C

E
Compaction C
E
3 ¾ Soil is used as a basic material for construction 3
5 5
3 ¾ Retaining walls, 3

Soil Compaction Theory ¾ Highways, Embankments, Ramps

D D
r r
. .
Chapter 4 T ¾ Airports, T
A A
L L
DR. TALAT BADER A
T
¾ Dams, Dikes, etc. A
T
¾ The advantages of using soil are:

B 1. Is generally available everywhere B

A
D 2. Is durable - it will last for a long time A
D
E
R 3. Has a comparatively low cost E
R

C What is Compaction C

What is Compaction?
E E
3 3
5 5
3 What do you think 3

• In most instances in civil engineering about this live

and/or construction practice, whenever D compaction D

machine
r r
soils are imported or excavated and re- . .

applied, they are compacted.

T T
A
Heavy Weight A
L L
A • When loose soils are applied to a construction A

• The terms compaction and consolidation

T T
site, compressive mechanical energy is applied
may sound as though they describe the to the soil using special equipment to densify
the soil (or reduce the void ratio).
same thing, but in reality they do not. B
A
B
A
D
• Typically applies to soils that are being applied D
E or re-applied to a site. E
R R

What is Consolidation C C

Compaction - Consolidation
E E
3 3
• When a Static loads are applied to saturated 5 5
3 3
soils, and over a period of time the increased
stresses are transferred to the soil skeleton, • Compaction means • Consolidation
leading to a reduction in void ratio. D the removal of means the removal D
r
. air-filled porosity. of water-filled r
.
T porosity. T
• Depending on the permeability of the soil and A
L
A
L
the magnitude of the drainage distance, this A A
can be a very time-consuming process. T T

• Typically applies to existing, undisturbed soil B

deposits that has appreciable amount of clay.
A
B
A
D D
E E
R R

1
 C C

Principles of Compaction The Goal of Compaction

E E
3 3
5 5
3 3

Compaction of soils is achieved by reducing • Reduce air-void volume Va in

Phase Diagram soils as much as is possible.
the volume of voids. It is assumed that the D D
r r
compaction process does not decrease the .
vA Air
• For a given water content w, .
the max. degree of compaction
wA
volume of the solids or soil grains· T
A
T
A
L Water that can be achieved is when all L
vT vW wW
A of the air voids have been A
T T
removed, that is (S=1).
Solids
– Since S = wGs/e, the
vS wS

B corresponding void ratio B

A A
D – (for S=1) will be: e = wGs D
uncompacted compacted uncompacted compacted E E
R R

Principles of Compaction
‰The degree of compaction of a soil is
C C
E
3 Typical Calculation (γd) E
3
5 5
3 3

measured by the dry unit weight of • block diagram shown

the skeleton. D
Phase Diagram • Total Mass M = Mw + Ms
D
r • Total Volume V = Vw + Vs r
‰The dry unit weight correlates with the .
T
vA Air wA • Void ratio e = Vv / Vs .
T
degree of packing of the soil grains. A • Water content w = Mw / Ms A
L vT vW
Water wW • Saturation S = Vw / V v L
Recall that γd= Gsγw/(1+e) · A
T • Moist unit weight
A
T

‰The more compacted a soil is: Solids – γ = (M w + Ms) / V

vS wS
– = (w + 1) Ms / V = (1+w) γd
9the smaller its void ratio (e) will be. B
A
– γd = γ / (1+w) = B
A
D – γd = Gsgw/(1+e) D
9the higher its dry unit weight (γd) will be E BACK E
R R

What Does Compaction Do? C

E Various Types of compaction C
E
¾1) Increased Shear Strength 3 3

¾This means that larger loads can be

5
3 test 5
3
applied to compacted soils since they
are typically stronger. Hammer No of Blows per
¾2) Reduced Permeability D
r
Type of Test Mould
mass (kg)
Drop (mm)
layers layer
D
r
. .
¾This inhibits soils’ ability to absorb T BS “Light”
One Liter 2.5 300 3 27
T
water, and therefore reduces the A
CBR 2.5 300 3 62
A
tendency to expand/shrink and L
ASTM (5.5lb)
4 in 2.49 305 3 25 L
A A
potentially liquefy T
6 in 2.49 305 3 56
T
¾3) Reduced Compressibility
One Liter 4.5 450 5 27
BS “Heavy”
CBR 4.5 450 5 62
¾This also means that larger loads can be ASTM (10lb)
4 in 4.54 457 5 25

applied to compacted soils since they B

A
6 in 4.54 457 5 56 B
A
will produce smaller settlements. D
BS Vibration
hammer
CBR 32 to 41 Vibration 3 1 minute D
¾4) Control Swelling & Shrinking E
R
E
R
¾5) Reduce Liquefaction Potential

2
(Holtz and Kovacs, 1981; Head, 1992)

General Compaction Methods C

E
3
The Standard Proctor Test C
E
3
Coarse-grained soils Fine-grained soils 5
3
5
3

• R.R. Proctor in the early

Laboratory

•Falling weight and hammers

D 1930’s was building dams D
for the old Bureau of
•Vibrating hammer (BS) •Kneading compactors r r
. .
Waterworks and Supply
•Static loading and press
T T
A A
•Hand-operated vibration plates L in Los Angeles, and he L
A A
•Motorized vibratory rollers •Hand-operated T developed the principles T
tampers of compaction in a series
Field

•Rubber-tired equipment
•Free-falling weight; dynamic
•Sheepsfoot rollers of articles in Engineering
B B
compaction (low frequency •Rubber-tired rollers A News-Record. A
vibration, 4~10 Hz) D D
E E
R R
Vibration Kneading

C The Standard Proctor Test C

Variables of Compaction Equipments

E E
3 3
5 5
3 3

Proctor established that compaction is a

function of four variables: D
r
D
r
. .
• Dry density (ρd) or dry unit weight γd. T Hammer T
A Weight A
• Water content w L
A
5.5 lb L
A

• Compactive effort (energy E) T

Drop Height
T

h=12”
• Soil type (gradation, presence of clay B B
minerals, etc.) A
D
A
D
E soil Volume 1/30 ft3 or 944 cm3 E
R Diameter 4 in or 10.16 cm R
Height 4.584 in or11.643cm

Equipments Needed C Standard Proctor Test C

For Compaction
E E
3 3
5
o The soil is mixed with varying amounts 5
3 of water to achieve different water 3
contents.
ASTM D-698 / D-1557 AASHTO T-99 / T-180 o For each water content,the soil is
For determining moisture - dnesity relationship. D compacted by dropping a hammer 25 D
times onto the confined soil
Machined steel, galvanized, 4" i.d.,
SO-351 Standard Proctor Mold
4.584" height, 2" height of collar
1 Pc r r
Machined steel, galvanized, 6" i.d., . .
o The soil is in mold will be divided into
SO-352 Standard Proctor Mold 1 Pc
T T
4.584" height, 2" height of collar
Standard Proctor Machined steel, galvanized, 2" i.d.,
A A
three lifts
SO-353 1 Pc
Hammer 12" drop height, 5,5 lbs weight

SO-354
Standard Proctor Machined steel, galvanized, 2" i.d.,
1 Pc L L
A o Each Lift is compacted 25 times A
Hammer 18" drop height, 10 lbs weight
SO-355 Extruder Steel frame, hydraulic jack 1 Set
T T
o This is don 4-6 times from dry-wet
GE-303 Square Pan Galvanized steel, l 65 x 65 x 7.5 cm 1 Pc
GE-390 Thin Box Alumunium, 60 gr capacity 12 Pcs
GE-405A Graduated Cylinder Plastic, 1.000 ml capacity 1 Pc
GE-801 Scoop Cast Alumunium 1 Pc
GE-871 Trowel Pointed type 1 Pc
GE-890 Straight Edge 30 cm length 1 Pc
B B
GE-900 Rubber Mallet Wooden handle 1 Pc
GE-920 Steel Wiire Brush Wooden handle 1 Pc A A
D Layer or lift # 3 D
E soil Layer or lift # 2 E
R Layer or lift # 1 R
25 Blows/Layer

3
 C Results from Standard C

Standard Energy Proctor Test

E E
3 3
5 5
3 3
Maximum dry
• Optionally, the unconfined
• Compactive (E) applied to soil per unit unit weight compressive strength of

Dry Density (γd)

volume: D
r
– the soil is also measured D
r
. – .
T A sample T
(# blows/layer) * (# of layers)* (hammer weight) * (height of drop) A – – from the
mold
A
E= L L
Volume of mold A A
T – T

(25blows/l ayer) * (3 of layers) * (5.5 lbs) * (1.0 ft)

ESP = = 12,375 ft − lb / ft 3
(1/30)ft 3
B B
A A
D Optimum water content D
E E
R Water Content (w) R

Dry Unit Weight C

E Water Role in C
E
3 3

• The compacted soil is removed from the mold and its

5
3 Compaction Process 5
3

dry density (or dry unit weight) is measured.

¾ Water lubricates the soil grains so that
γ Mg D
they slide more easily over each other D

γ d =
m
Where γm = r
. and can thus achieve a more densely
r
.

1 + ω V packed arrangement.
T T
A A
L L
γ d • =Dry Unit weight A A

m γ • =Bulk Density
T
– A little bit of water facilitates T

ω • =Water Content
compaction
B B
V • =Total Soil Volume A A
D – too much water inhibits compaction. D
M • =Total Wet Soil Mass E E
R R
g • =Gravitational Acceleration

Dry Unit Weight C

E
Modified Proctor Test C
E
3 3

as
5
3 ƒ Was developed during World War II 5
3

2.0
Co
mp
ac
ƒ By the U.S. Army Corps of
te
ity

d Density when compacted Engineering

(Mg/m3)

ns

1.9 Increase of D D
Dry + mass of water added
ƒ For a better representation of the
De

Density due r r
3

1.8
to compaction
. .
T
compaction required for airfield to T
1.7

A A
Increase of density due
support heavy aircraft.
1.6
L L
Density

1.5 to mass of water added A A

T T
1.4

1.3 Density when compacted dry

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
B B
A A
Water content w (%) D D
E E
R R

4
 Modified Proctor Test C Effect of Energy on Compaction C

E2 > E1
E E
3 3
ƒ Same as the Standard Proctor Test 5 5

with the following exceptions: 3 3

¾ The soil is compacted in five layers

D D
r Modified E=E2 r

Dry Density (γd)

¾ Hammer weight is 10 Lbs or 4.54 Kg . .
T T
¾ Drop height h is 18 inches or 45.72cm A A
L L
¾ Then the amount of Energy is calculated A
T
A
T
¾ Remember Standard Proctor Energy ESP = 12,375 ft − lb / ft 3
Standard E=E1
(25blows/layer) * (5 of layers) * (10 lbs) * (1.5 ft) B B
E MP =
# 5
(1/30)ft 3 A A
# 4
D D
soil # 3 E MP = 56,250 ft − lb / ft 3
E E
# 2

# 1 E MP 56 , 250 ft − lb / ft 3 R Water Content (w) R

= = 4 . 55
E SP 12 , 375 ft − lb / ft 3

Comparison-Summary C
E
Common Compaction Curves C
E

Standard Proctor Test Modified Proctor Test

3
5 Encountered in Practice 3
5
3 3

• Mold size: 1/30 ft3 • Mold size: 1/30 ft3

Dry unit weight γd

One & one-half peaks

• 12 in height of drop • 18 in height of drop D Bell-shaped D
• 5.5 lb hammer • 10 lb hammer r r
. .
• 3 layers • 5 layers T T
• 25 blows/layer • 25 blows/layer A A
L L
• Energy 12,375 ft·lb/ft3 • Energy 56,250 ft·lb/ft3 A A
T T
Double-peaked
Dry Density (γd)

Modified E=E2 Odd-shaped

B B
A A
Standard E=E1
D D
E E

Water Content (w)

R
Water content (w) R

Holtz and Kovacs, 1981

Zero-Air-Void C
E
Zero-Air-Void C
E
Degree of Saturation ZAV:The curve represents 3
5 The Equation for the ZAV
3
5
the fully saturated 3 curves with different 3
2.0 60% 80% 100% condition (S=100%). Degree of Saturation
degree of saturation is :
"Zero ZAV cannot be reached by
( Mg 3/ m )

2.0 60% 80% 100%

Air compaction.
1.9 Line of
D ρ wS ρ S D
optimums
Voids" Line of Optimum: A line "Zero ρd = = w
( Mg 3/ m )

r r
Air
ρw S
drawn through the peak . 1.9 w+ S w+ .
points Continue T Voids" ρs T
Modified Gs
of several
1.8
Proctor A A
compaction curves at
Dry density

L Modified L
You can derive the equation
1.8
1.7 different compactive A Proctor A
Dry density

Standard
Proctor
efforts for the same soil T
by yourself, Hint T
will be almost parallel to a 1.7
Standard ρs
1.6
0 5 10 15 20 25 100 % S curve Proctor ρd =
Water content w (%) B 1+ e B
Entrapped Air: is the A
1.6 Se = wG s A
Points from the ZAV curve can be distance between the wet
0 5 10 15 20 25
D Water content w (%) D
calculated from: side of the compaction E E
γdry = Gsγω / 1+ e curve and the line of R Back R
100% saturation.

5
Holtz and Kovacs, 1981 Holtz and Kovacs, 1981; Das, 1998

Results-Explanation C Effects of Soil Types on C

Compaction
E E
Below womc At womc Above womc 3 3
5 5
Dry of Optimum The density is at the Wet of Optimum 3 The soil type-that is, grain-size distribution, shape of the soil 3
•As the water content maximum, and it does not Water starts to
increase any further. grains, specific gravity of soil solids, and amount and type of
increases, the particles replace soil clay minerals present
develop larger and OMC particles in the
D D

––
larger water films mold, and since Soil texture and Plasticity data
Dry Density (γd)

r 2.2 r
around them, which ρw<<ρs the dry .
NO Description Sand Silt Clay LL PI
.
– –

(Mg / m3)
tend to “lubricate” the density starts to T 2.1 1
1
Well graded
88 10 2 16 NP T
Zero air voids, S= 100 %
particles and make decrease. A
loamy sand
A
them easier to be
Dry Wet – Hammer Impact L
2.0 2
2
Well graded
sandy loam
72 15 13 16 NP L
moved about and Moisture cannot A A
Side Side T
1.9
3 Med graded
T
reoriented into a escape under
3
sandy loam
73 9 18 22 4

Dry density
denser configuration. Water Content (w) impact of the
1.8
4
4
Lean sandy
32 33 35 28 9
silty clay
Hammer Impact hammer. Instead,
5
1.7
Escaping air Lean silty
the entrapped air is
6
5 5 64 31 36 15
•Air expelled from the B clay B
energized and lifts
7
A A
1.6
soil upon impact in 8 6 Loessial silt 5 85 10 26 2

quantities larger than the soil in the D 5 10 15 20 25 7 Heavy clay 6 22 72 67 40 D

E E
Entrapped
the volume of water air region around the Water content w (%) Poorly graded
R 8 94 6 6 NP NP R
added. Dry side Wet side hammer. sand

Compaction Characteristics C
E
Embankment Materials C
E

Unified Soil Classification Unified Soil Classification

3 3
5 5
3 3
Group Symbol Value as Embankment Material
Compaction
Group Symbol GW
Characteristics D Very Stable D
GW r SW r
. .
GP T
CL Stable T
GM A GP A
GC Good L L
A GM A
SW T Reasonably Stable T
GC
SP
SM SC
SC B SP B
Good to Fair
A
Reasonably Stable when Dense A
CL SM
D D
ML Good to Poor E ML Poor, gets better with high density E
OL, MH, CH, OH, PT Fair to Poor R R
OL, MH, CH, OH, PT Poor, Unstable

Subgrade Materials C
E
Typical Compaction Curve for C
E
Cohesionless Sands & Sandy Gravel
Unified Soil Classification
3 3
5 5
3 3

Group Symbol Value as Subgrade Material

GW Excellent Complete saturation
D
– D
(increasing) Density

GP
Excellent to Good
r
.
Air dry
– – ––– r
.
GM T – – T
GC A
– A

SW
Good L
A
– –
L
A
SP
T – The low density that is obtained at
T

SM Good to Fair bulking low water content is due to capillary

SC B Forces resisting arrangements of B
A the sand grains. A
ML
Fair to Poor D D
CL E E
R (increasing) Water content R
OL, MH, CH, OH, PT Poor to Not Suitable

6
 Water & Compaction
C
E
3
Water Role in C
E
3
5
3 Compaction Process 5
3
Remember what is the Affect
¾ Water lubricates the soil grains so that
• Increasing the water content
D D
r they slide more easily over each other r

at which soil is compacted:

.
T
and can thus achieve a more densely .
T

™ Increases the likelihood of

A
L
packed arrangement. A
L
A A
obtaining dispersed soil structure T T
with reduced shear strengths. – A little bit of water facilitates
™ Increases the pore pressure in compaction
B B
the soil, decreasing the short A
D
– too much water inhibits compaction. A
D
term shear strength. E E
R Back R

Lambe and Whitman, 1979 From Lambe and Whitman, 1979;

Holtz and Kovacs, 1981

Structure of Compacted Clay C

E
10−7
Effect of Compaction on C
E
3 3

permeability
Intermediate
structure 5 5
3 3
Permeability

High Compactive
Effort Dispersed Structure Permeability at constant
or
D
compactive effort decreases D
parallel
r with increasing water content r
Dry Density

. and reaches a minimum at about .

T the optimum. T
A 10−9 A
Low
L If compactive effort is L
Flocculated Structure A A
increased, the permeability
Density

Compactive
or Effort T T
Honeycomb Structure decreases because the void
or
Random
ratio decreases.

B B
Water Content A Water content A
D D
Structure E
Permeability E
Particle Arrangement Dry side more random Magnitude Dry side more permeable
R R
Dry side more deficient; thus imbibes more water, Dry side permeability reduced much more by
Water Deficiency Permanence
swells more, has lower pore pressure permeation

From Lambe and Whitman, 1979;

Compressibility & Expansion

Holtz and Kovacs, 1981

Effect of Compressibility C C

Unified Soil Classification

E E
3 3
Dry compacted or Dry compacted or 5 5
undisturbed sample undisturbed sample 3 3
Void ratio , e

Compressibility
Void ratio , e

Group Symbol
and Expansion
Wet compacted or Wet compacted or D D
GW
Remolded sample Remolded sample r r
. GP .
Very Little
T SW T
Rebound for both samples A A
0
Pressure, natural scale SP
0
Pressure, log scale L L
Low pressure consolidation A GM A
High-pressure consolidation
T GC Slight T
Compressibility of compacted clays is function of stress level. SM
Low stress level: Clay compacted wet of optimum are more compressible. SC
B Slight to Medium B
High stress level: The opposite is true ML
A A
Compressibility D CL Medium D
Wet side more compressible in low pressure range, E OL, MH, CH, OH, PT High E
Magnitude
dry side in high pressure range R R
Rate Dry side consolidates more rapidly

7
 From Lambe and Whitman, 1979

Compressibility & Expansion C Effect of Strength C

Unified Soil Classification

E E
3 150 3
5 Samples 100 5

Degree of Particle Orientation

De
Dry unit weight (kN/m3)
3 (Kaolinite) Parral 3

gr
145

ee
80

of
Compressibility compacted

s at
Group Symbol 60

u
dry of

ra
and Expansion 140

t
io
40

n=
optimum

10
D D

0%
GW r tend to be 135 20 r
Very Little Random
. more rigid 0 .
GP and 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36
T 130 T
GM A stronger 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 Molding water content (%) A
Slight L Molding water content (%) L
GC than
A samples 600 A
SW T T
compacted

Deviation stress (kN/m2)

Very Little 500
SP wet of 400
SM Slight optimum
300
B B
SC
Slight to Medium A 200 A
ML D 100
D
E E
CL Medium
R R
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
OL, MH, CH, OH, PT High Axial Strain (%)

Holtz and Kovacs, 1981

C Comparison of Soil Properties C

Effect of Strength (con) E

3
5
Dry of Optimum & Wet of Optimum
E
3
5
100 3 Compaction 3
Unsoaked CBR (%)

55 blows / layer
75 26 blows / layer The CBR (California bearing ratio)
10 lb hammer 18 “ drop (modified proctor)

50
12 blows / layer CBR= resistance required to Strength
06 blows / layer penetrate a 3-in2 piston into the D D
As molded
25 compacted specimen/ resistance r r
. a :Undrained Dry side is much higher .
required to penetrate the same T T
0 b :Drained Dry side is some how higher
120
depth into a standard sample of A After saturation A
crushed stone. L Dry side higher if swelling prevented,wet sidecan be L
Dry density (lb/ft3)

115 A a :Undrained A
A greater compactive effort hiher if swelling is permitted
T T
110 produces a greater CBR for the b :Drained dry side the same or slpghtly hiher
dry of optimum. However, the CBR Stress-strain modulus Dry side much greater
105
is actually less for the wet of Sensitivity Dry side more apt to be sensitive
100 optimum for the higher B B
compaction energies A A
95 (overcompaction). D D
E E
90 R R
10 15 20 25
Water content (%)

Compaction and Shrinkage

Holtz and Kovacs, 1981

Effect of Swelling C
E
C
E

• Swelling of compacted clays is greater for those

3 Dry of OMC Wet of
• samples 3
5 optimum optimum 5
compacted dry of optimum. They have a 3 Kneading compacted wet 3

relatively greater deficiency of water and of optimum

Vibratory
therefore have a greater tendency to adsorb D
have the D
water and thus swell more. r highest r
. Static .
OMC
T shrinkage T
A A

––
L L
Dry Density (γd)

Dry density ( Mg / m3 )

1.80

A A

Higher
– – Higher
T S = 100%
1.75
T

Swelling Dry Wet – Shrinkage Legend

Side Side B B
1.70
Potential Potential
Kneading compaction
A A
Water Content (w) D 1.65 Vibratory compaction D
E E
R 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 Static compaction R
Molding water content (%)
1.60

8
 Engineering Properties C C
Summary E
3 Summary E
3
5 5
Properties Dry side Wet side 3 UCS
Group
Compaction Compressibility
Value as Embankment Material
Value as 3
Characteristics and Expansion Subgrade Material
Symbol
Structure More random More oriented GW
Very Little
Very Stable Excellent

(parallel) D GP
Excellent to Good
D
r Reasonably Stable r
More
GM

Permeability . .
Slight
Good
permeable
GC
T Good T
SW Very Stable
A Very Little A
More compressible More compressible L SP
Reasonably Stable when Dense
L
Compressibility A A
in high pressure in low pressure SM Slight Good to Fair
T T
range range SC Good to Fair Reasonably Stable

ML Good to Poor Slight to Medium Poor, gets better with high density
Fair to Poor
Swell more, higher *Shrinkage CL Good to Fair Stable
Swelling
water deficiency more B OL, MH, CH,
Fair to Poor High Poor, Unstable Poor to Not Suitable B
A A
OH, PT

D D
Strength Higher E E
R R

Question Time
E
3
5
3

Thank you
r
.
T
A
L
A
T

Dr. Talat Bader B

A
D
E
R