Example: bankruptcy

14.330 Soil Compaction - University of Massachusetts Lowell

Slide 1 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionSOILCOMPACTIONBASICSC ourtesy of Compaction :Densification of soil by the removal of courtesy of soil Compaction : A Basic Handbook by 2 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionWHYCOMPACTSOILS?Figure courtesy of soil Compaction : A Basic Handbook by 3 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionVolume (V)Weight (W) =Conceptual(Figure FGE (2005))MOISTUNITWEIGHT( ) (w)Silty Clay (LL=37, PI =14) Example(from Johnson and Sallberg 1960, taken from TRB State of the Art Report 8, 1990)Slide 4 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionLABORATORYCOMPACTIONTESTS( PROCTORS)Typical proctor Test Equipment(Figure courtesy of )6 inchMold4 inch MoldEjectorModified HammerStandard HammerSoil PlugSoil PlugScaleSlide 5 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionTestASTM/AASHTOH ammerWeight (lb)Hammer Drop(in) Compaction Effort(kip-ft/ft3)

Soil Compaction: Densification of soil by the removal of air. ... Typical Proctor Test Equipment (Figure courtesy of test-llc.com) 6 inch Mold 4 inch Mold Ejector Modified Hammer ... Test STANDARD ASTM D698/AASHTO T-99 MODIFIED ASTM D1557/AASHTO T-180 Method A B C A B C Material ≤ 20%

Tags:

  Tests, Standards, Soil, Compaction, Proctor, Standard test, Soil compaction, Proctor test

Information

Domain:

Source:

Link to this page:

Please notify us if you found a problem with this document:

Other abuse

Transcription of 14.330 Soil Compaction - University of Massachusetts Lowell

1 Slide 1 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionSOILCOMPACTIONBASICSC ourtesy of Compaction :Densification of soil by the removal of courtesy of soil Compaction : A Basic Handbook by 2 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionWHYCOMPACTSOILS?Figure courtesy of soil Compaction : A Basic Handbook by 3 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionVolume (V)Weight (W) =Conceptual(Figure FGE (2005))MOISTUNITWEIGHT( ) (w)Silty Clay (LL=37, PI =14) Example(from Johnson and Sallberg 1960, taken from TRB State of the Art Report 8, 1990)Slide 4 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionLABORATORYCOMPACTIONTESTS( PROCTORS)Typical proctor Test Equipment(Figure courtesy of )6 inchMold4 inch MoldEjectorModified HammerStandard HammerSoil PlugSoil PlugScaleSlide 5 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionTestASTM/AASHTOH ammerWeight (lb)Hammer Drop(in) Compaction Effort(kip-ft/ft3)

2 Standard(SCDOT) 6 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionTestSTANDARDASTM D698/AASHTO T-99 MODIFIEDASTM D1557/AASHTO T-180 MethodABCABCM aterial 20% Retained by #4 Sieve>20% Retained on #4 20% Retained by 3/8 in Sieve>20% Retained on 3/8 in< 30% Retained by 3/4 in Sieve 20% Retained by #4 Sieve>20% Retained on #4 20% Retained by 3/8 in Sieve>20% Retained on 3/8 in< 30% Retained by 3/4 in SieveUse soil Passing Sieve#43/8 in in#43/8 in inMold Dia. (in)446446No. of Layers333555No. Blows/Layer252556252556 LABORATORYCOMPACTIONTESTSUMMARYS lide 7 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionFigure courtesy of soil Compaction : A Basic Handbook by 8 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionAutomated ProctorEquipment(Figure courtesy of Humboldt)Manual proctor Test( What you WILL be doing )(Figure courtesy of )LABORATORYCOMPACTIONTESTS( PROCTORS)Slide 9 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil Compactionw d+=1 From soil Composition notes.

3 Optimum Moisture Content OMC = DryDensityMDD or d,max= pcfSP-SM% Fines = 6%Zero Air Voids(ZAV) LineGs= 10 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionswswswszavGwwG GeG 111+=+=+= Dry Unit Weight ( d) ( no water): zav= Zero Air Void Unit Weight:w Volume (V))Solids (WWeight of sd+==1 ZEROAIRVOIDSLINES lide 11 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil Compaction1. soil TypeGrain Size DistributionShape of soil GrainsSpecific Gravity of soil Solids2. Effect of Compaction EffortMore Energy Greater CompactionFACTORSAFFECTINGSOILCOMPACTION S lide 12 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionLee and Suedkamp (1972)A.

4 Single Peak(Most Soils)B. 1 PeakCohesive Soils LL<30C. Double PeakCohesive Soils LL<30orCohesive Soils LL>70D. No Definitive PeakUncommonCohesive Soils LL>70after Figure Das FGE (2005)Moisture Content wDry Unit Weight dABCDTYPESOFCOMPACTIONCURVESS lide 13 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionFigure Das FGE (2005).In general: Compaction Energy = d,maxCompaction Energy = OMCEFFECTOFCOMPACTIONENERGYS lide 14 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionEFFECTOFCOMPACTIONONCOHESIVESO ILSF igure Das FGE (2005).OMCWet SideDry SideDry Side ParticleStructureFlocculentWet Side ParticleStructureDispersedSlide 15 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionFigure Das FGE (2005).

5 Hydraulic Conductivity (k):Measure of how water flows through soilsIn General:Increasing w= Decreasing kUntil ~ OMC, then increasing whas no significant affect on kEFFECTOFCOMPACTIONONCOHESIVESOILSS lide 16 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionFigure Das FGE (2005).Unconfined Compression Strength (qu) :Measure of soil strengthIn General:Increasing w= Decreasing quRelated to soil structure:Dry side FlocculentWet Side DispersedEFFECTOFCOMPACTIONONCOHESIVESOI LSS lide 17 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionFIELDCOMPACTIONEQUIPMENT4 Common Types:1. Smooth Drum Roller2. Pneumatic Rubber Tired Roller3. Sheepsfoot Roller (Tamping Foot)4.

6 Vibratory Roller (can be 1-3)Smooth DrumPneumatic Rubber TiredSheepsfootVibratory DrumSlide 18 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionPhotographs courtesy and Kovacs (1981)FIELDCOMPACTIONEQUIPMENTS lide 19 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionFineGrainedSoilsCoarseGrainedS oilsCoarseGrainedSoilsFIELDCOMPACTIONEQU IPMENTS lide 20 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil Compactionfrom Holtz and Kovacs (1981)FIELDCOMPACTIONEQUIPMENTS lide 21 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionRelative Compaction (R or ):5 Common Field Test Methods:1. Sand Cone (ASTM D1556)2. Rubber Balloon Method (D2167)3. Nuclear Density (ASTM D2922)4.

7 Time Domain Reflectometry (D6780)5. Shelby Tube (not commonly used)100(%)max,)( =dfieldd R FIELDCOMPACTIONTESTINGS lide 22 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionMETHODSAND CONE(ASTM D1556)BALLOON(ASTM D2167)NUCLEAR(ASTM D2922 &ASTM D3017)TDR(ASTM D6780)Advantages Large Sample Accurate Large Sample Direct Reading Obtained Open graded material Fast Easy to re-perform More tests Fast Easy to re-perform More TestsDisadvantages Time consuming Large area required Slow Balloon breakage Awkward No sample Radiation Moisture suspect Under researchErrors Void under plate Sand bulking Sand compacted soil pumping Surface not level soil pumping Void under plate Miscalibration Rocks in path Surface prep req.

8 Backscatter Under Researchafter soil Compaction : A Basic Handbook by courtesy of Durham Geo/Slope Indicator and 23 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionSand Cone Method(D1556-07)Figure 12 Figure 13 Balloon Method(D2167-08)Figures courtesy of soil Compaction : A Basic Handbook by MultiQuip and TRB State of the Art Report 8, Method(D2922-05 & D3017-05)FIELDCOMPACTIONTESTINGS lide 24 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionReferenceCity of LynchburgSCDOTQCSCDOTQAUSBR Earth ManualNAVFAC 5-410 Year200419961996199819861997 Roads1 per liftper 300 LF1 per liftper 500 LF1 per liftper 2500 LF1 per liftper 250 LFBuildings or Structures1 per liftper 5000 SFAirfields1 per liftper 250 LFEmbankmentMass Earthwork1 per liftper 500 LF1 per liftper 2500 LF2000 CY500 CYCanal/Reservoir Linings1000 CY500-1.

9 000 CYTrenches &Around Structures1 per liftper 300 LF200 CY200-300 CY1 per liftper 50 LFParking Areas1 per liftper 10000 SF1 per liftper 250 per areas of doubtful compaction1 per areas of doubtful compactionFIELDCOMPACTION: TESTFREQUENCYS lide 25 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionState DOTsMaximum LiftHeightMaryland, Massachusetts , Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma Max. m (6 in) lift before Compaction Connecticut, Kentucky Max. m (6 in) lift after Compaction Alabama, Arizona, California, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, WisconsinMax.

10 M (8 in) lift before compactionLouisiana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Texas, WyomingMax. m (12 in) lift before Compaction New YorkDepends on soil & Compaction EquipmentAfter Hoppe (1999), Lenke (2006), and Kim et al. (2009). FIELDCOMPACTION: LIFTHEIGHTSS lide 26 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil CompactionFIELDCOMPACTION: ONEPOINTPROCTORSC-T-29: Standard Method of Test for Field Determination of Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content of Soils by the One-Point MethodGeneral Procedure: Run one (1) proctor Test DRY of OMC. Plot Test on Family of Curves Match to a specific curve: Take MDD and OMC Values from of CurvesSlide 27 of 38 Revised 02 soil MECHANICSSoil d,maxD698(lb/ft3)Evaluation for Use as FillCompression & ExpansionEmbankmentSubgradeBase CourseGWRubber TiredSmooth DrumVibratory Roller125 135 Almost NoneVery StableExcellentGoodGPRubber TiredSmooth DrumVibratory Roller115 125 Almost NoneReasonably StableExcellent to GoodPoor to FairGMRubber TiredSheepsfoot120 135 SlightReasonably StableExcellent to GoodFair to PoorGCRubber TiredSheepsfoot115 - 130 SlightReasonably StableGoodGood to FairCOMPACTIONCHARACTERISTICS& RATINGS.


Related search queries