Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Compaction
3.1
DENSITY MEASUREMENTS
Cone Penetration Test, CPT. See ASTM Standards D-1586 and D-3441.
Field density tests are used extensively to determine if modication is needed
and to monitor the progress and results of modication (compaction)
efforts.
When eld compaction is to be done it is necessary to establish the
goals to be reached. These goals must not only be adequate for the proposed
construction, but must also be economically attainable. They are generally
established by laboratory tests, which are empirical in nature. Nonetheless,
they are backed by a wealth of eld data, and are universally used.
The earliest procedure to come into widespread use was the Proctor
Test, intended for use in the design of roads and air eld runways. It is still
in use today and described in ASTM Standard D-698. However, as vehicles
and planes grew larger and heavier, the Proctor was modied to account for
the greater supporting capacity needed (ASTM Standard D-1551). All of
these compaction tests consist of applying compactive effort to a contained
soil sample by dropping a weight a number of times on layers of the sample.
Details are given in Table 3.1. Each test requires compacting several samples
of the same soil with the same compactive effort, but at different water
contents. The resulting data are plotted as shown in Figure 3.1
From the test data, the maximum dry density and the optimum water
content to achieve that density can be determined. It is, of course, extremely
difcult in the eld to compact to precisely the maximum density at precisely
the optimum water content. Specications, therefore, are always written to
call for a percentage such as 90 or 95% of maximum density and a water
content somewhat below optimum (at water contents higher than optimum,
the supporting ability of the compacted soil degrades rapidly).
Figure 3.1 shows typically that for any soil as the compactive effort
increases, the maximum density increases and the optimum water content
decreases. The approximate relative moisture density relationships for the
soil designations of the Unied Classication System are shown in
Figure 3.2.
TABLE 3.1 Laboratory Compaction Test Data
Test
No.
A
B
C
D
E
Designation
Stand. Proctor
Mod. AASHO
Mod. AASHO
(CBR Mold)
Number
of
layers
3
5
5
3
5
Weight of
hammer, lbs
5.5
10.0
5.5
10.0
10.0
Height of
drop, in.
Number of
blows/layer
12
18
12
18
18
25
25
25
25
55
Compactive
effort, in
ft-lbs/ft3
12,400
56,200
20,600
33,750
56,200+
FIGURE 3.1
3.2
SHALLOW COMPACTION
TABLE 3.2A
Equipment
Smooth wheel rollers, static or
vibrating
Rubber-tired rollers
Grid rollers
Sheepsfoot rollers:
Static
Vibrating
Vibrating plate (light)
Tampers, rammers
Impact rollers
Most-suitable soils
Well-graded sand-gravel
mixtures, crushed rock,
asphalt
Coarse-grained soils with
some nes
Weathered rock, well-graded
coarse soils
Fine-grained soils with more
than 20% nes
As above, but also sand-gravel
mixtures
Coarse-grained soils, 4 to 8%
nes
All types
Wide range of moist and
saturated soils
Typical applications
Running surface, base courses,
subgrades for roads and
runways
Road and aireld subgrade
and base course proofrolling
Subgrade, subbase
Least-suitable soils
Uniform sands
Dams, embankments,
subgrades for airelds,
highways
Subgrade layers
Small patches
Cohesive soils
Difcult-access areas
Subgrade earthworks (except
surface)
Hausmann, M. R., Engineering Principles of Ground Modication, p 27, McGraw-Hill Co., 1990. Reproduced by permission of
McGraw-Hill Companies.
TABLE 3.2B
Compaction characteristics
Good
SM, GM
Good
SC, GC
Good to fair
Silt
ML
Good to poor
MH
Fair to poor
Clay
CL
Good to fair
Organic soil
CH
OL, OH, PT
Fair to poor
Not recommended for
structural earth ll
Recommended compaction
equipment
Vibratory drum roller, vibratory
rubber tire, pneumatic tire
equipment.
Vibratory drum roller, vibratory
rubber tire, pneumatic tire
equipment.
Pneumatic tire, vibratory rubber
tire, vibratory sheepsfoot.
Pneumatic tire, vibratory rubber
tire, vibratory sheepsfoot.
Pneumatic tire, vibratory rubber
tire, vibratory sheepsfoot,
sheepsfoot type.
Pneumatic tire, sheepsfoot,
vibratory sheepsfoot, and
rubber tire.
Rubber tire.
Source: Bergato, D.T. et al, Soft Ground Improvement, p 24, ASCE Press, 1996. Reproduced by permission of ASCE, Reston, VA.
FIGURE 3.2 Moisture density relations for soil designations in the Unied
Classication System. (Hausmann, M.R., Engineering Principles of Ground
Modication p 48, McGraw-Hill Co. 1990. Reproduced by permission of
McGraw-Hill Companies.)
3.3
DEEP COMPACTION
Piles are generally driven to transfer surface or near surface loads downward
to better bearing materials, or to spread loads over a greater depth. In
granular deposits the grains of soil are displaced radially from the pile,
resulting in densication. The effect of a single pile is negligible, but a group
of piles driven in a pattern may signicantly increase the density of the soil
within the pile group. This will provide greater skin friction than that
obtained from a load test on a single pile, and may give a greater safety
factor than that computed from a single pile test. If the void left as a pile is
extracted is lled with compacted sand or gravel during extraction, the sand
(or gravel) piles thus formed will be able to support signicant loads, and
the densied formation may become adequate for spread footings or
foundations. Figure 3.6 shows the effects that compacted sand piles can
have on relative density of a sand deposit.
FIGURE 3.3
water under pressure). The entire assembly weights between one and two
tons.
In use, the vibroot is lowered into the soil with a combination of
vibrations and water jetting from the bottom. A quick condition is created
which helps the vibroot sink rapidly to the desired depth. At that point, the
water is channeled to ports along the side, and the pressure is reduced and
maintained at a level that keeps water owing upward around the unit. This
allows ll fed from the surface to fall to the lower tip. The vibration creates a
cavity around the tip of three feet or more radial extent. As this cavity
forms, it is lled with material fed from above, and densied by the
vibration. The vibroot is progressively raised, in increments of 12 to 18
inches, to create a large column of densied soil. The process is shown in
Figure 3.7.
Sand deposits up to 100 feet in depth have been successfully
compacted by vibrootation. The process works best in sands with less
FIGURE 3.5 Variation of compactive effect with number of passes. (DAppolonia, D.I., R.V. Whitman, and E.DAppolonia Sand Compaction with
Vibratory Rollers, Proceedings, ASCE Special Conference on Placement
and Improvement of Soils to Support Structures, New York, 1968, pp 125
136. Reproduced by permission of ASCE, Reston, VA.)
than 20% silt and minimum clay, and less than 20% gravel. Relative
densities of 75% and more are generally achieved. Spacing of holes varies
with the soil properties, but is usually in the six to 12 foot range.
Compaction is poor near the surface, and rolling is generally required after
the vibrootation process has been completed (the term vibro-compaction is
commonly used interchangeably with vibrootation).
The vibrations induced within the soil mass will travel much further
than the hole spacing before attenuation, and the possible damage to nearby
structures must be considered.
In soils containing strata of silt and clay, those strata may not densify
and the overall deposit may not benet from vibrootation. However, the
probe will create a zone of displaced material which can be lled from the
surface with stone aggregate as the probe is withdrawn. These stone columns
can then be used for structural support. This process is often referred to as
vibro-replacement. Table 3.3 and Fig. 3.8 shows the vavious soils for which
vibro-treatment is effective.
Vibro-compaction
Vibro-replacement
Sands
Silty sandsa
Silts
Clays
Mine spoils
Dumped ll
Garbage
Excellent
Good
Poor
Not applicable
Good
Depends on nature of ll
Not applicable
Not applicable
Excellent
Good
Good
Excellent
Good
Not applicable
Two other vibration mechanisms have come into use in recent years.
The terra-probe is similar to the vibroot except for being larger in diameter
and much longer. It is much faster in per-hole densication, but less efcient
FIGURE 3.6 Effect of size and spacing on sand compaction piles. (Gupta,
S.N., Discussion of Sand Densication by Piles and Vibrootation, by C.E.
Basore and J.D.Boitano, Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 95, SM 6, Nov. 1969, pp 224226.
Reproduced by permission of ASCE, Reston, VA.)
Tamping to compact surface soils was undoubtedly done long before small
mechanical equipment took the drudgery out of the process. In turn, rollers
FIGURE 3.8
TABLE 3.4
Building Rubble
Boulders
Broken Concrete
Decomposed Landlls
Flyash
Mine Spoil
Clay Fill
Mine Spoil
Most Likely
AASHTO
Soil
Type
Degree of
Saturation
A-1-a
A-1-b
A-3
A-1-6
A-2-4
A-2-5
A-5
High
or
Low
High
Low
Good
Excellent
High
Low
Fair
Good
A-6
A-7-5
A-7-6
A-2-6
High
Not recommended
Low
Fairminor improvementswater
content should be less than plastic
limit.
Fairlong-term settlement anticipated
due to decomposition. Limit use to
embankments.
Not recommended unless sufcient
granular ll added and energy applied
to mix granular with organic deposits.
None
Low
None
High
Excellent
Source: Bergato, D.T. et al., Soft Ground Improvement, p 67, 1996, ASCE Press. Reproduced by permission of ASCE, Reston, VA.
3:1
FIGURE 3.11 Field data relating depth of inuence with applied energy.
(From Ref. 3.2.)
Soil type
Degree of
saturation
Recommended
n Value
High
Low
0.5
0.50.6
High
0.350.4
Low
0.40.5
Impervious DepositsPrimarily
clayey soils with plasiticity
index of > 8
High
Not recommended
Low
0.350.40
Soils should be at water
content less than the
plastic limit.
NWHP
grid spacing2
3:1
PRELOADING
Economics and specic necessary location of facilities often require the use
of saturated foundation materials subject to large settlements. Preloading
the site prior to construction, with unit loads equal to or greater than the
anticipated unit foundation loads, can greatly reduce the settlement of the
structure that will be built.
Preloading the soil mass induces consolidation, which decreases the
volume of voids, resulting in settlement of the surface. The amount of
settlement and the length of time for it to occur are functions of the load
intensity and the properties of the soil. When the soil mass is unloaded to
build the structure, the settlement rebound is small, and is of the magnitude
that the structure itself will most likely experience. (Of course, shear strength
and therefore bearing capacity will also benet from consolidation).
TABLE 3.6
Type of deposit
Pervious coarse-grained soil
Zone 1 of Figure 5
Semipervious ne-grained
soilsZone 2 and clay lls
above the water table
Zone 3 of Figure 5
Landlls
Unit applied
energy (kJ/m3)
Percent standard
proctor energy
200250
3341
250350
4160
6001100
100180
For saturated soils, the settlements occur as the water is forced out, and
the settlement volume is equivalent to the water loss. This water volume must
be removed from the site, by drainage ditches, pumping, or other means.
Preloading large areas lying near oceans or bays can often be
accomplished economically by depositing dredged material over the area.
Systems for water removal must be adequate to carry off the additional
water from the dredgings. Each foot of depth of granular material deposited
will apply a pressure of about 100 pounds per square foot. Thus, a 30-foothigh ll will permit the site to be used for foundation loads of 3000 pounds
per square foot, suitable for many types of structures.
Preloading or surcharging may also be done by applying a vacuum
under an airtight membrane. To do so, a shallow ditch is placed around the
perimeter of the area. The area itself is covered with a thin layer of sand,
whose edges lap into the ditch. The membrane covers the sand, and its edges
also reach into the ditch. The ditch must be kept lled with water above the
edges of the membrane. When a vacuum is applied under the membrane,
pore water pressure pushes the pore water up and out. This method is
effective for equivalent sand surcharges of as high as 15 feet.
For deep deposits, the consolidation times may be longmonths or
even years. Drains can be used effectively to shorten the times, and are used
universally with deep deposits. Sand drains can be put in place using the
same method as for sand piles. A hollow steel shell is driven, cleaned out if
necessary, and lled from the surface with a narrowly graded sand.
Contrary to a sand pile, the sand ll is not compacted as the shell is
withdrawn. The capacity of a sand drain to carry water depends primarily
upon the drain diameter. Drains may become clogged over a period of time,
TABLE 3.7
Diameter
of sand
drain
in.
cm
K, permeability
of sand ll
m/sec
235
470
940
2350
4700
GPD/ft2
500
1000
2000
5000
10,000
6
15
12
30
18
45
24
60
gpm
l/min.
gpm
l/min.
gpm
l/min
gpm
l/min
0.07
0.14
0.28
0.70
1.4
0.26
0.53
1.05
2.6
5.3
0.27
0.54
1.08
2.7
5.4
1.02
2.04
4.08
10.2
20.4
.61
1.22
2.44
6.1
12.2
2.3
4.6
9.2
23
46
1.09
2.18
4.36
10.9
21.8
4.1
8.2
16.4
41
82
Source: Powers, J.P., Construction Dewatering, p 387, John Wiley and Sons, NY,
1981. This material is used by permission of John Wiley and Sons.
Th
5
10
20
50
100
0.28
0.45
0.66
0.95
1.10
If sand drains are used, the drainage paths will be horizontal, equal to half
of the spacing. Try 12 foot spacing and 12 inch diameter drains. A
horizontal Time Factor is needed. From Table 3.8, it can be seen that the
Time Factor (for radial pore water ow) varies with the ratio of spacing to
diameter. For the selected values the ratio is 12, and the value for Th is 0.5.
Then
t90 0:56122 =0:0345 75; 100 minutes 52 days
In recent years geotextile wicks have replaced sand drains. Wicks consist
of a thin corrugated core surrounded by a thin geotextile lter jacket.
Typically, wicks are about 1/4 inch by 4 inches in cross section. They are
placed by insertion into a similarly shaped mandrel (tube) whose bottom is
closed with a plate to which the wick is attached. The mandrel is pushed or
driven into the soil to the desired depth. When it is withdrawn, the bottom
plate stays in place, holding the wick in place.
The drainage equivalency of wicks and sand drains is often computed
by equating void volumes or perimeters. If void volumes are used, assuming
85% for wicks and 30% for sand, a wick is shown to be equivalent of about a
2-to 3-inch diameter sand drain (depending upon whatever efciency factor
may seem appropriate). Based on experience, however, several wick
manufacturers literature states, Each wick drain can provide a greater
vertical discharge capacity than a 6-inch-diameter sand drain (quote
courtesy of U.S. Wickdrain, Inc).
Spacing of wicks in the eld is often in the range of 4 to 8 feet.
Contractors may have a feel for proper spacing based on their own
experience. Spacing may also be determined by using the design procedure
in the previous example, and selecting 6-inch-diameter sand drains, with the
intent to use wicks. Suppose, in the previous example, 6-inch sand drains
3.6
BLASTING
3.7
SUMMARY
Compaction is the oldest, and in its many forms the most used, method for
modifying soil properties. On large projects, shallow compaction processes
begin with laboratory tests which dene the related water content and
density that will provide adequate support for the proposed use. Economic
factors then determine the type of equipment to be used, from among those
which can produce the desired results. Field density tests are then used to
measure the progress of eld work, and to verify that design values have
been attained.
Deep compaction processes begin with eld investigations which
delineate the zones where improvement is desirable, and possibly indicate
the degree of improvement needed as well as means to measure
improvement. Environmental and economic factors then determine the
type of equipment and process to be used. Field tests conducted near or at
the conclusion of the eld work assess the degree of improvement attained.
Compressible soils cannot be quickly compacted as granular
materials can. Clayey and organic soils need time for the evacuation of
pore water. The length of time can be signicantly reduced by eld
procedures which shorten the drainage paths.
3.8
REFERENCES
1. Buggy, Finton J., Martinez, Ramon E., and Hussin, James D., Performance of
Oil Storage Tanks on Vibrootation Improved Hydraulic Fill in the Port of
Tampa, Florida, Geotechnical Special Publication No. 40, pp 548560, 1994,
ASCE, NY.
2. Lucas, R.G., Geotechnical Engineering Circular No. 1, Dynamic Compaction,
1995, Federal Highway Administration FHWA-SA-95-037, Washington, DC.
3. Schaefer, V. R., Ground Improvement, Ground Reinforcement, Ground Treatment Developments, 19871997, Geotechnical Special Publication No. 69,
ASCE, NY.
4. Santi, Paul M., C. Dale Elifrits, and James A. Liljegren, Draining in a New
Direction, Civil Engineering, June 2001, pp A10A16, ASCE, Reston, VA.
5. Chai, Jun-Chun and Norihiko Miura, Investigation of Factors Affecting
Vertical Drain Behavior, Journal of Geotechnical and Environmental Engineering, March, 1999, pp 216226, ASCE, Reston, VA.
6. Dynamic Deep Compaction, Ground Modication Report 1223, Hayward
Baker Co. 1981, Odenton, MD.
7. Gandhi, S.R. et al, Densication of Pond Ash by Blasting, Journal of
Geotechnical and Environmental Engineering Oct. 1999, pp 889899, ASCE,
Reston, VA.
8. Leonards, G.A. et al, Dynamic Compaction of Granular Soils, Journal of the
Geotechnical Engineering Division, Jan. 1980, pp 3544, ASCE, Reston, VA.
3.9
PROBLEMS
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6