the maximum load does not exceed the shakedown
limit. When loaded above the elastic shakedown limit, the material can
undergo plastic deformation but can still shakedown (i.e. plastic sha-
kedown) below a certain load limit. If it is loaded further, the material
can undergo continual accumulation of plastic deformation, eventually
leading to failure. Lower-bound and upper-bound solutions may be
developed to estimate the shakedown limiting loads [52,70]. This ap-
proach does not produce the resulting plastic deformations (or rutting),
and requires that the material does not display hysteresis and there is
no Bauschinger effect [70]. To date, its application has been limited to
relatively simple material models (e.g. without the effect of moisture
content or suction as in the unsaturated soil models described above).
Alternatively, non-linear load-displacement analyses have been
30
Transportation Geotechnics 17 (2018) 24–34
attempted using elasto-plastic constitutive models under repetitive
loading to produce the displacement accumulation with load cycles
(e.g. [8]). However, due to various field complications, such as varia-
tion in moisture content and suction (or pore pressure), hence changes
in yield stresses and yield surfaces, rotation of principle stresses during
traffic loading, temperature variations, and uncertainty of pavement
initial conditions and material properties in most cases, a reliable
purely mechanistic method has not yet been developed for practical
use. Therefore, the development of a rational but field-validated design
method based on a sound theoretical basis remains a major challenge
for the pavement industry. It could be argued that it is necessary to give
priority to the identification of major contributing factors and then
considering them, rather than considering all potentially influencing
factors, to tackle this complex problem for genuine practical advance-
ment.
Despite the incompleteness of theoretical advancements in this area,
laboratory cyclic triaxial [or repeated load triaxial (RLT)] testing is
commonly undertaken to rank/characterise the resilient behaviour of
unbound materials, particularly coarse-grained materials. For instance,
in CEN [19] for unbound mixtures, the test protocol provides provisions
for σ3 and deviatoric stress (σd ) variations, and assessment of both re-
silient modulus and accumulation of plastic deformations. It should be
noted that these element tests and their direct application to field
conditions are not straightforward, but when coupled with stress ana-
lysis of the pavement layer system, significant insights may be gained
into how the material may perform. For field applications for unbound
materials, various empirical formulas have been developed for resilient
modulus (MR ) relating the bulk stress (for confinement) and octahedral
stress (for shear) (c.f. [68]). Similar models have been suggested for
fine-grained materials (c.f. [18]), but the protocols of testing are less
developed, predominantly due to the influence of suction and difficulty
in measuring it during dynamic testing [27].
Interpretation of compacted soil behaviour in e−e w−σnet space
In contrast to saturated soils, unsaturated compacted clayey soils
display complex behavioural characteristics in the volumetric space,
such as change in yield pressure with wetting or drying, swelling and
collapse during wetting, swelling pressure development under con-
strained swelling, and cracking during drying. In addition, soil may
undergo plastic deformation under wet/dry cycles (see Fig. 4), and soil
may eventually reach a condition referred to as an “environmentally
stabilised” state, where soil predominantly behaves in reversible
(elastic) manner. Detailed handling of these behavioural characteristics
in triaxial space has been the focus of the numerical models discussed
earlier. For practical applications, however, a relatively simple ap-
proach under 1-D (or Ko) conditions is attractive, similar to routinely
used 1-D consolidation analysis, thanks to Terzaghi [65]. In this con-
text, the Monash Peradeniya Kodikara (MPK) framework presented by
Kodikara [43] is worth considering, and a brief description of this
framework is presented here to highlight the analysis of two pre-
dominant practical behavioural changes after compaction: (a) major
wetting; (b) environmental stabilisation during wet/dry cycles.
As noted previously, the volumetric space in compacted soils can be
represented using the virgin (or loaded, in other words, including both
elastic and plastic deformations) compaction surface [referred to as the
loading/wetting state boundary surface (LWSBS) by Kodikara [43]].
Fig. 5(a) shows this in the γd−e w−p space and Fig. 5(b) shows this in the
transformed space of e−e w−p, where p is the vertical stress in 1-D
loading. The operational space is bounded by the virgin compaction
surface, saturated plane (e = e w plane), dry soil (e w=0 plane) and tensile
failure surface [not shown, see Kodikara [43]]. Note that the familiar
compaction curve after unloading is a projection on the unloaded plane
given by e−e w−p , where p is 0 or more practically nominal stress, and
the limb on the wet side of LOO will be that applicable to the dashed
line. Constant γ line in Fig. 5(a) represents e w−p relationship at a
J. Kodikara et al. Transportation Geotechnics 17 (2018) 24–34

Fig. 5. (a) Loaded compaction surface; (b) Transformed loaded compaction surface (LWSBS).

constant dry density on the virgin compaction surface. Similar lines are
represented by constant e line on the LWSBS [see Fig. 5(b)].
A practical consideration of compacted soil is the possibility of
significant wetting after compaction, particularly when the soil is
compacted on the dry side of the LOO, as depicted in Fig. 6. Two sce-
narios are considered: (1) partial wetting with swelling and subsequent
loading; (2) wetting to saturation with collapse deformation.
Figs. 6(a) and (b) represent experimentally developed compaction
surface (i.e. the LWSBS) and the experimental result of partial wetting
after compaction for compacted kaolin presented by Islam and Kodikara
[40]. The LWSBS is defined as the compaction surface depicting the
loosest states that the compacted soil can attain under loading or
wetting or a combination of these paths [43]. Islam and Kodikara [40]
developed the LWSBS by combining compaction curves produced at
different net stresses, starting from a nominal stress 7 kPa, which re-
presents the loosest state for the Kaolin soil. The experimental result in
Figs. 6(a) and (b) shown involves the compaction of a soil specimen
with a moisture content of 4.04% (e w = 0.107) to a stress of 1,000 kPa
(position B), unloaded to 20 kPa stress (position C), then wetted to
23.67% (e w = 0.627) moisture content at this stress level (position D),
and finally, compressed to a stress of 2,000 kPa (position F) at that
moisture content. This wetting can be considered as a major wetting
event that occurred during operation. In this instance, the soil swelled
during wetting without any collapse due to the relatively low opera-
tional stress (20 kPa). The gradient of swelling is characterised by the
hydric coefficient α given by (∂e / ∂e w )p = 20kPa , which can be obtained
experimentally under constant stress swelling. It then shows a sub-
sequent loading which can again intercept the LWSBS (at position E),

Fig. 6. (a) & (b) Compaction to 1,000 kPa, unloading to 20 kPa, wetting to e w = 0.627 and subsequent loading to 2,000 kPa at constant water content of a compacted
kaolin sample [40]; (c) & (d) Compaction to 1,000 kPa, unloading to 700 kPa and wetting to almost saturation of a kaolin sample [40].

31
J. Kodikara et al.
where soil can undergo yielding at a lower stress level (500 kPa – half of
1,000 kPa at the time of compaction), possibly leading to extra de-
formation [see Fig. 6(a)]. This situation may be likened to rutting (due
to volumetric deformation) in the pavement, which may occur after the
soil subgrade has been weakened by a significant wetting event or
phase.
Figs. 6(c) and (d) illustrate a scenario where soil is compacted at
15.85% moisture content (e w = 0.42) to 1,000 kPa stress (position B)
and then unloaded to 700 kPa (position C) and subsequently wetted to
32.88% moisture content (e w = 0.868) with almost full saturation.
From position C to position D, the soil swelled, and at position D, it
intercepted the LWSBS and subsequently followed the 700 kPa contour,
initially indicating collapse and, after LOO, some swelling to almost full
saturation. This idealised example may be applicable to an embank-
ment fill that was compacted, had an operational stress of 700 kPa (e.g.
∼35 m of overburden) and then underwent wetting. When the soil is
more reactive (shrinking/swelling), swelling and likely collapse will be
pronounced [40,41]. In addition, another aspect is that given that the
MPK framework reveals a direct connection to the “loaded” compaction
curve, it is possible to gain insights into the likely material behaviour on
the basis of the shape of the “unloaded” or routine compaction curve
(say, undertaken at Proctor energy level). For instance, if the dry of the
optimum limb of the compaction curve is steep, then it is possible to
expect high moisture sensitivity [e.g. reduction in yield stress with
wetting, as can be inferred from the example given in Figs. 6(a) and (b),
and enhanced collapse potential, as can be inferred from Figs. 6(c) and
(d)]. The authors’ experience is that such steep compaction curves can
arise in gap-graded unbound materials with an appreciable percentage
of clay particles.
The above state surface approach addresses loading/unloading/
wetting path combinations. Stress path independency of such paths was
also highlighted by Alonso et al. [5] and Tarantino and Tombolato [61].
However, when drying paths are involved its applicability need to be
further examined.
Environmental stabilisation during wet/dry cycles
Gould et al. [31] proposed that when compacted soils undergo a
number of wet/dry cycles, they reach a structurally stabilised state,
referred to as the “environmentally stabilised state (ESS)”, which ap-
pears to feature a unique path in e−e w plane corresponding to the op-
erational stress. As presented by Kodikara et al. [42], Fig. 7 shows
conceptually the environmental stabilisation of a compacted soil
sample during wet/dry cycles at a certain operational stress p = p0 ,
after compaction of loose soil to a stress pc and then unloaded to an
operational stress of p0 (path shown as: 1 → 2 → 2ꞌ). The state 2ꞌ is
located dry of the Environmentally Stabilised Curve (ESC) at the
Fig. 7. An idealised process of environmental stabilisation of clayey soils
compacted to dry and wet sides of the LOO [42].
32
Transportation Geotechnics 17 (2018) 24–34
operating stress, as shown in Fig. 7. During wetting and drying cycles at
p0 , the soil swells and shrinks (being below the compaction curve at
p = p0 ), densifying the soil (at a particular moisture ratio) and even-
tually reaching the ESC applicable to the operational stress p0 . This
curve can be developed by undertaking wet/dry cycle tests on a com-
pacted soil specimen subjected to an operational stress p0 [see Tripathy
et al. [67]]. During this process, the soil structure undergoes adjust-
ments, primarily the stabilisation of unstable open structural units
generated during the compaction process. If the initial unloaded state at
the operating stress is to the wet side of ESC (as shown by state 8), and
if the soil is dry/wet cycled, it appears to follow a path such as 8 → 9 →
10 → 11 → 12, where at state 12, it reaches the same ESC and follows it
reversibly for subsequent cycles. However, it should be noted that soil
may take many cycles to move to the ESC, and hence under practical
conditions, it may appear to stabilise significantly prior to reaching the
ESC. Nonetheless, the direction of movement is clear: densification and
downward movement for soil compacted dry of the ESC and loosening
or “decompaction” for soils compacted wet of the ESC. It may be con-
sidered that this behaviour is similar to contraction of soils that fall on
the loose side of the critical state line (CSL) and dilation of soils that fall
on the dense side of the CSL in saturated critical state soil mechanics.
However, a difference is that the explained behaviour is in volumetric
space in contrast to shear space for saturated soils. In the latter case,
energy is dissipated through external shear loading, whereas in the
former, energy is dissipated through suction variation, as given by the
sde w /(1 + e ) term in Eq. (1).
On the ESC, the air ratio (as shown by ea = Va/ Vs , the volume of air
divided by the volume of soil) at the operating optimum (marked OO)
signifies the introduction of air free to move into soil as voids and
perhaps as micro-cracks. For heavy clay soils, this air content appears to
remain the same (see Fig. 2), giving a line parallel to the saturated line
during the main swelling/shrinking path of the ESC. Hence, such wet-
ting and drying will cause only swelling and shrinking of aggregates
unhindered by air movement or with no slippage at the aggregate
contacts (i.e. with minimal plastic energy dissipation). For soils with
less reactive mineral content, the ESC may be flatter with air content
increasing in the soil as the soil dries, and vice-versa.
One practical implication of this concept is that depending on the
compacted state and operational stress, soil will change its state, either
densifying (producing settlement) or loosening (referred to as decom-
paction) when subjected to wet/dry cycles. Therefore, in this context,
an ideal position to compact is on the respective ESC not at the op-
timum water content. In addition, when compacted fills have failed to
perform, litigation could arise if subsequent investigations revealed that
the fill density was lower than that specified in the contract documents
[42]. However, the reduction in density (or decompaction) described
above could also occur naturally due to wet/dry cycles. These concepts
still require further experimental validation for a wide range of soils.
Concluding remarks
This paper has presented a brief historical account of soil compac-
tion development with special emphasis on transport geotechnics.
Proctor’s curves and CBR were reviewed and the associated state-of-the-
art of field specifications were discussed. The properties of compacted
soil and the typical behaviour of a compacted fill under in-service
conditions were discussed. It was highlighted that intelligent compac-
tion is being increasingly adopted with a view to increase uniformity in
compaction, lack of which may be a major cause of premature pave-
ment failure. The current state of the ability to predict compacted soil
behaviour was reviewed and limitations were identified. A more recent
development, the interpretation of compacted soil behaviour with a
three-dimensional compacted surface has been highlighted, where one-
dimensional behaviour can be interpreted and used in routine practice.
Nonetheless, more theoretical advances are necessary, particularly in
the area of the response of compacted soils with respect to cyclic
J. Kodikara et al.
loading. Once robust models are developed, it may be possible to make
rollers genuinely intelligent to compact soils to performance specifica-
tions rather than screening for adequacy. In this regard, the ability to
measure and monitor the change in degree of saturation is identified as
a major need.
Appendix A. Supplementary material
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.trgeo.2018.09.006.
References
[1] AASHTO. AASHTO guide for Design of Pavement Structures. Washington, DC, US:
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials; 1993.
[2] Ampadu S. A laboratory investigation into the effect of water content on the CBR of
a subgrade soil. Springer Proc Phys 2007;112(3):137–44.
[3] Austroads. Guide to pavement technology Part 2 - pavement structural design, Pub.
No. AGPT02-17, Sydney, Australia; 2017.
[4] Abeyrathne AP. A new modelling approach for compacted clayey soils using specific
volume as a state variable, PhD Thesis, Monash University, Australia; 2016.
[5] Alonso EE, Gens A, Hight DW. Special problem soils. General report. In: 9th
European conference of soil mechanics and foundation engineering, Dublin; 1987.
p. 1087–146.
[6] Alonso EE, Gens A, Josa A. A constitutive model for partially saturated soils.
Ge’otechnique 1990;40(3):405–30.
[7] Alonso EE, Vaunat J, Gens A. Modelling the mechanical behaviour of expansive
clays. Eng Geol 1999;54:173–83.
[8] Arvin MR, Tamiz M. Elasto-plastic finite element evaluation of flexible pavements
based on shakedown concept. Int J Transportation Eng 2018;5(3):243–60.
[9] AS 1289.5.1.1. Methods of testing soils for engineering purposes - Soil compaction
and density tests - Determination of the dry density/moisture content relation of a
soil using standard compactive effort. Australian Standards, Sydney, Australia;
2017.
[10] AS 1289.6.1.1. Methods of testing soils for engineering purposes - Soil strength and
consolidation tests - Determination of the California Bearing Ratio of a soil -
Standard laboratory method for a remoulded specimen. Australian Standards,
Sydney, Australia; 2014.
[11] ASTM . Standard test methods for laboratory compaction characteristics of soil
using standard effort [12 400 ft-lbf/ft3 (600 kN-m/m3)]. American Society for
Testing and Materials (ASTM), West Conshohocken, PA; 2012.
[12] ASTM . Standard test method for California bearing ratio (CBR) of laboratory-
compacted soils. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), West
Conshohocken, PA; 2002.
[13] Barden L, Slides G. Engineering behaviour and structure of compacted clay. J Soil
Mech Foundation Div, ASCE 1970;96(4):1171–200.
[14] Barman M, Imran SA, Nazari M, Commuri S, Zaman M. Intelligent compaction of
stabilized subgrade of flexible pavement. Proc, IFCEE 2015:2554–66. https://doi.
org/10.1061/9780784479087.237.
[15] Briaud JL, Seo J. Intelligent compaction: overview and research needs. Texas, US:
Texas A&M University; 2003.
[16] BS 1377-4. Methods of test for soils for civil engineering purposes. British Standards
Institution, London: Compaction-related tests; 1990.
[17] BS 1377-9. Methods for test for soils for civil engineering purposes. British
Standards Institution, London: In-situ tests; 1990.
[18] Cary CE, Zapata EC. Resilient modulus for unsaturated unbound materials. Road
Mater Pavement Des 2011;12(13):615–38.
[19] CEN-European Committee for Standardization. Cyclic load triaxial test for unbound
mixtures. Brussels: European Standards, EN; 2004. p. 13286–7.
[20] Christopher BR, Schwartz C, Boudreau R. Geotechnical aspects of pavements,
Publication No. FHWS NHI-05-037, Federal Highway Administration, Washington,
DC; 2006, 592 p.
[21] Cox DW. Volume change of compacted clay fill. Clay fills. London: ICE; 1978. p.
79–86.
[22] Croney D, Croney P. Design and performance of road pavements. New York:
McGraw-Hill; 1997.
[23] Daniel DE. Clay liners. In: Daniel David E, editor. Geotechnical practice for waste
disposal. London, UK: Chapman & Hall; 1993. p. 137–63.
[24] De Bruijn CA, Collins LE, Williams AAB. The specific surface, water affinity and
potential expansiveness of clay. Clay Miner Bull 1956;3(17):120–8.
[25] Department of transporation and main roads. Transport and main roads specifica-
tions - technical specification. Queensland Government; 2017.
[26] Ebels LJ, Lorio R, van der Merwe C. The importance of compaction from an his-
torical perspective. In: Proceedings of the 23rd southern African transport con-
ference (SATC 2004). Pretoria, South Africa; 2004.
[27] Erlingsson S, Rahman S, Salour F. Characteric of unbound granular materials and
subgrade based on multi stage RLT testing. Transp Geotech 2017;13:28–42.
[28] Forster W, Sarvins J, Waite J. Lattice expansion and rehelogical behavior re-
lationships in water-montmorillonite systems. Clays Clay Miner 1955;395:296–316.
[29] Fredlund DG, Morgenstern NR. Constitutive relations for volume change in un-
saturated soils. Can Geotech J 1976;13(3):261–76.
[30] Gilbert OH. The influence of negative pore water pressures on the strength of
33
Transportation Geotechnics 17 (2018) 24–34
compacted clays, Master’s thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; 1959.
[31] Gould SJF, Kodikara J, Rajeev P, Zhao X-L, Burn S. A void ratio – water content –
net stress model for environmentally stabilized expansive soils. Can Geotech J
2011;48(6):867–77. https://doi.org/10.1139/t10-108.
[32] Hilf J. An investigation of pore pressures in compacted soils, U.S. Dept. of Interior
Bureau of Reclamation, Tech. Mem.; 1956, 654.
[33] Hilf J. Foundation engineering handbook, chapter compacted fill. London, UK:
Chapman & Hall Ltd.; 1975. p. 249–316.
[34] Hillard P. Western freeway – melton bypass section, lime stabilisation of the clay
subgrade. Road Construction Authority, Victoria, Materials Division Report No.
18X429; 1981.
[35] Hogentogler C. Essentials of soil compaction. Proc Highway Res Board
1936:309–16.
[36] Holtz WG, Gibbs HJ. Engineering properties of expansive clays: Transactions. ASCE
1956;121:641–77.
[37] Horn HM. An investigation of the frictional characteristics of minerals PhD Thesis
US: University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois; 1960.
[38] Houlsby GT. The work input to an unsaturated granular material. Géotechnique
1997;47(1):193–6. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1997.47.1.193.
[39] Hudson WR, Monismith CL, Shook JF, Finn FN, Skok Jr., EL, 2006. What did we
learn from AASHO road test results and how did it influence design practice? In:
Presented at 85th annual meeting of the transportation research board, Washington,
DC, US.
[40] Islam T, Kodikara J. Interpretation of the loading/wetting behaviour of compacted
soils within the MPK framework: Part I Static compaction. Can Geotech J
2016;53(5):283–805.
[41] Kodikara J, Islam T, Rajeev P. Interpretation of the loading/wetting behaviour of
compacted soils within the MPK framework: Part II dynamic compaction. Can
Geotech J 2016;53(5):806–27.
[42] Kodikara J, Islam T, Wijesooriya S, Bui H, Burman BC. On controlling influence of
the line of optimums on the compacted clayey soil behaviour, unsaturated soils:
research and applications. In: Khalili N, Russell AR, Khoshghalb A, editors.
Proceedings of the sixth international conference on unsaturated soils, UNSAT2014,
Sydney, Australia; 2014. p. 219–25.
[43] Kodikara JK. New framework for volumetric constitutive behaviour of compacted
unsaturated soils. Can Geotech J 2012;49:1227–43.
[44] Kodikara J, Rahman F. Moisture content and hydraulic conductivity relations for
compacted clay. Civil Eng Trans, IEAUST 2002;CE43:13–8.
[45] Lambe TW. The structure of compacted clay. J Soil Mech Foundation Div, ASCE
1958;84:1–34.
[46] Langfelder L, Chen C, Justice J. Air permeability of compacted cohesive soils. J Soil
Mech Foundations Div 1968;94(4):981–1002.
[47] Lawton EC, Fragaszy RJ, Hardcastle JH. Collapse of compacted clayey sand. Of
Geotechnical Eng. 1989;115(9):1252–67.
[48] Li H. The family of compaction curves for fine-grained soils and their engineering
behaviors. PhD Thesis. Dept. of Civil and Environmental Eng., University of Alberta,
Edmonton, Alberta; 2001.
[49] Loret B, Khalili N. An effective stress elasto-plastic model for unsaturated soils.
Mech Mater 2002;44:97–116.
[50] Matyas EL, Radhakrishna HS. Volume change characteristics of partially saturated
soils. Ge’otechnique 1968;18(4):432–48.
[51] McDowell C. The relation of laboratory testing to design for pavements and struc-
tures on expansive soils. Q J Colorado School Mines 1959;54(4):122.
[52] Melan E. Zur plastizitat des raumlichen kontinuums. Arch Appl Mech 1938;9(2).
1144-1126.
[53] Nieves A. Intelligent compaction: executive summary, FHWA-HIF-13-051, U.S.
Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration; 2013.
[54] Olson RE. Effective stress theory of soil compaction. J Soil Mech Foundation Div,
ASCE 1963;89(SM2):27–45.
[55] Proctor R. Fundamental principles of soil compaction. Eng News Record
1933;111(9):245–8.
[56] Purwana YM, Nikraz H. The correlation between the CBR and shear strength in
unsaturated soil conditions. Int J Transportation Eng 2014;1(3).
[57] Rowland R, Weiss E, Bradley W. Dehydration of monoionic montmorillonite. Clays
Clay Miner 1955;4(1):85–95.
[58] Russam K, Coleman JD. The effect of climatic factors on subgrade moisture con-
ditions. Ge’otechnique 1961;11(1):22–8.
[59] Seed HB, Mitchell JK, Chan CK. The strength of compacted cohesive soils. In: Proc.
of conference on shear strength of cohesive soils, ASCE; 1960. p. 877–963.
[60] Suriol J, Gens A, Alonso EE. Volumetric behaviour of a compacted soil upon wet-
ting. In: Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. Unsat. Soils. Recife. Brasil, vol. 2; 2002. p. 619–623.
[61] Tarantino A, Tombolato S. Coupling of hydraulic and mechanical behaviour in
unsaturated compacted clay. Geotechnique 2005;55(4):307–17.
[62] Tatsuoka F. Compaction characteristics and physical properties of compacted soil
controlled by the degree of saturation. In: Keynote lecture, deformation char-
acteristics of geomaterials, Proc. of the 6th international conference on deformation
characteristics of geomaterials, Buenos Aires; 2015. p. 40–78.
[63] Tatsuoka F, Gomes Correia A. Importance of controlling the degree of saturation in
soil compaction. Procedia Eng 2016;143:556–65.
[64] Tatsuoka F, Gomes Correia A. Importance of controlling the degree of saturation in
soil compaction linked to soil structure design. Transp Geotech 2018. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.trgeo.2018.06.004.
[65] Terzaghi K. Theoretical soil mechanics. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1943. p. 510.
[66] Toll D. California bearing ratio tests on a lateritic gravel from Kenya. Transp
Geotech 2015;5:59–67.
[67] Tripathy S, Rao KSS, Fredlund DG. Water content – void ratio swell-shrink paths of
J. Kodikara et al.
compacted expansive soils. Can Geotech J 2002;39(4):938–59.
[68] Uzan J. Characterisation of granular material, Transport Research Record 1022.
Washington DC, US: Transportation Research Board; 1985. p. 52–9.
[69] Wheeler SJ, Sharma RS, Buisson MSR. Coupling of hydraulic hysteresis and stress-
strain behaviour in unsaturated soils. Ge’otechnique 2003;53(1):41–54.
[70] Yu H-S. Plasticity and geotechnics, advances mechanics and mathematics. N.Y:
Springer-Verlag; 2006.
[71] Zhou AN, Sheng D, Sloan SW, Gens A. Interpretation of unsaturated soil behaviour
in the stress-saturation space I: Volume change and water retention behaviour.
34
Transportation Geotechnics 17 (2018) 24–34
Comput Geotech 2012;43:178–87.
[72] Zhou AN, Sheng D, Sloan SW, Gens A. Interpretation of unsaturated soil behaviour
in the stress-saturation space II: Constitutive relationships and validations. Comput
Geotech 2012;43:111–23.
[73] Zhu X, Bai S, Xue G, Yang J, Cai Y, Hu W, et al. Assessment of compaction quality of
multi-layer pavement structure based on intelligent compaction technology. Constr
Build Mater 2018;161:316–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.11.
139.