Professional Documents
Culture Documents
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/250074235
Article in Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers Ground Improvement · January 2005
DOI: 10.1680/grim.2005.9.1.17
CITATIONS READS
26 4,725
2 authors:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Acid Rain Intrusion Effects on Slope Failure Phenomena and Mechanisms View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Nagaraj Honne on 16 January 2014.
Notation Introduction
e void ratio Soil compaction is the process whereby soil particles are
GS specific gravity of soils constrained to pack more closely together through a reduction
IP plasticity index in the air voids, and generally through mechanical means. The
IS shrinkage index ¼ wL wS
purpose of compacting earth fills such as earth dams and
OMC optimum moisture content
embankments (highway, railway and canal) is to produce a
Sr degree of saturation
w water content
soil mass that will satisfy the two basic criteria: reduction in
wL liquid limit settlement, and increase in shear strength. Many other en-
wP plastic limit gineering structures constructed on soils, such as highways,
wS shrinkage limit railway subgrade and airfield pavements, also require com-
ªd dry unit weight of soils paction. Compaction increases the strength characteristics of
ªd max maximum dry unit weight of soils soils, which in turn increases the bearing capacity of founda-
ªw unit weight of water tions constructed over them. It also decreases the amount of
(ªd )P dry unit weight at plastic limit water content undesirable settlement of structures and increases the stability
of slopes of embankments. Compaction plays a vital role in the
preparation of a good compacted soil liner in waste impound-
ment sites to make them relatively impervious to leachates
and thereby reduce the threat of groundwater pollution. Thus
compaction is used as a practical means of achieving the
desired strength and compressibility and also hydraulic
conductivity characteristics of the soils used.
(GI 3173) Paper received 17 February 2003; last revised 22 March The compaction characteristics of a soil as obtained from
2004; accepted 21 April 2004 a laboratory compaction test are maximum dry unit weight
content: %
construction of many earth structures, such as embank-
Optimum
moisture
16.2
24.0
31.4
21.2
29.0
35.1
28.0
39.7
44.4
31.2
ments, it is essential to assess the suitability of a soil with
respect to the compaction characteristics. Also, such pro-
jects require large quantities of soil, and it may be difficult
to obtain the desired type of soil from one borrow area
alone. To obtain the compaction characteristics from
Maximum dry
ªd max : kN/m3
unit weight,
laboratory compaction requires considerable time and
17.9
15.2
13.3
16.0
14.1
12.9
14.2
12.2
11.1
13.5
effort. So, for a preliminary assessment of the suitability of
soils required for the project, it is preferable to use the
correlation of engineering properties with simple index
tests.
Kaolinite, montmorillonite,
Kaolinite, montmorillonite,
Attempts have been made in the past to correlate the
Montmorillonite, kaolinite,
Montmorillonite, quartz
compaction characteristics with the liquid limit. However,
muscovite, quartz
muscovite, quartz
muscovite, quartz
paper, based both on detailed experimental investigations
Kaolinite, quartz
Kaolinite, quartz
Kaolinite, quartz
and on an analysis of the published data on fine-grained
Illite, quartz
Mineralogy
soils, a study has been made to discover which of the index
properties correlate well with the compaction character-
Illite
istics.
Clay: %
26.0
5.0
9.5
35.0
32.0
17.5
38.0
11.5
27.5
51.5
Grain size distribution
Correlation of compaction
characteristics with index properties:
Silt: %
38.5
58.5
74.5
57.0
67.0
64.5
42.5
88.5
71.6
35.5
state of the art
Although the compaction characteristics are very impor-
tant for field considerations, few attempts have been made
Sand: %
35.5
36.5
16.0
8.0
1.0
18.0
19.5
0.0
0.9
13.0
in the past to predict them. An early attempt to predict
the compaction characteristics was made by Johnson and
Sallberg (1962). They developed a chart to determine the
approximate optimum moisture content of a soil using the
IS : %
11.6
9.0
32.5
21.9
35.4
45.0
12.3
34.4
61.6
GS , specific gravity; wL , liquid limit; wP , plastic limit; wS , shrinkage limit; IP , plasticity index; IS , shrinkage index.
limit against liquid limit. Different zones of optimum
moisture content were indicated by means of numerous
curves. This is a useful chart in predicting only the
IP : %
19.0
9.5
12.4
26.7
23.6
18.3
26.4
13.5
21.5
37.9
optimum moisture content of the soil from its liquid limit
and plastic limit.
Recently Pandian et al. (1997) have proposed a method to
predict the compaction characteristics in terms of the liquid
wS : %
14.7
27.4
15.5
33.1
21.0
13.5
46.4
39.0
11.9
29.5
35.6
21.3
31.4
38.1
32.1
45.2
51.9
35.6
39.0
48.0
48.0
55.0
56.4
58.5
58.7
73.4
73.5
2.65
2.65
2.70
2.64
2.61
2.66
2.65
2.58
2.70
Gs
S2r
Cochin clay (oven dried)
Red earth 2
Kaolinite 1
Kaolinite 2
Kaolinite 3
Illitic soil
Soil type
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
18
Plastic limit and compaction characteristics of fine-grained soils
17 r 5 0·80
Dry unit weight, ãd: kN/m3
ZAV line
G 5 2·70
15
16
15
ZAV line
14 G 5 2·65
10
13
0 50 100
Liquid limit, wL: %
12 (b)
15 20 25 30 35 40
Moisture content: %
Fig. 2 (a) Optimum moisture content and (b) maximum dry unit weight
Fig. 1. Dry unit weight against moisture content for a set of two soils with against liquid limit for soils both from the present study and from the
liquid limit 48% (ZAV (zero air voids)) literature
19
Sridharan and Nagaraj
15·0
In order to check the validity of the above finding, Symbol Soil no. wL: wP: ãd max: OMC:
compaction data from the literature (McRae, 1958; Johnson % % kN/m3 %
and Sallberg, 1960; Foreman and Daniel, 1986; Sridharan et 5 55·0 31·4 14·1 29·0
al., 1990; Benson and Trast, 1995) were also plotted along
14·5 7 58·5 32·1 14·2 28·0
with the data from present study. Fig. 2(a) shows a plot of
optimum moisture content against the liquid limit from the
12·0
20 25 30 35 40 45
17 Moisture content: %
Symbol Soil no. wL: IP : ãd max: OMC:
(b)
% % kN/m3 %
4 48·0 26·7 16·0 21·2 Fig. 4 Dry unit weight against moisture content for a set of two soils with
16 7 58·5 26·4 14·2 28·0 plastic limit approximately: (a) 32%; (b) 36%
Dry unit weight, ãd: kN/m3
20
Plastic limit and compaction characteristics of fine-grained soils
16 Plastic limit
Relationship between wP and ãd 20
15
ZAV line 10
14 G 5 2·70
13 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Plastic limit, wP: %
12 (a)
Fig. 5. Dry unit weight against moisture content for all the soils used in the
ãd max 5 0·23 (93·33 2 wP) --- (4)
present study (dry density at plastic limit water content, (ªd )P ) (ZAV (zero
air voids)) 16 r 5 0·93
Conclusions
A compaction study with five different pairs of soils, with
References
each pair having nearly the same liquid limit, has shown Benson C. H. and Trast J. M. (1995) Hydraulic conductivity of
that the compaction characteristics do not correlate well with thirteen compacted clays. Clays and Clay Minerals, 43, No. 6,
either the liquid limit or the plasticity index of the soils. 669–681.
21
Sridharan and Nagaraj
BSI (1990a) British Standard Methods of Test for Engineering McRae J. L. (1958) Index of compaction characteristics. Symposium
Purposes: Classification Tests. British Standards Institution, on Application of Soil Testing in Highway Design and Construction,
Milton Keynes, BS 1377: Part 2. ASTM Special Technical Publication No. 239, pp. 119–127.
BSI (1990b) British Standard Methods of Test for Engineering Pandian N. S., Nagaraj T. S. and Manoj M. (1997) Re-examination
Purposes: Compaction-Related Tests. British Standards Institu- of compaction characteristics of fine-grained soils. Géotechnique,
tion, Milton Keynes, BS 1377: Part 4. 47, No. 2, 363–366.
Foreman E. D. and Daniel D. E. (1986) Permeation of compacted Sridharan A., Rao S. M. and Joshi S. (1990) Classification of
clay with organic chemicals. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineer- expansive soils by sediment volume method. Geotechnical Test-
ing Division, ASCE, 112, No. 7, 669–681. ing Journal, 13, No. 4, 375–380.
Johnson A. W. and Sallberg J. R. (1960) Factors that influence field
compaction of soils (compaction characteristics of field equip-
ment). Highway Research Board Bulletin, No. 272, 14.
Johnson A. W. and Sallberg J. R. (1962) Factors influencing
compaction results. Highway Research Board Bulletin, No. 319, Discussion contributions on this paper should reach the
125. editor by 1 July 2005
22
View publication stats