COMPACTION

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 1

 Outline
 Definition & Purpose of compaction
 Laboratory compaction tests
 Factors affecting compaction of soil
 Field compaction
 Dynamic compaction
 In-place soil unit weight test
 Field control of compaction
 Soil stabilization

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 2

 4-1 Definition & Purpose of
compaction
 Compaction means to press the soil particles
tightly together by expelling air from the void
space
 Compaction usually increases the soil’s
density & produce 3 important effects:
 Increase in shear strength

 Decrease in future settlement of soil

 Decrease in permeability

 Compaction is a cheap & effective way to

improve the properties of soil
2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 3
 4-1 Definition & Purpose of
compaction
 Compaction is quantified in terms of soil’s dry
unit weight & is computed using

d  eqn 4.1
1 w

 For a given compactive effort, there is an

optimum moisture content & the associated
dry unit weight is known as maximum dry unit
weight
 Maximum dry unit weight is used by the
engineer in specifying design shear strength
2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 4
 4-1 Definition & Purpose of
compaction
 Field soil is compacted by field compaction
methods until the laboratory maximum dry
unit weight is achieved

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 5

 4-2 Laboratory Compaction Test
 Laboratory tests are
performed to
determine a soil’s
 optimum moisture
content
 Maximum dry unit
weight

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 6

 4-2 Laboratory Compaction Test
 To carry out a lab compaction test, the soils
engineer allows a soil sample from the field to
dry until it becomes friable under a trowel
 The sample may be dried in
 the air

 drying oven (not exceeding 60oC)

 After drying, a series of at least 4 specimens

is prepared by adding increasing amount of
water to each sample so that the moisture
contents will bracket the optimum moisture
content
2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 7
 4-2 Laboratory Compaction Test
 After curing, each prepared specimen is
placed in a compaction mold & compacted in
layers by dropping the hammer onto the
specimen in the mold a certain distance &
specified number of uniformly distributed
blows per layer
 This results in a specific energy exertion per
unit volume of soil
 The compacted soil specimen’s wet unit
weight & moisture content is determined

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 8

 4-2 Laboratory Compaction Test
 Dry unit weight is then computed using eqn
4.1
 A plot of moisture content vs dry unit weight
for the data collected will be of a form similar
to the curve shown in Fig 4.2

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 9

 4-2 Laboratory Compaction Test
 The coordinates at the peak gives the
maximum dry unit weight & optimum moisture
content
 To achieve the maximum dry unit weight, field
compaction should be done at or near
optimum moisture content

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 10

 4-2 Laboratory Compaction Test
 In Fig 4.2, the right side of the curve roughly
parallels the dashed line labelled “Zero Air
Voids”
 This line represents the dry unit weight when
saturation is 100% & can be determined from
Gs w
  eqn 4.2
ZAV
1  wG s

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 11

 Element of standard compaction tests
Standard Modified
(ASTM D698) (ASTM D1557)
Hammer 24.5 N 44.5 N
Height of hammer fall 305 mm 457 mm
Number of layers 3 5
No. of blows/layer 25 25
Mold volume 942 cm3 942 cm3
Soil (-) No 4 sieve (-) No 4 sieve

Compaction energy 595 kJ/m3 2698 kJ/m3

(CE)

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 12

 Example 4-1
 The combined unit weight of a mold & the
specimen of compacted soil it contains is
4000 g
 The mold’s volume is 944 cm3
 The mold’s weight is 2023 g
 The specimen’s water content is 10%
 Determine the
 Wet unit weight of the specimen

 Dry unit weight of the specimen

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 13

 Example 4-1
Solution
 Eqn 2.10
W

V
4000  2023
  2.09 g/cm 3  20.9 kN/m 3
944
 From eqn 4.1

d 
1 w
20.9 kN/m 3
d   19 kN/m 3
1  0.10
2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 14
 Example 4-2
 A set of laboratory compaction test data & results is
tabulated as follows
Test No. 1 2 3 4 5
Dry unit wt (kN/m3) 17.61 18.32 18.57 18.09 17.11
Moisture content 7.1 10.0 13.4 16.7 20.1

 The test was conducted in accordance with the

ASTM D 698 Standard Proctor Test
 Plot a Proctor curve (i.e. dry unit weight vs
moisture content)
 Determine the soil’s maximum dry unit weight &
optimum moisture content
2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 15
 Example 4-2
Solution
 The Proctor curve is
plotted as shown
 From the graph
plotted,
 Max dry unit
weight = 18.7
kN/m3
 Optimum
moisture content
= 12.5%

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 16

 Example Problem 1.7

 The maximum void ratio of a sand is found to

be 0.66, while its minimum void ratio is 0.46.
Specific gravity of the soil solid (Gs) is 2.68.
Calculate the maximum and the minimum dry
unit weight of the sand. If the natural void
ratio of the sand in the field is 0.63, calculate
the relative density (Dr).

Example Problem 1.7.docx

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 17
 Example Problem 1.8

 The following is the results of laboratory test on a clay soil sample. The
volume of the soil specimen is 1000 cm3 and Gs = 2.67.

a) Determine the optimum water content and the line of zero air void
(zav)
b) If Gs = 2.65, is it possible to compact the soil so that the dry unit
weight is d = 20.0 kN/m3 at water content 13.5%

Example Problem 1.8.docx

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 18

 4-3 Factors affecting compaction
of soil
 Compaction of soil can be affected by:
 Moisture content (covered in section 4.2)

 Compaction effort

 Type of soil

 Compaction effort
 can be quantified in terms of the
compaction energy per unit volume

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 19

 4-3 Factors affecting compaction
of soil
 Compaction effort (cont’d)
 It is a function of

 the number of blows per layer

 Number of layers

 Weight & height of hammer

 Volume of mold

 The greater the compaction energy per unit

volume, the greater the compaction

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 20

 4-3 Factors affecting compaction
of soil
 The figure illustrates
the influence of
compaction energy
on the compaction
of sandy clay
 As the no. of blows
, the max d  &
optimum moisture
content 

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 21

 4-3 Factors affecting compaction
of soil
 Type of soils
 Max dry unit weight & optimum moisture
content can be affected by:
 Grain-size distribution of soil

 Shape & specific gravity of solids

 Type & amount of clay minerals present

 Max dry unit weight can range from

9.42 kN/m3 for organic soils to about
22.78 kN/m3 for well-graded granular
material
2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 22
 4-3 Factors affecting compaction
of soil
 Type of soils (cont’d)
 Optimum moisture content can range from
5% to 35%
 Higher optimum moisture contents are
associated with lower dry unit weights
 Higher dry unit weights are associated with
well-graded granular materials
 Uniformly graded sand, clays of high
plasticity and organic silts & clays respond
poorly to compaction
2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 23
 4-3 Factors affecting compaction
of soil
 Type of soils
(cont’d)
 The figure gives
the moisture vs
density curves for
the various types
of soils
 Both the shapes
& positions of the
curves change as
the texture of soil
varies
2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 24
 4-4 Field compaction
 Compaction is normally done in layers
 Moisture content can be
 Increased by sprinkling water

 Decreased by aeration

 The surface of each compacted layer should

be scarified by disk plowing to provide for
bonding between layers

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 25

 4-4 Field compaction
 Various kind of field compaction equipment:
 Tampers

 Rollers

 Tampers
 Compact soil by delivering light weight
blows
 Limited in scope and compacting ability

 Useful in areas not readily accessible to

rollers

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 26

 4-4 Field compaction
 Rollers
 Can cover large areas relatively quickly &
with great compacting pressures
 Smooth wheel roller

 2 or 3 smooth wheel metal rollers

 Useful in compacting base courses &

paving mixtures
 Also used to provide a smooth finished
grade
 They are generally self-propelled
2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 27
 4-4 Field compaction
 Smooth wheel roller (cont’d)
 Compacted primarily through static
weight

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 28

 4-4 Field compaction
 Sheepsfoot roller
 Consists of a drum with metal projecting
“feet” attached
 Only projecting feet come into contact
with soil, area of contact is small, 
greater compacting pressure

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 29

 4-4 Field compaction
 Sheepsfoot roller (cont’d)
 Effective for compacting fine-grained
soils

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 30

 4-4 Field compaction
 Pneumatic roller
 Consists of of rubber tires, highly inflated

 Vary from small to very large & heavy

ones
 clayey & silty soils may be compacted
effectively

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 31

 4-4 Field compaction
 This type of rollers are also effective for
granular material containing small amount of
fines

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 32

 4-4 Field compaction
 Vibratory roller
 Contains a vibrating unit that imparts an
up-and-down vibration to the roller as it
pulled over the soil
 Effective in
compacting
granular materials

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 33

 4-4 Field compaction
 Two means may be used to specify a
particular compaction requirement
 Specify the procedure to be adopted by
contractor & the no. of passes to be made
 Specify the compacted soil’s required final
dry unit weight (more commonly used)

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 34

 4-5 Dynamic Compaction
 Dynamic compaction may be employed to
improve soil properties
 This method is carried out essentially by
repeatedly dropping a very heavy weight onto
the soil from a relatively great height
 Suitable for both cohesive & cohesionless
soils
 It may also be utilised to compact buried
refuse fill areas

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 35

 4-5 Dynamic Compaction
 In cohesive soils, the reduction of settlements
due to dynamic compaction is more distinct
than the increase in bearing capacity
 The tamping produce a pre-settlement of the
soil, well beyond the settlement that would
have occurred as a result of construction
weight only, without any preliminary
consolidation

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 36

 4-5 Dynamic Compaction
 For cohesionless soils, dynamic compaction
densifies loose soil
 A closely spaced grid pattern is selected for a
given compaction site
 Preliminary work is done to determine grid
spacing & weight, height & no. of drops

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 37

 4-5 Dynamic Compaction
 Approximate depth of influence, D
 For cohesionless soils

D  0.5 Wh Eqn 4.3

 For cohesive soils
D  Wh Eqn. 4.4
W  weight

h  distance dropped

 The extent of improvement is greatest near

the surface & diminishes with depth

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 38

 4-5 Dynamic Compaction
 Improvement increases with drops made up to
some limit, beyond which additional drops
afford little or no additional improvement
 With saturated, fine-grained soils, satisfactory
results may be obtained by performing a
series of drops at intervals of several days to
allow for dissipation of pore pressures due to
previous compaction

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 39

 4-5 Dynamic Compaction
 It should be noted that soil surface may
become crated as a result of dynamic
compaction
 When this happens, the craters must be
backfilled & compacted by other means

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 40

 4-6 In-place soil unit weight test
 It is important to determine the compacted
soil’s in-place dry unit weight in order to
ascertain the max dry unit weight has been
achieved
 Weight & volume of soil sample are measured
to determine in-place unit weight
 There are several methods to determine the
volume
 Destructive methods

 For cohesive soils, density of soil in-place

by the drive cylinder method can be used
2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 41
 4-6 In-place soil unit weight test
 Destructive methods (cont’d)
 For cohesionless soils, sand-cone
apparatus
 Another method is unit weight of soil in-
place by the rubber-balloon method
 Fairly time consuming

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 42

 4-6 In-place soil unit weight test
 For non-destructive testing methods:
 Unit weight of soil & soil-aggregate in-
pace by nuclear methods
 May have errors in moisture content for
soils containing iron, boron & cadmium
 Faster to perform

 However, it is potential hazards to

individual handling radioactive materials
 More costly

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 43

 4-6 In-place soil unit weight test
 Moisture content of soil is also required to
determine the compacted soil’s dry unit
weight
 Several methods available to determine
moisture content
 Oven drying method

 Speedy moisture tester

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 44

 Example 4-3
 During construction of a soil embankment, a
sand-cone-in-place unit weight test was
performed in the field
 The following data were obtained
 Weight of sand used to fill test hole &
funnel of sand-cone device = 867 g
 Weight of sand to fill funnel = 319 g

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 45

 Example 4-3
 The following data were obtained (cont’d)
 Unit weight of sand = 1.538 g/cm3

 Weight of wet soil from test hole = 747 g

 Moisture content of soil from test

hole = 13.7%
 Determine the dry unit weight of the
compacted soil

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 46

 Example 4-3
Solution
Weight of sand used in test hole
 Weight of sand to fill test hole & funnel – weight of sand to fill funnel
 867 g  319 g  548 g
548 g
volume of test hole   356 cm 3

1538 g/cm 3
747 g
wet unit weigh t of soil in - place   2.1 g/cm 3
 21 kN/m 3

356 cm 3
From eqn 4.1,

d 
1 w
21 kN/m 3
d   18.4 kN/m 3
1  0.137
2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 47
 4-7 Field control of compaction
 After a fill layer of soil has been compacted,
test is usually performed to determine if the
maximum lab dry unit weight has been
achieved
 A common practice is to specify the required
percentage of compaction
 Some practical considerations to note
 Soil may be of different characteristics if
taken from different pits
 Degree of compaction may not be uniform
throughout
2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 48
 4-7 Field control of compaction
 To ensure that required field unit weight is
achieved by field compaction, a specifications
contract between owner & contractor is
prepared
 The contract includes:
 Required percentage (%) of compaction

 Min number of field unit weight tests

required

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 49

 4-7 Field control of compaction
 The contract may also includes
 Max thickness of loose fits prior to
compaction
 Method to obtain dry unit weight & in-place
unit weight

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 50

 Example 4-4
 Soil from a borrow pit to be used for
construction of an embankment gave the
following laboratory results when subjected to
the Standard Proctor Test (from e.g. 4.2)
 Max dry unit weight = 18.6 kN/m3

 Optimum moisture content = 12.5%

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 51

 Example 4-4
 The contractor, during construction of the soil
embankment,achieved the following (from e.g.
4.3)
 d reached by compaction= 18.5 kN/m3
 Actual water content = 13.7%
 Determine % of compaction achieved by
contractor

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 52

 Example 4-4
Solution
 % of compaction achieved

in - place dry unit weigh t

 100
max lab dry unit weigh t
18.5
 100  98.9%
18.6

2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 53

 Example 4-5
 A borrow pit’s soil is being used as earth fill at
a construction project
 The in-situ dry unit weight of the borrow pit
soil was determined to be 17.18 kN/m3
 The soil at the construction site is to be
compacted to a dry unit weight of 18.90 kN/m3
 The construction project requires 15,000 m3
of compacted soil fill
 Determine the volume of soil to be excavated
from the borrow pit to provide the necessary
volume of compacted fill
2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 54
 Example 4-5
Solution
 Total dry weight required to furnish the
compacted fill
 total dry weight of soil required to be excavated
from the borrow pit
 (18.90 kN/m3 ) (15,000 m 3 )  283,500 kN

 Volume of soil required to be obtained from

the borrow pit
283,500
  16,500 m3
17.18
2005 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd 55