CEN 401-SOIL COMPACTION

• In the construction of highway embankments, earth dams, and many

other engineering structures, loose soils must be compacted to
increase their unit weights.
• Compaction increases the strength characteristics of soils, thereby
increasing the bearing capacity of foundations constructed over them.
• Compaction also decreases the amount of undesirable settlement of
structures and increases the stability of slopes of embankments.
• Smooth-wheel rollers, sheep foot rollers, rubber-tired rollers, and
vibratory rollers are generally used in the field for soil compaction.
• Vibratory rollers are used mostly for the densification of granular
soils.
 CEN 401-SOIL COMPACTION
• Compaction-General Principles
• Compaction, in general, is the densification of soil by removal of air,
which requires mechanical energy.
• The degree of compaction of a soil is measured in terms of its dry
unit weight.
• When water is added to the soil during compaction, it acts as a
softening agent on the soil particles.
• The soil particles slip over each other and move into a densely
packed position.
• The dry unit weight after compaction first increases as the moisture
content increases (Figure 4.1).
• Note that at a moisture content w = 0, the moist unit weight ( is
equal to the dry unit weight (or

• When the moisture content is gradually increased and the same

compactive effort is used for compaction, the weight of the soil solids
in a unit volume gradually increases.
• For example, at w = w1, the moist unit weight is equal to
•

• However, the dry unit weight at this moisture content is given by

•
 CEN 401-SOIL COMPACTION
• Compaction-General Principles
• Beyond a certain moisture content w = w2, (Figure 4.1), any increase
in the moisture content tends to reduce the dry unit weight.
• This is because the water takes up the spaces that would have been
occupied by the solid particles.
• The moisture content at which the maximum dry unit weight is
attained is generally referred to as the optimum moisture content.
• The laboratory test generally used to obtain the maximum dry unit
weight of compaction and the optimum moisture content is called the
Proctor compaction test (Proctor, 1933).
 CEN 401-SOIL COMPACTION
• In the Proctor test, the soil is compacted in a mold that has a volume
of 943.3 cm3.
• The diameter of the mold is 101.6 mm.
• During the laboratory test, the mold is attached to a base plate at the
bottom and to an extension at the top (Figure 4.2a).
• The soil is mixed with varying amounts of water and then compacted
(Figure 4.3) in three equal layers by a hammer (Figure 4.2b) that
delivers 25 blows to each layer.
•
 CEN 401-SOIL COMPACTION
• Compaction-General Principles
• The hammer weighs 24.4 N (mass 2.5 kg), and has a drop of 304.8
mm. For each test, the moist unit weight of compaction can be
calculated as
 CEN 401-SOIL COMPACTION
• For each test, the moisture content of the compacted soil is
determined in the laboratory. With known moisture content, the dry
unit weight can be calculated as
• The values of determined from Eq. (4.2) can be plotted against the
corresponding moisture contents to obtain the maximum dry unit
weight and the optimum moisture content for the soil.
• Figure 4.4 shows such a compaction for a silty clay soil.
• The procedure for the standard Proctor test is given in ASTM Test
Designation D-698 and AASHTO Test Designation T-99.
• For a given moisture content, the theoretical maximum dry unit
weight is obtained when there is no air in the void spaces—that is,
when the degree of saturation equals 100%.
• Thus, the maximum dry unit weight at a given moisture content with
zero air voids can be given by
•
• Since Newton is a derived unit, in several instances it is more
convenient to work with density (kg/m3) rather than unit weight. In
that case, Eqs. (4.1), (4.2), and
(4.3) can be rewritten as
•
• FACTORS AFFECTING DENSITY
• The preceding section showed that moisture content has a great
influence on the degree of compaction achieved by a given soil.
• Besides moisture content, other important factors that affect
compaction are soil type and compaction effort (energy per unit
volume).
• Effect of Soil Type
• The soil type—that is, grain-size distribution, shape of the soil grains, specific gravity of
soil solids, and amount and type of clay minerals present—has a great influence on the
maximum dry unit weight and optimum moisture content.
• Lee and Suedkamp (1972) studied compaction curves for 35 different soil samples. They
observed four different types of compaction curves.
• These curves are shown in Figure 4.5.
• Type A compaction curves are the ones that have a single peak. This type of curve is
generally found in soils that have a liquid limit between 30 and 70.
• Curve type B is a one and one-half peak curve, and curve type C is a double peak curve.
Compaction curves of types B and C can be found in soils that have a liquid limit less than
about 30.
• Compaction curves of type D are ones that do not have a definite peak. They are termed
odd-shaped. Soils with a liquid limit greater than about 70 may exhibit compaction curves
of type C or D.
• Soils that produce C- and D-type curves are not very common.
• Effect of Compaction Effort
• The compaction energy per unit volume, E, used for the standard
Proctor test described in Section 4.2 can be given as
• Effect of Compaction Effort
• If the compaction effort per unit volume of soil is changed, the moisture–
unit weight curve will also change.
• This can be demonstrated with the aid of Figure 4.6, which shows four
compaction curves for a sandy clay.
• The standard Proctor mold and hammer were used to obtain the
compaction curves.
• The number of layers of soil used for compaction was kept at three for all
cases.
• However, the number of hammer blows per each layer varied from 20 to 50.
• The compaction energy used per unit volume of soil for each curve can be
calculated easily by using Eq. (4.7).
• These values are listed in Table 4.1.
• Effect of Compaction Effort

• From Table 4.1 and Figure 4.6, we can reach two conclusions:
• 1. As the compaction effort is increased, the maximum dry unit weight of
compaction is also increased.
• 2. As the compaction effort is increased, the optimum moisture content is
decreased to some extent.
• The preceding statements are true for all soils.
• Note, however, that the degree of compaction is not directly proportional to
• MODIFIED PROCTOR TEST
• With the development of heavy rollers and their use in field compaction,
the standard Proctor test was modified to better represent field conditions.
• This is sometimes referred to as the modified Proctor test (ASTM Test
Designation D-1557 and AASHTO Test Designation T-180).
• For conducting the modified Proctor test, the same mold is used, with a
volume of 943.3 cm3 , as in the case of the standard Proctor test.
• However, the soil is compacted in five layers by a hammer that weighs
44.5 N (mass = 4.536 kg).
• The drop of the hammer is 457.2 mm.
• The number of hammer blows for each layer is kept at 25 as in the case of
the standard Proctor test.
• MODIFIED PROCTOR TEST
• The compaction energy for unit volume of soil in the modified test
can be calculated as
•

• Because it increases the compactive effort, the modified Proctor test

results in an increase of the maximum dry unit weight of the soil.
• The increase of the maximum dry unit weight is accompanied by a
decrease of the optimum moisture content
• MODIFIED PROCTOR TEST
• In the preceding discussions, the specifications given for Proctor tests
adopted by ASTM and AASHTO regarding the volume of the mold
(943.3 cm3 ) and the number of blows (25 blows/layer) are generally
the ones adopted for fine-grained soils that pass the U.S. No. 4 sieve.
• However, under each test designation, three different suggested
methods reflect the size of the mold, the number of blows per layer,
and the maximum particle size in a soil aggregate used for testing.
• A summary of the test methods is given in Tables 4.2 and 4.3
• MODIFIED PROCTOR TEST
• Omar, et al. (2003) recently presented the results of modified Proctor
compaction tests on 311 soil samples.
• Of these samples, 45 were gravelly soil (GP, GP-GM, GW, GW-GM,
and GM), 264 were sandy soil (SP, SP-SM, SW-SM, SW, SC-SM, SC, and
SM), and two were clay with low plasticity (CL).
• All compaction tests were conducted using ASTM 1557 method C.
• MODIFIED PROCTOR TEST
• Based on the tests, the following correlations were developed.
•
• MODIFIED PROCTOR TEST
• More recently, Gurtug and Sridharan (2004) proposed correlations for
optimum moisture content and maximum dry unit weight with the
plastic limit (PL) of cohesive soils. These correlations can be expressed
as:
• FIELD COMPACTION
• Most compaction in the field is done with rollers. There are four
common types of rollers:
1. Smooth-wheel roller (or smooth-drum roller)
2. Pneumatic rubber-tired roller
3. Sheep foot roller
4. Vibratory roller
• Smooth-wheel rollers (Figure 4.11) are suitable for proof rolling
subgrades and for the finishing operation of fills with sandy and clayey
soils.
• They provide 100% coverage under the wheels with ground contact
pressures as high as 310 –380 kN/m2 .
• They are not suitable for producing high unit weights of compaction
when used on thicker layers.
• FIELD COMPACTION
• Pneumatic rubber-tired rollers (Figure 4.12) are better in many
respects than smooth-wheel rollers.
• The former are heavily loaded wagons with several rows of tires.
These tires are closely spaced—four to six in a row.
• The contact pressure under the tires can range from 600 to 700
kN/m2, and they produce 70% to 80% coverage.
• Pneumatic rollers can be used for sandy and clayey soil compaction.
• Compaction is achieved by a combination of pressure and kneading
action.
• FIELD COMPACTION
• Sheepsfoot rollers (Figure 4.13) are drums with a large number of
projections.
• The area of each of these projections may range from 25 to 85 cm2.
• Sheepsfoot rollers are most effective in compacting clayey soils.
• The contact pressure under the projections can range from 1380 to
6900 kN/m2.
• During compaction in the field, the initial passes compact the lower
portion of a lift.
• The top and middle portions of a lift are compacted at a later stage.
• FIELD COMPACTION
• Vibratory rollers are very efficient in compacting granular soils.
• Vibrators can be attached to smooth-wheel, pneumatic rubber-tired,
or sheepsfoot rollers to provide vibratory effects to the soil.
• Figure 4.14 demonstrates the principles of vibratory rollers.
• The vibration is produced by rotating off-center weights.
• Hand-held vibrating plates can be used for effective compaction of
granular soils over a limited area.
• Vibrating plates are also gang-mounted on machines, which
can be used in less restricted areas.
• FIELD COMPACTION
• In addition to soil type and moisture content, other factors must be
considered to achieve the desired unit weight of compaction in the
field.
• These factors include the thickness of lift, the intensity of pressure
applied by the compacting equipment, and the area over which the
pressure is applied.
• The pressure applied at the surface decreases with depth, resulting in
a decrease in the degree of compaction of soil.
• FIELD COMPACTION
• During compaction, the dry unit weight of soil is also affected by the
number of roller passes.
• The dry unit weight of a soil at a given moisture content will increase
up to a certain point with the number of passes of the roller.
• Beyond this point, it will remain approximately constant. In most
cases, about 10 to 15 roller passes yield the maximum dry unit weight
economically attainable.
• SPECIFICATIONS FOR FIELD COMPACTION
• In most specifications for earth work, one stipulation is that the
contractor must achieve a compacted field dry unit weight of 90% to
95% of the maximum dry unit weight determined in the laboratory
by either the standard or modified Proctor test. This specification is,
in fact, for relative compaction R, which can be expressed as
• SPECIFICATIONS FOR FIELD COMPACTION
• In the compaction of granular soils, specifications are sometimes
written in terms of the required relative density Dr or compaction.
• Relative density should not be confused with relative compaction.
• SPECIFICATIONS FOR FIELD COMPACTION
• Based on the observation of 47 soil samples, Lee and Singh (1971)
gave a correlation between R and Dr for granular soils:

• The specification for field compaction based on relative compaction

or on relative density is an end-product specification. The contractor
is expected to achieve a minimum dry unit weight regardless of the
field procedure adopted. The most economical compaction condition
can be explained with the aid of Figure 4.15.
• SPECIFICATIONS FOR FIELD COMPACTION
• The compaction curves A, B, and C are for the same soil with varying
compactive effort.
• Let curve A represent the conditions of maximum compactive effort
that can be obtained from the existing equipment.
• Let it be required to achieve a minimum dry unit weight of (field) = R
(max).
• To achieve this, the moisture content w needs to be between w1 and
w2.
• However, as can be seen from compaction curve C, the required
(field) can be achieved with a lower compactive effort at a moisture
content w = w3.
• SPECIFICATIONS FOR FIELD COMPACTION
• However, in practice, a compacted field unit weight of (field)= R
(max) cannot be achieved by the minimum compactive effort because it allows no
margin for error considering the variability of field conditions.
• Hence, equipment with slightly more than the minimum compactive effort
should be used.
• The compaction curve B represents this condition.
• Now it can be seen from Figure 4.15 that the most economical moisture content
is between w3 and w4.
• Note that w = w4 is the optimum moisture content for curve A, which is for the
maximum compactive effort.
• The concept described in the preceding paragraph, along with Figure 4.15, is
historically attributed to Seed (1964), who was a prominent figure in modern
geotechnical engineering.
• The idea is elaborated on in more detail in Holtz and Kovacs (1981).
• DETERMINATION OF FIELD UNIT WEIGHT AFTER COMPACTION
• When the compaction work is progressing in the field, it is useful to
know whether or not the unit weight specified is achieved.
• Three standard procedures are used for determining the field unit
weight of compaction:
1. Sand cone method
2. Rubber balloon method
3. Nuclear method
• DETERMINATION OF FIELD UNIT WEIGHT AFTER COMPACTION
• Sand Cone Method (ASTM Designation D-1556)
• The sand cone device consists of a glass or plastic jar with a metal
cone attached at its top (Figure 4.16).
• The jar is filled with very uniform dry Ottawa sand.
• The weight of the jar, the cone, and the sand filling the jar is
determined (W1).
• In the field, a small hole is excavated in the area where the soil has
been compacted.
•
• DETERMINATION OF FIELD UNIT WEIGHT AFTER COMPACTION
• Sand Cone Method (ASTM Designation D-1556)
• If the weight of the moist soil excavated from the hole (W2) is
determined and the moisture content of the excavated soil is known,
the dry weight of the soil (W3) can be found as
• DETERMINATION OF FIELD UNIT WEIGHT AFTER COMPACTION
• Sand Cone Method (ASTM Designation D-1556)
• After excavation of the hole, the cone with the sand-filled jar
attached to it is inverted and placed over the hole (Figure 4.17).
• Sand is allowed to flow out of the jar into the hole and the cone.
• Once the hole and cone are filled, the weight of the jar the cone, and
the remaining sand in the jar is determined (W4), so
• DETERMINATION OF FIELD UNIT WEIGHT AFTER COMPACTION
• Sand Cone Method (ASTM Designation D-1556
• The volume of the hole excavated can now be determined as
• DETERMINATION OF FIELD UNIT WEIGHT AFTER COMPACTION
• Sand Cone Method (ASTM Designation D-1556
• The values of W c and d(sand) are determined from the calibration
done in the laboratory. The dry unit weight of compaction made in
the field can now be determined as
• DETERMINATION OF FIELD UNIT WEIGHT AFTER COMPACTION
• Rubber Balloon Method (ASTM Designation D-2167)
• The procedure for the rubber balloon method is similar to that for
the sand cone method; a test hole is made, and the moist weight of
the soil removed from the hole and its moisture content are
determined.
• However, the volume of the hole is determined by introducing a
rubber balloon filled with water from a calibrated vessel into the hole,
from which the volume can be read directly.
• The dry unit weight of the compacted soil can be determined by
using Eq. (4.17).
• Figure 4.18 shows a calibrated vessel used in this method.
• DETERMINATION OF FIELD UNIT WEIGHT AFTER COMPACTION
• Nuclear Method
• Nuclear density meters are now used often to determine the
compacted dry unit weight of soil.
• The density meters operate either in drilled holes or from the ground
surface.
• The instrument measures the weight of wet soil per unit volume and
also the weight of water present in a unit volume of soil.
• The dry unit weight of compacted soil can be determined by
subtracting the weight of water from the moist unit weight of soil.
• Figure 4.19 shows a photograph of a nuclear density meter
• SPECIAL COMPACTION TECHNIQUES
• Several special types of compaction techniques have been developed
for deep compaction of in-place soils, and these techniques are used
in the field for large-scale compaction works. Among these, the
popular methods are vibroflotation, dynamic compaction, and
blasting.
•
• SPECIAL COMPACTION TECHNIQUES
• Vibroflotation is a technique for in situ densification of thick layers of loose
granular soil deposits.
• It was developed in Germany in the 1930s.
• The first vibroflotation device was used in the United States about 10 years later.
• The process involves the use of a Vibroflot (also called the vibrating unit), which
is about 2.1 m long (as shown in Figure 4.20.)
• This vibrating unit has an eccentric weight inside it and can develop a centrifugal
force, which enables the vibrating unit to vibrate horizontally.
• There are openings at the bottom and top of the vibrating unit for water jets.
• The vibrating unit is attached to a follow-up pipe.
• Figure 4.20 shows the entire assembly of equipment necessary for conducting
the field compaction.
• EFFECT OF COMPACTION ON COHESIVE SOIL PROPERTIES
• Compaction induces variations in the structure of cohesive soils, which, in
turn, affect
the physical properties such as hydraulic conductivity and shear strength
(Lambe,
1958).
• This can be explained by referring to Figure 4.23.
• Figure 4.23a shows a compaction curve (that is, variation of dry unit weight
versus moisture content).
• If the clay is compacted with a moisture content on the dry side of the
optimum, as represented by point A, it will possess a flocculent structure
(that is, a loose random orientation of particles), as shown in Figure 4.23b.
• Each clay particle, at this time, has a thin layer of adsorbed water and a
thicker layer of viscous double layer water.
• In this instance, the clay particles are being held together by
electrostatic attraction of positively
charged edges to negatively charged faces.
• At low moisture content, the diffuse double layer of ions surrounding
the clay particles cannot be freely developed.
• When the moisture content of compaction is increased, as shown by
point B, the diffuse double
layers around the particles expand, thus increasing the repulsion
between the clay
particles and giving a lower degree of flocculation and a higher dry unit
weight.
• A continued increase of moisture content from B to C will expand the
double layers more, and this will result in a continued increase of
repulsion between the particles.
• This will give a still greater degree of particle orientation and a more
or less dispersed structure (Figure 4.23c).
• However, the dry unit weight will decrease because the added water
will dilute the concentration of soil solids per unit volume.
• It is also important to point out that at a given moisture content,
higher compactive effort tends to give a more parallel orientation to
the clay particles, thereby giving a more dispersed structure.
• The particles are closer, and the soil has a higher unit weight of
compaction.
• Figure 4.24 shows the degree of particle orientation with moisture
content for compacted Boston Blue clay (Lambe, 1958) and kaolinite
(Seed and Chan, 1959).
• For a given soil and compaction energy, the hydraulic conductivity
(Chapter 5) will change with the molding moisture content at which
the compaction is conducted.
• Figure 4.25 shows the general nature of the variation of hydraulic
conductivity with dry unit weight and molding moisture content.
• The hydraulic conductivity, which is a measure of how easily water
flows through soil, decreases with the increase in moisture content.
• It reaches a minimum value at approximately the optimum moisture
content.
• Beyond the optimum moisture content, the hydraulic conductivity
increases slightly.
• The strength of compacted clayey soils (see Chapter 8) generally
decreases with the molding moisture content.
• This is shown in Figure 4.26.
• Note that at approximately optimum moisture content, there is a
great loss of strength.
• This means that if two samples are compacted to the same dry unit
weight, one of them on the dry side of the optimum, and the other on
the wet side of the optimum, the specimen compacted on the dry
side of the optimum (that is, with flocculent structure), will exhibit
greater strength.
•