Indian Geotechnical Conference 2017 GeoNEst

14-16 December 2017, IIT Guwahati, India

Index Properties and Compaction Characteristics of Soils

H S Prasanna
Anil M G
Praveen
Harshitha D
Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Engineering, Mysuru - 570008
E-mail: prasanna@nie.ac.in, anilmgmg52@gmail.com, psingade1994@gmail.com, harshithadgowda333@gmail.com

ABSTRACT: Field compaction of soils involves different equipment’s with the compaction energy varying significantly.
Hence, maximum dry density (MDD) and optimum moisture content (OMC) need to be obtained at different compaction
energies assume a great importance from the viewpoint of practical significance. In this study, six field soils were selected
from various locations in Mysuru district, Karnataka. Selected soils were sieved through 4.75mm sieve to have coarse-
grained fraction named as Group-1 soils. The field soils were also sieved through 425μm sieve to have fine-grained
fraction named as Group-2 soils. Index property and compaction characteristics at various energy levels, tests were carried
out on the soils as per BIS specifications. An attempt has been made to establish the correlation between MDD and OMC
obtained from different compaction energy levels for Group-1 and 2 soils. MLRA equations were developed to predict
the compaction characteristics of soils belonging to Group-1 without considering plastic limit. It is also observed that, the
compaction characteristics of Group-2 soils can be effectively correlated for all energy levels with plastic limit in relative
comparison to liquid limit. A method has also been proposed to correlate MDD and OMC for Group-2 soils with Group-
1 soils, which saves material, time and money.
Keywords: Compaction characteristics; Compaction Energy Levels; Index properties; Multiple Linear Regression Analysis (MLRA);
Simple Linear Regression Analysis (SLRA).
1. Introduction 2. Literature review
Compaction of soil is a process of application of Many theories exist in the geotechnical engineering
mechanical energy for its densification by removal of air literature to explain the compaction process such as
voids and rearranging the particles. So modification of soil lubrication theory Proctor (1933), viscous water theory
is a vital process for improving its engineering properties Hogentogler (1936), Capillary theory Hilf (1956),
and it is essential in many applications such as highway, physico-chemical theory Lambe (1960), effective stress
subgrades, airfield pavements and for earth and earth theory Olson (1963), cluster characteristics theory Barden
retaining structures. and Sides (1970) and soil aggregate theory Hodek and
Lovell (1979). Hilf (1986) opined that these theories must
The compaction of coarse grained soils is purely a physical
be considered tentative as they were based almost entirely
problem, the behavior of compacted fine-grained soils is
on the state of knowledge at the time of their proposition.
expected to be physio-chemical in nature by virtue of the
No single theory can satisfactorily explain the compaction
clay mineralogical composition of such soils. Field
process, which is quite complex involving capillary
compaction of soils usually involves different equipment
pressure, pore air pressure, pore water pressure, osmotic
with compaction energy varying significantly. Hence the
pressure, hysteresis, permeability, soil surface
compaction characteristics need to be obtained at different
characteristics, concept of effective stress, shear strength
compaction energies. Knowledge of compaction behavior
and compressibility. The problem becomes much more
and its characteristics of soils at different compaction
complicated by the fact that the fine-grained soils are
energy levels assumes great importance from the
composed of different clay minerals in different
viewpoint of practical significance. Prior to the field
proportions, whose response to external input may be quite
compaction, the determination of compaction
different from one another. Sridharan & H.B.Nagaraj
characteristics namely, OMC and MDD is necessary. For
(2000) concluded that the shrinkage index (liquid limit-
preliminary assessment of the soil characteristics,
shrinkage limit) correlates better with the compaction
predictive equations can be useful, especially when index
characteristics than plasticity index or the liquid limit of
properties are already known. Several relationships were
soils. Gurtug & Sridharan (2004) gave correlations for the
developed to relate OMC and MDD found in the literature
plastic limit and the different methods of Proctor tests. The
for the Standard Proctor compaction test based on some
study of Sridharan & H.B.Nagaraj (2005) shows that liquid
selected index properties such as liquid limit (LL), plastic
limit or plasticity index don't correlate well with the
limit (PL) and specific gravity (Gs). Therefore, there is a
compaction characteristics. Further, correlation of index
need of correlating the compaction characteristics with
properties with compaction characteristics of coarse-
index properties as they are easy to determine. The present
grained and fine-grained fraction of soils for varying
study examines the compaction characteristics of coarse-
energy levels is very scanty.
grained fraction (Group-1 soils) and fine-grained fraction
(Group-2 soils). Equations were developed to predict the 3. Materials
compaction characteristics (OMC and MDD) for the For the present experimental study, six field soils were
different compaction energies as a function of index selected from Mysore District, Karnataka based on their
properties. index properties.

1
Index Properties and Compaction Characteristics of Soils

4. Methodology Dry unit weight for different compaction energy levels

Group 1 soils were sieved through 4.75mm sieves to have for soils is predicted using equation (1), with liquid limit.
sand, silt and clay-fraction. Soils procured from source γd (LL) = (Gs γw)/(1+(LL)×Gs ) (1)
were also sieved through 425μm sieves to have fine-sand,
silt and clay-fraction and named as Group 2 soils. For both
Group 1 and 2 soils, compaction tests were carried out for
varying energy levels like Reduced Standard Proctor
(RSP), Standard Proctor (SP), Reduced Modified Proctor
(RMP) and Modified Proctor (MP) and minimum of six
trials were done with varying initial water content to get
the compaction curve. In order to understand the soil
characteristics, the physical tests were conducted on the
soil samples as per Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS)
specifications.
5. Results and discussions
Fig 1 Variation of OMC with Liquid Limit of soils
Table-1 Index Properties of soils passing 4.75mm for varying energy levels
Sl. G LL PL SL Gravel Sand M+C
No. (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

1 2.61 37 18 13 6 67 27

2 2.74 55 20 15 3 66 31

3 2.68 27 16 15 14 62 24

4 2.7 26 22 18 14 62 24

5 2.65 32 21 17 20 62 18

6 2.67 26 18 17 20 58 22
Fig 2 Variation of OMC with Liquid Limit of soils
passing 425μm for different compaction energy levels
Obtained equations with the correlation coefficients and
standard errors of estimate from the MLRA for different
compaction energy are presented in Table 3.
Table 3 Correlation equations and standard errors for
different compaction energy (CE) levels
Sl. CE Correlation Equations R SE
No. (%)

1 RSP OMC = - 2.451G - 0.167S + 1 ± 0.94

0.219F + 1.460LL - 1.520PI

2 SP OMC = - 1.845G - 0.080S + 1 ± 0.17

0.112F + 1.201LL - 1.300PI
OMC = 1.087G - 0.365S +
3 RMP
0.351F + 1.265LL - 1.314PI
Fig 3 Variation of MDD with MDD at Liquid Limit of
soils passing 4.75mm for varying energy levels
0.99 ±1

4 MP OMC = 0.478G - 0.270S + 1 ± 0.55

0.211F + 1.254LL - 1.266PI

5 RSP MDD = 8.090G + 0.149S - 1 ± 0.29

0.126F - 0.571LL + 0.584PI

6 SP MDD = 6.198G + 0.199S - 1 ± 0.03

0.055F - 0.491LL + 0.461PI

7 RMP MDD = 5.707G + 0.230S - 1 ± 0.05

0.058F - 0.469LL + 0.421PI
8 MP MDD = 8.090G + 0.149S -
0.126F - 0.571LL + 0.584PI
Fig 4 Variation of MDD with MDD at Liquid Limit of
1 ± 0.38 soils passing 425μm for different compaction energy
levels

2

From figures 1 to 4 it can be observed that, no definite
relationship exists between liquid limit with MDD and
OMC of soils belonging to Group 1 and 2.
Further, single parameter namely liquid limit cannot
explain the compaction characteristics of soils belonging
to group 1 and 2 with varying energy levels. Dry unit
weight for different compaction energy levels for soils is
predicted using equation 2 by considering plastic limit
as water content (assuming the soil to be saturated at
plastic limit).
γd (PL) = (Gs γw)/(1+(PL)×Gs ) (2)
Fig 5 Variation of MDD at Plastic Limit of soils
belonging to Group 1 for different compaction energy
levels.
It can be observed that there is a good correlation
between γdmax and γd(PL) with correlation coefficient 1 in
relative comparison to relationship between compaction
characteristics with liquid limit as the water content.
Thus one can write,
γdmax = K1× γd (PL) (3)
As compactive energy increases, K1 varies from 0.991
to 1.123
Fig 6 Variation of OMC with Plastic Limit of soils
belonging to Group 1 for different compaction energy
levels.
From Fig 6 it can be observed that OMC can be
correlated well with PL with a correlation coefficient
ranging from 0.992 to 0.996 for varying energy levels.
Thus one can easily predict the OMC of soils for varying
energy levels, by using equation 4.
Hence, OMC can be written as;
OMC = K2 * PL (4)
3
Indian Geotechnical Conference 2017 - GeoNEst
14-16 December 2017, IIT Guwahati, India
K2 is a coefficient depending upon the energy level. K2
varies from 0.8101 to 0.6348. The variation in K2 is
quite significant showing that OMC is affected
significantly with change in the energy levels.
It was observed that, very good correlation exists
between K1 and K2 with compaction energy levels with
correlation coefficient 0.975 for K1 and 0.983 for K2.
K1 and K2 for different compaction energy levels is
calculated by using the equation 5 and 6 as given below:
K1 = 0.0608×ln (CE) + 0.6352 R = 0.975 (5)
K2 = -0.079×ln (CE) + 1.2702 R = 0.984 (6)
From the analysis it is clearly observed that, the
maximum standard error between the laboratory values
of OMC, MDD and predicted values of OMC, MDD
using plastic limit criteria from equation 3 and 4 is
±1.67%.
Fig 7 Variation of OMC obtained from the different
compaction energy levels with values estimated from
equation number 1 to 4
Fig 8 Variation of MDD obtained from the different
compaction energy levels with values estimated from
equation number 5 to 8
The analysis of the results showed that, the equations
including the input data of all the index properties
without plastic limit are observed to give the best OMC
and MDD results for coarse-grained fraction with R
value ranging from 0.999 to 1 and maximum standard
error ±1%.
Index Properties and Compaction Characteristics of Soils
Fig 9 Variation of MDD of soils belonging to Group 2
with predicted values of MDD of Group 1 soils for
different compaction energy levels.
It is seen that there is a good correlation between γd(425μm
L) and γd(4.75mm P) with correlation coefficient 1.
γd(425μm L)= K3 × γd (4.75mm P) (7)
As compactive energy increases, K3 varies from 0.917
to 0.9693.
Fig 11 Variation of OMC of soils belonging to Group 2
with predicted values of OMC of Group 1 soils for
different compaction energy levels.
It is seen that, there is a good correlation between
OMC(425μm L) and OMC(4.75mm P) with correlation
coefficient ranging from 0.952 to 0.957. Thus written as,
OMC(425μm L) = K4 × OMC(4.75mm P) (8)
As compactive energy increases, K4 varies from 1.184
to 1.122. A good correlation with correlation coefficient
0.875 for K3 and 0.863 for K4 was observed. K3 and K4
for different compaction energy levels are calculated by
using the equation 9 and 10 as given below:
K3 = 0.0202×ln (CE) + 0.8052 R = 0.87 (9)
K4 =-0.024×ln (CE) +1.3241 R = 0.863 (10)
From the analysis it is clearly observed that, the
maximum standard error between the laboratory values
of OMC, MDD and predicted values of OMC, MDD
from equation 7 and 8 is ranging from ±0.8%. It can be
observed that, the range of error between the predicted
and observed values of compaction characteristics of
soils having coarse-grained fraction and fine-grained
fraction with index property lies within the reasonable
limit. Hence, SLRA equations given by the authors can
be used for predicting OMC and MDD of soils for
varying energy levels with a fair degree of accuracy.
This highlights that for soils belonging to Group 1 and
2, single parameter plastic limit is more reliable in
predicting the compaction characteristics in relative
comparison to liquid limit for different energy levels.
6. Conclusions
1. No definite relationship exists between LL and MDD,
OMC of soils for different compaction energy levels.
2. The equations developed to predict OMC and MDD for
varying energy levels of coarse-grained fraction (Group-1
soils) can be effectively used for preliminary designs.
3. PL of soils can be better correlated with MDD and OMC
of soils for different compaction energy levels.
4. MDD and OMC for fine-grained fraction (Group-2
soils) can be effectively correlated with MDD and OMC
of coarse-grained fraction (Group-1 soils) with a fair
degree of accuracy.
References
Barden, L. and Sides, G.R. (1970) Engineering behaviour
and structure of compacted clay, Journal of Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engg. Division, ASCE,
94(4), pp. 1171-1200.
Hilf, J.W. (1956) An investigation of pore water pressure
in compacted cohesive soils, Technical Memorandum
654, US Department of Interior Bureau of reclamation,
Denver, Colorodo.
Hodek, R.J. and Lovell, C.W. (1979) Soil aggregates and
their influence on compaction and swelling,
Transportation research record, No. 733, pp. 94-99.
Hogentogler, C.A. (1936) Essentials of soil compaction,
Proceedings of Highway Research Board, NRC,
Washington DC, pp. 309-316.
Lambe, T.W. (1960) Structure of compacted clay,
Transactions, ASCE, Vol. 125, pp. 682-705.
Olson, R.E. (1963) Effective stress theory of soil
compaction, Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 89, pp. 27-45.
Proctor, R.R. (1933) Fundamental principles of soil
compaction, Engineering News Record, 111(9), pp 12-
13.
Sridharan A and Nagaraj H. B. (2000) Compressibility
behavior of remolded, fine grained soils & correlation
with index properties. Canadian Geotechnical Journal,
37(3).
Sridharan A and Nagaraj H.B. (2005) Plastic limit and
compaction characteristics of fine grained soils Ground
Improvement, 9, No. 1, 17–22.
Yesim Gurtug and Shridharan A. (2004) Compaction
behavior and prediction of its characteristics of fine
grained soil with particular reference to compaction
energy. Japanese Geotechnical Society, 44(5), pp. 27-36.