0 vues

Transféré par Gracie Azevedo

,

- Compaction V
- Sand Cone Test
- 01 PresentacionISTRAM
- CEEN3160 F10 Lab4 Proctor SandCone
- LAB1
- exp 1 Compaction Test ( Proctor Test ).docx
- To Assess the Degree of Compaction
- Soil Compaction
- Aazokhi Waruwu -The Compaction Potential in Increasing Compressive and Shear Strength at Peat Soil
- 32 Road Compaction R&B1014
- Placement Moisture Content-2% Fixation
- GeoILab5
- D 560 – 96 ;RDU2MC1SRUQ_.pdf
- asthoo
- Proctor Result Izzah.docx
- testing
- WMM Job No 026 S
- Moisture in Portland Cement Concrete
- Omc -Dry Density Using Light Compaction
- EFFECT OF USING POZZOLANIC MATERIALS ON THE PROPERTIES OF EGYPTIAN SOILS.pdf

Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 13

www.sciencedirect.com

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/sandf

Yasir Al-Badrana,b,c,n, Tom Schanzb,c,1

a

Highway & Transportation Department, College of Engineering/Al-Mustansiriya University, Baghdad, Iraq

b

Chair of Foundation Engineering, Soil- and Rock Mechanics, Civil & Environmental Engineering Faculty, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Germany

c

Building IC E5/ 117, Universitätsstrasse 150, D-44780, Bochum, Germany

Received 23 September 2011; received in revised form 25 September 2013; accepted 24 January 2014

Available online 17 May 2014

Abstract

A theoretical model for the compaction curve of ﬁne-grained soils at various compaction efforts for the entire range of water content is

presented in this study. The prediction method is based on the assumption that the compaction curve represents the state surface at the yield state

in an unsaturated condition. Thus, for each applied compaction effort, the compaction curve relates to one yielding point on the saturated normal

consolidation line (NCL). For a given soil, the model requires the NCL, Src, and one point from any compaction curve to predict the compaction

curves for different compaction efforts. Moreover, the lines of equal suctions on the compaction curves can be determined if the SWCC, the

wetting path, is known. The model introduced here provides additional theoretical understanding of the soil's volume change behavior of the

compaction curve. The model was veriﬁed in two ways: ﬁrst it was veriﬁed quantitatively, by experimental results, and second it was veriﬁed

qualitatively, by examining the relationships from other models in the literature. The model was further applied to experimental data reported in

the literature on previous static and dynamic compaction tests. The results show that the model ﬁts the experimental data very well. Finally,

a simple chart, based on this model and using only liquid limits, is presented to estimate γdmax and OMC quickly.

& 2014 The Japanese Geotechnical Society. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Modelling; Compaction curve; Compacted soils; Volume change; Yield state; Fine-grained soils; Unsaturated soil; Suction

reproduce the volumetric yielding surface or the state surface

The aim of this study is to model the compaction curves at at the yield state in an unsaturated condition (Al-Badran and

various compaction efforts for the entire range of water content Schanz, 2009a; Al-Badran, 2011). The state surface at the

yield state in an unsaturated condition is a unique surface

☆ which includes all points from different initial conditions. The

International geotechnical classiﬁcation numbers: A01, D03, D09.

n

Corresponding author. Tel.: þ49 234 32 26078; fax: þ 49 234 32 14150. position of the yielding surface is deﬁned by the NCL's

E-mail addresses: yasir.al-badran@rub.de, constant degree of saturation, Sr-lines (Al-Badran, 2001,

yaser_albadran@yahoo.com (Y. Al-Badran), tom.schanz@rub.de (T. Schanz). 2011). The concept of the Sr-lines is modiﬁed according to

1

Tel.: þ49 234 32 26135; fax: þ49 234 32 14236. the microstructural consideration of Nagaraj et al. (2006a,

Peer review under responsibility of The Japanese Geotechnical Society.

2006b). Consequently, each point of the compaction curve

represents a normal consolidated or yield state and results in an

increase in the applied net stress or the compaction effort until

a speciﬁc value under a constant water content condition can

be reached for soil in an initially loose state. Thus, for each

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2014.04.011

0038-0806/& 2014 The Japanese Geotechnical Society. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Y. Al-Badran, T. Schanz / Soils and Foundations 54 (2014) 426–438 427

compaction effort applied, the compaction curve relates to one determine the w–γd relationship separately for the dry of

yielding point of the saturated NCL. The parameters involved optimum, DOP, and the wet of optimum, WOP, based on

in this model are functions of the void ratio of the saturated the LL and the Gs for each CE. Pandian et al. (1997) presented

NCL (eNCL) of the effective stress equivalent to the compaction the linear relationships of w LL, [w/(Sr) 0.5]–LL, [w (Sr) 2]–

effort, the degree of saturation Sr, the critical degree of LL, for the standard Proctor test. Basheer (1998) developed

saturation Src (the degree of saturation at the optimum moisture models for both the compaction characteristics and the

content, OMC), the parameter that controls the inﬂuence of the compaction curves. Li and Sego (2000) derived an equation

degree of saturation to increase the void ratio under a constant with both soil and compaction effort parameters to predict the

compaction effort (R), and the parameter that controls the complete compaction curves of ﬁne-grained soils for all w 4 0.

position of the maximum value for the void ratio under each Basheer (2001) suggested empirical models using both statis-

net stress or compaction effort (M). However, for a given soil, tical regression and ANNs to predict the compaction curves of

the model requires the NCL, Src, and one point from any cohesive soils based on the soil properties and compaction

compaction curve to predict the compaction curves for efforts. Nagaraj et al. (2006a) introduced an ideal pore model

different compaction efforts. The prediction of any further (linear relationship) to estimate the compaction curves of ﬁne-

compaction curve for a speciﬁc compaction effort requires grained soils quickly for different compaction efforts for DOP

only the eNCL of the equivalent effective stress. In addition, a and WOP. Based on their ideal model, state parameters w/Sr 0.5

simple chart, based on this model and using only liquid limits, and w/Sr 2 were proposed for DOP and WOP, respectively.

will present a quick estimation of γdmax and optimum moisture Honda et al. (2007) presented a method to determine the

content OMC. Moreover, the lines of equal suctions on the maximum dry density–optimum moisture content (w–γd)

compaction curves can be determined if the soil–water relationship based on the unsaturated normal consolidation

characteristic curve, SWCC (wetting path) is known. lines (NCL) of the constant water content condition behavior.

Kurucuk et al. (2008) presented an approach to predict the soil

2. Literature review of compaction modelling compaction curve during undrained loading. They investigated

the effect of soil suction, stiffness, and pore air pressure on the

Previous studies on soil compaction models can be divided shape of the compaction curve.

into two main groups: Several studies (Joslin, 1959; Nagaraj and Bindumadhava,

1992; Nagaraj, 1994; Nagaraj et al., 2006a) yielded a set of

(1) Models that use empirical correlations for both cohesive and compaction curves that are nearly parallel for all soils for any LL.

cohesionless soils, which relate optimum water content, Others (Basheer, 2001; Horpibulsuk et al., 2008a, 2008b) have

OMC, and maximum dry density or unit weight γdmax, to demonstrated that the compaction curves of natural soils are

soil properties, such as the Atterberg index (liquid limit, LL, rarely parallel to each other (some of them have ﬂatter curves and

and plastic limit, PL), the speciﬁc gravity of solids (Gs), and others have sharp peaks).

the grain-size distribution (Davidson and Gardiner, 1949;

Turnbull, 1948; Ring et al., 1962; Ramiah et al., 1970; Jeng

and Strohm, 1976; Livneh and Ishai, 1978; Wang and Huang, 3. Material used

1984; Korﬁatis and Manikopoulos, 1982; Al-Kafaji, 1993;

Basheer and Najjar, 1995; Najjar and Basheer, 1996; Blotz The materials used in this study are pure bentonite 100B,

et al., 1998; Sridharan and Nagaraj, 2005; Gurtug and and a mixture of bentonite and quartz sand, 30% bentonite and

Sridharan, 2002; Jesmani et al., 2008). 70% sand mixture, 30B (Agus, 2005). The basic properties

(2) Models for the entire range of compaction curves describ- investigated in this study were performed based on ASTM

ing the compaction characteristics (Joslin, 1959; Rethati, standards (ASTM, 1997) and DIN standards (DIN, 1987). The

1988; Hilf, 1991; Howell et al., 1997; Nagaraj and

Bindumadhava, 1992; Nagaraj, 1994; Pandian et al., 1.8

1997; Basheer, 1998, 2001; Li and Sego, 2000; Nagaraj 100B 100B-MP

100B-SP

Dry unit weight, (gm/cm3)

et al., 2006a; Honda et al., 2007; Kurucuk et al., 2008; 1.6 100B-RMP

100B-Pcom0.248

Horpibulsuk et al., 2008a, 2008b). s=1 MPa

s=35 MPa

1.4

ZAV -

Proctor curves (named Ohio's curves). Rethati (1988) pre-

Src = 90%

sented an empirical approach to modelling the compaction 1

S = 35 MPa

S = 1 MPa

curves based on ﬁtting a simple quadratic equation to the water Sr = 30% Sr = 50%

Sr = 70%

content, w, and the dry density, γd, relationship (w–γd). Hilf 0.8

0 20 40 60

(1991) and Howell et al. (1997) used second-, third-, and Moisture content, (%)

fourth-degree polynomial equations to model the compaction

curves. Nagaraj and Bindumadhava (1992) and Nagaraj (1994) Fig. 1. Dynamic and static experimental compaction curves for different CE,

developed a semi-empirical phenomenological model to and points of equal suction for 100B mixtures.

428 Y. Al-Badran, T. Schanz / Soils and Foundations 54 (2014) 426–438

2.2

30B-SP

30B-MP

30B-RP

Dry unit weight, (gm/cm3)

2 S = 6.5 MPa

30B-Pcom0.248

s=0.7 MPa

s=6.5 MPa

1.8

1.6 ZAV

S = 0.7 MPa

Src = 85%

1.4

Sr = 70%

30B Sr = 30% Sr = 50%

1.2

0 10 20 30

Moisture content, (%)

Fig. 3. Constant degree of saturation lines (Sr-lines) that represent the NCL of

Fig. 2. Dynamic and static experimental compaction curves for different CE, unsaturated state (Al-Badran, 2001).

and points of equal suction for 30B mixtures.

basic properties of the bentonite (100B) are Gs ¼ 2.75, LL ¼

tion curve (state surface) is governed by the degree of

89.1%, PL ¼ 35.9%, shrinkage limit (SL)¼ 14%, and total

saturation, and for each degree of saturation there is a straight

speciﬁc surface area (SSA) ¼ 400 m2/g, while for sand, Gs ¼

line representing the normal consolidation line for this degree

2.65, and total SSA ¼ 0.25 m2/g. The Gs ¼ 2.695 and LL ¼ 30%

of saturation (Sr-lines).

for 30B.

For each soil mixture, different compaction efforts were The saturated NCL for the initially slurry state specimen is

performed (dynamic: 248 [RP ¼ SP/2.5], 593 [SP], and adopted in this model to determine parameter eNCL. Hypothesis 1

2694 [MP] kJ/m3), and static compaction: s¼ 248 kPa) with was veriﬁed by performing a constant degree of saturation test

different water contents. RP, SP, and MP are the Reduced, the (for details, see Al-Badran and Schanz, 2009a; Al-Badran, 2011),

Standard, and the Modiﬁed Proctors, respectively. The total in which the degree of saturation was kept constant by

suction of the compaction tests was measured at the end of the controlling the net vertical stress and suction. Moreover, the

tests with a Chilled Mirror device. Figs. 1 and 2 show the contour lines for the constant degrees of saturation for the yield

experimental results of the compaction curves and the points of state, after back calculations from the unsaturated compression

equal suction for the soils used in the investigation. curves, also show straight lines (Lawton et al., 1989; Al-Badran,

2001; Honda et al., 2007; Sun et al., 2007).

The work of Nagaraj et al. (2006a, 2006b) supports the

relation between the saturated NCL and the Sr-lines from the

4. Description of the model microstructural consideration, as shown in Fig. 4. It was

assumed that the change in the microstructure of the unsaturated

The main assumption of the model is that the compaction soil at a constant water content, due to compression under an

curves reproduce the state surface at the yield state in an applied net pressure (P ua) or applied suction (ua – uw), is

unsaturated condition, as proposed by Al-Badran and Schanz due to a change in the radius of the air–water interface in the

(2009a) and Al-Badran (2011). It was shown that, for the same micropore enclosed by the saturated clay clusters. To represent

soil, all unsaturated yielding points from different initial these changes, parameter w/√Sr (or e√Sr) is a convenient

conditions can be linked to a unique state surface of degree parameter to employ to account for the effects of the degree of

of saturation and water content. The position of the state saturation in the range of 40–90%.

surface at the yield state is deﬁned by the NCL of the constant The line for the Red Soil in Fig. 4a represents the void ratio–

degree of saturation, Sr-lines (Al-Badran, 2001, 2011), as Net stress data of any degree of saturation by normalizing the

shown in Fig. 3. The concept of the Sr-lines is modiﬁed unsaturated NCL's for the Red Soil in Fig. 4b. The lines for the

according to the microstructural consideration of Nagaraj et al. constant degree of saturation (Sr-lines) in Fig. 4b show that

(2006a, 2006b), as shown in Fig. 4b. The modiﬁcations are there is a straight line for each degree of saturation and that the

that the Sr-lines are not parallel, but they have slightly different slope of these lines increases as the degree of saturation

slopes, and empirical equations are proposed to determine the increases, starting from the slope of the saturated NCL.

volumetric yielding at each degree of saturation, as shown in Therefore, the new yielding volume change model for the

Eqs. (2)–(6), which will be explained later. unsaturated soil connects the saturated NCL and the unsatu-

The model presents the relationship among the void ratio, rated NCL (Sr-lines) using empirical equations, as with other

the compaction effort, and the degree of saturation according unsaturated models, but here it is based on a microstructural

to the Hypothesis 1 for Sr-lines. Then, to connect the void consideration.

ratio, the net stress (or compaction effort), and the degree of The model assumed that maximum dry density γdmax for all

saturation with suction, Hypotheses 2 and 3 are presented. compaction efforts occurs at the same (constant) degree of

Y. Al-Badran, T. Schanz / Soils and Foundations 54 (2014) 426–438 429

1.5 1.5

e√Sr 1 1

e

Red Soil

Red Soil

0.5 0.5 Sr =100%

Brown Soil Sr =90%

Sr =69%

Black Cotton Soil

Sr =49%

0 0

10 100 1000 10 100 1000

Equilibrium pressure, [kPa] Equilibrium pressure,[KPa]

Fig. 4. (a) Nagaraj et al. (2006a) concept ‘each soil has one NCL by normalization’ (after Nagaraj et al., 2006a), (b) Sr-lines concept ‘straight NCL for each degree

of saturation’ for Red Soil.

saturation, and that this saturation is the critical degree of Hypothesis 2. If the ﬁne-grained soils are kept in a drying or

saturation. The critical degree of saturation, Src, is the degree wetting state for the unsaturated state water content and dry

of saturation at the air entry value when the air phase state density relationship located under the critical degree of

starts to be continuous and the water phase discontinuous. This saturation, there is no density effect on the gravimetric water

condition (change of phase state) also occurs at the optimum content–suction relationship.

water content, OMC (Pandian et al., 1997); therefore, Src is

assumed to be equal to the degree of saturation at the OMC. It is worthwhile to mention that Hypothesis 2 is valid only

The critical degree of saturation, Src, is a boundary limit for the dry of optimum, DOP. Therefore, for water contents

between the saturated and the unsaturated zones (transition and less than the OMC, the water content–dry density relationship

residual zones). The soil in the saturated zone (Sr 4 ¼ Src) for constant suction represents a vertical line (different dry

behaves as fully saturated soil which is close to the behavior of densities at a constant water content that corresponds to the

the soil in WOP, while the soil in the unsaturated zone wetting path). For the wet of optimum, WOP, the contour line

(Sr o Src) behaves as unsaturated soil which is close to the for the constant suction can be calculated by adopting a linear

behavior of soil in DOP. Moreover, it is assumed that the value relationship between Sr and suction to consider the effect of

for the critical degree of saturation, Src, for ﬁne-grained soil is density on the wetting path, as seen in Figs. 9 and 10.

not largely affected by the change in compaction energy. This The results of contour lines of equal suction in the

is because the water at the air entry value, AEV, is under compaction curves of the experimental program, seen in

considerable stress (SP and MP) and is almost located in the Figs. 1 and 2, and the results of Delage and Graham (1995),

micro-pores size which is not largely affected or remains Gens et al. (1995), Li (1995), Romero (1999), Tarantino and

unchanged with the application of compaction energy, as can Tombolato (2005), and Agus (2005) support Hypothesis 2.

be observed in the pore-size distributions for the mixture of The results showed that for the dry side of the compaction

50% bentonite–50% sand (Ariﬁn, 2008). The experimental curve, when the soils are in an unsaturated state, the lines of

results of this study support this assumption, as seen in Figs. 9 constant suction are almost vertical. In other words, for ﬁne-

and 10. The experimental results of Romero (1999) provide grained soils on the dry side of the compaction curve, the

good evidence of such behavior. The critical degree of suction is a function of the water content regardless of density.

saturation, Src, equal to 90%, gives good predictions of the Romero (1999) attributed this behavior to the effects of the

compaction curves shown in Fig. 12, and this value is very loading mechanism on the macroporosity that does not contain

close to that obtained from the SWCC in Romero (1999). free water, since at low moisture content levels (on dry side of

A change in the number of meniscus water bridges in the the compaction curve), water is mainly absorbed or contained

unsaturated soil (as the degree of saturation changes), produces in the less bonded diffuse layers on the intra-aggregate scale.

a change in their stabilising effect, and hence, leads to the The degree of saturation that changes on the dry side of the

possibility of yielding and plastic compression during the compaction curve is associated with microporosity changes

increase in the degree of saturation (wetting) (Wheeler et al., under a constant intra-aggregate water content. When the

2003). However, in addition to the effect of net vertical stress matric suction values approach the saturation zone, on the

(or compaction effort), there is a strong relationship between wet side of the compaction curve, however, the loading

the volume change and suction, considered by the change in mechanism affects the inter-aggregate water and the contours

the degree of saturation, according to the following hypothesis: of equal suction try to incline in order to converge to the limit

430 Y. Al-Badran, T. Schanz / Soils and Foundations 54 (2014) 426–438

condition of the matric suction equal to zero at the full considerable stress ( 41 kPa) and (ii) sufﬁcient time. Any

saturation condition (Sr ¼ 100%), as shown in Fig. 12. How- applied compaction effort value of more than 1 kPa on the

ever, the contour lines of equal suction in the compaction DOP will produce volumetric yielding (state surface) and the

curves of Romero (1999), that pass the optimum moisture soil structure will immediately reach the equilibrium. The

content (OMC), may need some correction. Some of the states of soil, normally consolidated (state surface) and over

contour lines were established using only two different consolidated, come from the difference between the value of the

positions (one at the wet side and the other at the dry side) applied stress or energy to the soil skeleton and the yield stress of

making a straight line, which does not necessarily represent the the soil in a speciﬁc condition (which depends on the dry density,

actual behavior. The structure and the behavior at the wet side the water content, or the degree of saturation). When the applied

are different from those at the dry side; thus, it is important to stress or energy 4 ¼ the yield stress of the soil, the soil is then

use several points from different locations to draw the contour normally consolidated or at a yield state (state surface), and when

lines of equal suction when the line passes from the dry side to the applied stress or energyothe yield stress of the soil, the soil

the wet side. is then over consolidated. In the case of compaction, the applied

This model assumes that when the applied suction is higher stress or energy is speciﬁc and constant (during the test) and the

than the air entry value the pore water will be located only in initial yield stress of the soil (before compaction) is relatively low

the ﬁne pores or pods (Backer and Frydman, 2009). These ﬁne (due to the open structure of the loose soil), so the yield stress of

pores or pods are not affected as the density changes (i.e., the the soil will increase by an in increase in density, as a result of

diameter is unchanged). Therefore, at high suction levels compression under the applied stress or compaction effort, until it

(higher than the air entry value or in the dry of optimum), reaches the same value as the applied stress or the compaction

there is no density effect on the gravimetric water content– effort. Therefore, all the points on the compaction curve in the

suction relationship. When the applied suction is lower than DOP represent the normally consolidated or the yield state.

the air entry value, the pore water is believed to be located at The initial value for suction remains almost constant

both the ﬁne pores (pods) and the large pores. Therefore, at because the water content is constant throughout the process.

low suction levels (lower than the air entry value or in the wet At WOP, however, the process is a combination of compaction

of optimum), both density and suction have an effect on the and consolidation. Therefore, a sufﬁcient amount of time is

gravimetric water content value. In the saturated zone (lower needed to complete the volume change process. In other

than the air entry value or in the wet of optimum) the model words, the experimental results of the compaction curve at

assumes, depending on the experimental results of this study, a WOP do not immediately reach the complete yield state. As a

linear relationship between the degree of saturation and result, on WOP, there are some differences between the

suction. In other words, at the wet of optimum, the suction predicted (yielding) and the experimental results. With time,

is a function of the gravimetric water content and the dry suction will increase in the case of compacted expansive soils

density, while at the dry of optimum, the suction is a function due to incomplete hydration (Agus et al., 2010; Schanz et al.,

of only the gravimetric water content. 2010). This may lead to a change in the state of the soil from

It is important to clarify that the counter lines of equal the yield state to the over consolidated state (hardening due to

suction in the compaction curves can be established by the drying). The unsaturated soil exhibits a very small amount of

wetting process, because each point on the curve represents the volume change during this process. Therefore, the volume

compaction under a constant water content which results in an change for the long term will be neglected. Additionally, in

increase in the degree of saturation. To consider the effect of DOP, both dynamic and static compaction techniques give the

hysteresis, Hypothesis 3 is adopted. same horizontal alignment of soil particle groups (Mitchell,

1993). However, the alignment of the soil particles in WOP

Hypothesis 3. The dry side of optimum in the compaction will be affected by the compaction type, which is not taken

curve represents the ﬁrst wetting path. Therefore, the gravi- into account in this model. Therefore, the model does not

metric water content–suction relationship in this part follows consider the dynamic or the static compaction explicitly. From

the wetting path. the above, the compaction curve in the DOP can be considered

as reproducing the state surface, while for the compaction

The compaction curve can be related to the state surface at curve in the WOP, some difference is expected between the

the yield state, which will be explained in the following predicted (state surface) and the experimental results.

paragraph. For the compaction process, the volume change

behavior responds according to the two independent stress 5. Locations of Sr-lines on the state surface for constant

variables, namely, net stress and suction. Generally, to prepare compaction effort

soil for a compaction test, the soil is ﬁrstly mixed with water

and then the mixture disintegrates to make a loose soil The locations of Sr-lines can be determined by performing

structure in an unsaturated state. To unify all the states, the double oedometer tests (DOT) for two samples showing the

value of 1 kPa will be considered as the preconsolidation stress same initial state (preferring high void ratio and low water

for this initial loose unsaturated soil. This initially unsaturated content to intersect a large number of Sr-lines). The results of

loose soil will produce volumetric yielding (state surface) Wheeler and Sivakumar (1995) and Casini et al. (2007)

when the following two conditions are ensured: (i) support the Sr-lines concept. By analyzing unsaturated volume

Y. Al-Badran, T. Schanz / Soils and Foundations 54 (2014) 426–438 431

II V

I III IV

interaction. The hardening of the soil sample due to surface

5

tension forces of air–water interaction inside the unsaturated

4 soil causes a reduction in dry density (or an increase in the

1 6

void ratio) as the water content increases, void ratio of point

void ratio

1 7

2 8

10

void ratio in the second interval, emax, which equals the void

9

0.5 ratio of point 5 in Fig. 5. It is important to mention that each

eNCL point in the second interval, i.e., points 2–5 in Fig. 5, resulted

compression (P=248 KPa) from individual tests. The experimental results show that the

compaction (CE=248 KJ.m/m3)

Proposed model

degree of saturation at the maximum void ratio, Sr(emax),

0 increases when the applied net stress or compaction effort

0 25 50 75 100

increases. Afterwards, the third interval sets off in which the

Degree of saturation, Sr (%)

void ratio decreases as the degree of saturation increases, from

Fig. 5. Experimental and proposed models for the void ratio–degree of points 5 to 9 in Fig. 5. The third interval is the main part of the

saturation relationship at normally consolidated or yield state under 248 kPa volumetric yielding behavior and for this interval Nagaraj et al.

constant net vertical stress or 248 kJ m/m3 compaction effort condition for 30B

(2006b) established Eq. (1). Eq. (1) shows unique paths on (e/

soil with ﬁve characteristic intervals of degree of saturation (Src ¼ 85%).

eL)√Sr versus (p ua) plots for different soils and for different

conditions (saturated and unsaturated).

change results in a normally consolidated state (compression

e pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ

curves and static compaction data for different levels of net Sr ¼ 1:00 0:21 logðp ua ÞE3 ð1Þ

stress and water content for 30B and 100B soils), Al-Badran eL

(2001) concluded: For constant applied vertical net stress or

compaction effort, the range of degree of saturation (from fully where e is the yield void ratio for both saturated and unsaturated

dry to fully saturated condition) shows ﬁve different intervals, void ratios, eL is the void ratio at the liquid limit state (eL ¼ Gs x

as shown in Fig. 5 for 30B soil. Soils samples (for 30B and LL), Sr is the degree of saturation, and p ua is the net stress.

100B soils) with different water contents were tested in The third interval continues until reaching the critical degree

compression and static compaction tests. These mixtures were of saturation (Src) with the lowest void ratio or the maximum

left for one week to reach equilibrium. Each sample was dry density, point 9 in Fig. 5, that can be reached under a

initially placed in its loose state, and then a constant net stress speciﬁc net stress or compaction effort. Then, the fourth

was applied for the required period to reach equilibrium with interval is reached, from points 9 to 10 in Fig. 5 and the void

respect to deformations. This time required to achieve equili- ratio increases again as the degree of saturation increases until

brium was shorter for intervals I, II, and III than that for reaching the full saturation condition (the ﬁfth interval, point

intervals IV and V. The water content was kept constant during 10 in Fig. 5). For this interval, the void ratio is equal to the

the tests by covering the cell or the compaction mold with a void ratio at the saturated NCL for the speciﬁc net stress

plastic bag. Besides the initial weight, after ﬁnishing the tests, (eNCL). Equations governing each interval are shown below:

the ﬁnal weights, the sample dimensions, and suction were The ﬁrst interval is from a zero degree of saturation to the

measured. A wide range of applied net stress was covered in degree of saturation at the maximum void ratio Sr (emax), from

these tests to gain a comprehensive understanding of the soil points 1 to 2 in Fig. 5. In this interval, the void ratio is

behavior. Fig. 5 shows the experimental and the proposed unchanged (constant) due to the absence of any bonding forces

models for the void ratio–degree of saturation relationship at between soil particles. Then, by increasing the degree of

the normally consolidated or yield state under 248 kPa/kJ saturation, the second interval comes about when water attracts

m/m3 constant net vertical stress or compaction effort condi- the soil particles through the surface tension forces.

tion for the 30B soil with ﬁve characteristic intervals of degree

of saturation (Src ¼ 0.85). The experimental data in Fig. 5 are euns I ¼ edry ð2Þ

presented as points and numbered in order to facilitate the

where edry is the void ratio of the fully dry soil.

distinction between the different intervals.

The second interval represents the degree of saturation at the

The ﬁrst interval starts from a zero degree of saturation in

maximum void ratio, Sr(emax), from points 2 to 5 in Fig. 5.

which the void ratio is unchanged (constant) due to the

The void ratio in this interval, euns-II, can be calculated as

absence of any bonding forces between soil particles, from

points 1 to 2 in Fig. 5. Then, by increasing the degree of Gs w

saturation, the second interval comes about when water attracts Gs w ¼ Srðe maxÞ euns -euns II ¼ ð3Þ

Srðe maxÞ

the soil particles through the action of surface tension forces of

the air–water interaction, from points 2 to 5 in Fig. 5. The During the second interval, the experimental results of this

experimental results show, as in Fig. 5, that the degree of study (see Figs. 1 and 2 or 9 and 10) show that the degree of

saturation remains almost unchanged throughout the second saturation remains almost unchanged. The experimental results

interval. The soil stiffness in the second interval increases due show that the water content at emax (w(emax)) can be predicted

432 Y. Al-Badran, T. Schanz / Soils and Foundations 54 (2014) 426–438

according to the following empirical equation. Eq. (1), and Horpibulsuk et al. (2008a, 2008b):

eNCL Src

eNCL euns ¼ ð5Þ

wðe maxÞ ¼ Gs þ U 100 Gs M ð4Þ ðSrÞR

Gs

where R is the parameter that controls the degree of water

where eNCL is the void ratio of the saturated NCL and M is the sensitivity (slope of compaction paths) on the dry and wet

parameter that controls the position of emax. sides of optimum.

The behavior of soil in the second interval gives an The fourth interval ranges from the critical degree of

additional peak to the compaction curve on the dry side. saturation up to the fully saturated state (Sr=100%), from

Several experimental studies show that in some cases the points 9 to 10 in Fig. 5. All the degrees of saturation in the

compaction curve has double peaks (e.g., the results of Hindi, fourth interval are greater than the critical degree of saturation;

1967; Lee and Suedkamp, 1972; Ellis, 1980; Razouki et al., therefore, the current degree of saturation is used in Eq. (5)

1980; Dixon et al., 1985; Benson et al., 1997; Sun et al., 2007; instead of the critical degree of saturation:

Razouki et al., 2008). eNCL Sr

The third interval covers the range from the degree of euns ¼ -euns ¼ eNCL ðSr Þ1 R ð6Þ

ðSrÞR

saturation at the maximum void ratio, Sr(emax), to the critical

degree of saturation, Src, from points 5 to 9 in Fig. 5. The The ﬁfth interval is deﬁned by a degree of saturation equal to

following unique equation (Eq. (5)) can be used for low to 100%, point 10 in Fig. 5; the void ratio is equal to the void

high plasticity ﬁne-grained soils (Fig. 6), which is equivalent ratio at the saturated NCL (i.e., eNCL).

to the approach used by Nagaraj et al. (2006a, 2006b) as in

6. Model steps

2

SP-100B1-Exp. Fig. 7 summarizes the different steps to predict the

SP-100B1-Eq.5 compaction curve. The curve of compaction effort equivalent

SP-30B1-Exp.

SP-30B1-Eq.5 to effective stress P1 can be estimated based on point B that

Void ratio

1 point B, by using an additional model parameter (i.e., Src, R,

and M), the void ratio for any degree of saturation or water

content can be calculated (according to Eqs. (2) to (6) for Sr-

lines). The next step will be the conversion of the void ratio to

0

the dry density to obtain the compaction curve. Parameters Src,

20 40 60 80 100 R, and M are constant for each soil and each parameter requires

Degree of saturation, Sr (%) only one experimental point to be determined. To predict the

Fig. 6. Comparison between exp. results of standard compaction tests and

curve for other compaction efforts, such as that equivalent to

Eq. (5) for 100B (Src ¼90% and R¼ 0.43) and 30B (Src ¼ 85% and R ¼ 0.5) effective stress P2, it requires no more than updating parameter

soils. SP is the Standard Proctor test. eNCL which corresponds to effective stress P2, point A. Fig. 8

saturation line

B

B

Void ratio

A

A

Void ratio

NCL

P1 P2

log effective stress Moisture content

ZAV

Dry unit weight

CE2 = P

A

CE1 = P1 B

Moisture content

Fig. 7. Sketch showing the steps using the proposed model to predict the compaction curve.

Y. Al-Badran, T. Schanz / Soils and Foundations 54 (2014) 426–438 433

paction efforts using the state surface model for the 30B soil.

7. Veriﬁcation of model

ways: ﬁrst quantitatively, by experimental results, and second

qualitatively, by examining the relationships from other

models in the literature.

analyzing the residuals between the predicted and the experi- Fig. 9. Dynamic and static compaction curves for different compaction efforts

mental compaction curves (static and dynamic). The predicted for 100B mixture, the points are the experimental results and the lines are the

predicted results.

curve is determined by using Eqs. (2)–(6) for all ﬁve intervals

of volumetric yielding behavior. These equations require the

value of the void ratio of saturated NCL eNCL at the net stress

equivalent to each compaction effort, the critical degree of

saturation, R, M, and the degree of saturation. The net stress

equivalent to each compaction efforts is 248 kPa for RP,

593 kPa for SP, and 2694 kPa for MP. The critical degrees of

saturation, Src, are 90% and 85% for 100B and 30B,

respectively. The R values (Eq. (5)) are 0.43 and 0.5, and

the M values (Eq. (4)) are 0.4 and 0.24 for 100B and 30B,

respectively.

In the water content–dry density relationship, the contour

lines for equal suctions are vertical in DOP (Hypothesis 2).

For WOP, the contour lines for constant suction are calculated

by adopting a linear relationship between the degree of

saturation and suction to consider the effect of density on the

wetting path. Fig. 10. Dynamic and static compaction curves for different compaction

Figs. 9 and 10 show the experimental and the predicted efforts for 30B mixture, the points are the experimental results and the lines are

the predicted results.

compaction curves, and the contour line locations of constant

suction for the 100B and 30B mixtures. The results show that suction values seem to follow a scanning path due to drying or

the model agrees well with the experimental results of the a reduced water content, while taking a specimen from the

compaction tests. The predicted constant suction lines almost compaction mold until measuring the suction in a chilled

perfectly match the experimental data with a slight shift mirror device.

towards a lower water content due to the predicted results

representing the wetting path (Hypothesis 3). The measured

7.2. Verifying the relationships of previous compaction

curve models

relationships given by other compaction models, such as the

linear relationships between Atterberg limits (liquid limits LL

and PL), Gs, water content w, degree of saturation Sr, and the

void ratio of constant water content, e(cons w), and between the

compaction effort on a logarithmic scale (Al-Kafaji, 1993;

Pandian et al., 1997; Blotz et al., 1998; Sridharan and Nagaraj,

2005; Gurtug and Sridharan, 2002; Nagaraj et al., 2006a,

2006b; Jesmani et al., 2008). All the above relationships can

be explained by the semi-linear relationship between void ratio

and net stress in the saturated NCL under constant or different

Fig. 8. Predicted compaction curves for different compaction efforts using the values of the liquid limit (LL) for the same soil or different

volumetric yielding surface model for 30B soil. types of soils, respectively. It is important to mention that all

434 Y. Al-Badran, T. Schanz / Soils and Foundations 54 (2014) 426–438

Horpibulsuk et al, 2008a-(Eq.8)

(ﬁtting) of experimental results.

Model-Eq. 14

Honda et al. (2007) presented equations based on the 1

assumptions that the unsaturated normal compression lines in

OMC/OMCsp

the constant water content condition (although the degree of

saturation is increasing) are straight in the void ratio–ln (s) 0.8

plot, as long as the degree of saturation is not close to 100%.

This assumption, according to the proposed model, is correct

0.6

because the compression lines in the yielding state follow the

Sr-lines according to its degree of saturation. The positions of

the Sr-lines are ﬁxed for each soil. Therefore, all the normal 0.4

compression lines for different initial dry densities (under the 100 1000 10000

Copaction Effort, CE (kJ.m/m3 )

same water content) follow one straight line according to

Fig. 11. Normalization of OMC–compaction effort relationship.

Gs U w ¼ Sr Ue-euns ¼ Gs U w=Sr ð7Þ

rewritten as Eq. (14).

Horpibulsuk et al. (2008a) observed that, even though the

OMC values are different for different soils, their rate of eNCL ¼ eLL ð1:122 0:2343 U log sÞ ð13Þ

decrease with compaction effort is almost the same for all

ﬁne-grained soils, which is evident because the ratios for OMC

OMC/OMCSP are almost the same for the same compaction ¼ 2:375 0:496 logðCEÞ ð14Þ

OMCSP

effort:

OMC As shown in Fig. 11, Eq. (14) is close to Eq. (8). It is

¼ 2:09 0:39 logðCEÞ ð8Þ believed that the difference between Eqs. (8) and (14) is a

OMC SP

result of the fact that Eq. (13) is a ﬁtting equation for only 11

where OMCSP is the OMC for a standard proctor. different soils with a limited range of LL (36% o LL o 160%)

Eq. (8) can be explained by the relationship between NCL and a limited range of stress (about 800 kPa). However, Eq. (8)

and the liquid limit (LL) by using different values for the was generated by ﬁtting 24 different soils with LL (17% o

liquid limit to cover the range of ﬁne-grained soils. The LL o 25%) and a larger range of compaction effort (356–

optimum moisture content (OMC), according to Eq. (6) is 2694 kJ m/m3).

the following:

1

OMC ¼ eNCL ðSrc Þ2 R ð9Þ

Gs

8. Applications

OMC ¼ eNCL K ð10Þ

The model was applied to several datasets from the literature

2R with a large range of liquid limit values (37–180%). Four

ðSrc Þ

K¼ ð11Þ different soils were chosen (Table 1): natural Boom clay [Boom]

Gs

(Romero, 1999), pure calcigel (calcium-type) bentonite [100B2],

where K is constant for each soil (Gs and Src are constant for bentonite–sand mixture [50B2], and [30B2] (from Agus, 2005;

the same soil). Thus, the ratio between OMC/OMCSP can be Ariﬁn, 2008). Fifteen experimental datasets of compaction

calculated as curves for the four soils were collected; nine static compaction

OMC eNCL curves were for the natural Boom clay and two dynamic

¼ ð12Þ compaction curves were for each bentonite–sand mixture.

OMC SP eNCLð593kPaÞ

The critical degrees of saturation were determined directly

Now, if the general equation for NCL, presented by Nagaraj from the experimental results. The one-dimensional saturated

and Srinivasa Murthy (1986) (Eq. (13)) is used, Eq. (12) is NCL and SWCC for the natural Boom Clay were taken from

Romero (1999). The one-dimensional saturated NCL for

100B2 was taken from Baille et al. (2010), and for the 50B2

Table 1 and 30B2 mixtures, the one-dimensional saturated NCL test

Properties of the soils used in the application. results were taken from Al-Badran and Schanz (2009b). The

Soil symbol Gs LL% Src% R M

SWCC of all the bentonite–sand mixtures were obtained from

Ariﬁn (2008).

Boom 2.7 58 90 0.35 0.35 Figs. 12–15 present the predicted and the measured compac-

100B2 2.8 180 90 0.04 – tion curves for the above selected soils. The predicted results

50B2 2.725 74 86.5 0.15 –

show a good agreement with the experimental results for both

30B2 2.695 37 85 0.45 –

compaction and suction data.

Y. Al-Badran, T. Schanz / Soils and Foundations 54 (2014) 426–438 435

Fig. 12. Static compaction curves and contour lines of equal matric suction for

natural Boom clay (exp. Data from Romero, 1999), the points are the Fig. 15. Dynamic compaction curves and contour lines of equal suction for

experimental results and the lines are the prediction results. 30B2 soil (exp. Data from Agus, 2005; Ariﬁn, 2008), the points are the

experimental results and the lines are the prediction results.

24 70

MP-Max. Dd-model SP-Max. Dd-model

22 RP-Max. Dd-model MP-OMC-model 60

SP-OMC-model RP-OMC-model

20

50

18

40

16

30

14

20

12

10 10

8 0

20 40 60 80 100 120

Liquid limit, LL (%)

Fig. 16. Optimum moisture content (OMC)-Max. Dry unit weight (γdmax) chart

Fig. 13. Dynamic compaction curves and contour lines of equal suction for using the yielding model depending upon LL.

100B2 soil (exp. Data from Agus, 2005; Ariﬁn, 2008), the points are the

experimental results and the lines are the prediction results.

optimum moisture content (OMC), without performing labora-

tory Proctor tests, is presented in this section. This chart

depends on Eq. (6), with Sr ¼ Src to determine the maximum

dry density and Eq. (9) to determine the optimum moisture

content. Eq. (13) from Nagaraj and Srinivasa Murthy (1986) is

used to predict the NCL from the LL to identify the value for

eNCL with different compaction efforts. To simplify the

model, it is assumed that the speciﬁc gravity, Gs, taken as

equal to 2.7, and based on the experimental results, the

following values are adopted: Src ¼ 87% and R ¼ 0.5 for the

range of liquid limit from 20% to 120%. Fig. 16 shows

the relationship between the maximum dry density (γdmax) and

the optimum moisture content (OMC) for a large range of

liquid limit values (20–120%) for Reduced Proctor RP (CE ¼

356 kJ m/m3), Standard 1 Proctor SP (CE ¼ 593 kJ m/m3), and

Fig. 14. Dynamic compaction curves and contour lines of equal suction for Modiﬁed Proctor MP (CE ¼ 2694 kJ m/m3). The maximum dry

50B2 soil (exp. Data from Agus, 2005; Ariﬁn, 2008), the points are the density for each compaction effort decreases with an increas-

experimental results and the lines are the prediction results.

ing liquid limit. The behavior of the optimum moisture content

is the reverse of that of the maximum dry density. The rate of

9. A stepwise procedure for fast estimation of optimum increase in the maximum dry density increases slightly as the

moisture content and maximum dry unit weight compaction effort increases.

Data for 147 different ﬁne-grained soils (LL: 17–110%)

A simple chart based on liquid limit values for the straight from 24 reported pieces of literature (Blotz et al., 1998; Daniel

forward estimation of the maximum dry density (γdmax) and the and Benson, 1990; Benson and Trast, 1995; Daniel and Wu,

436 Y. Al-Badran, T. Schanz / Soils and Foundations 54 (2014) 426–438

24

10. Conclusions

MP-Max. Dd-model

Max. Dry density, (kN/m3 )

20

MP-OMC-model A theoretical model for the compaction curve of ﬁne-grained

MP-OMC-Exp. data

soils at various compaction efforts for the entire range of water

(%)

40 contents is presented. The basic parameters of the new model

16

are NCL, the compaction effort, the degree of saturation, and

12

20 the critical degree of saturation, the parameter that controls the

inﬂuence of the degree of saturation to increase the void ratio

8 0

under constant compaction effort, and the parameter that

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 controls the position of the maximum value of the void ratio

Liquid limit, LL (%) under each net stress or compaction effort. The model can

describe the lines of equal suction on the compaction curves.

24 The new model was validated by comparing the predicted

SP-Max. Dd-model

results with the experimental results using dynamic and static

Max. Dry density, (kN/m3 )

SP-OMC-model

20 SP-OMC-Exp. data

compaction tests. The new model was further veriﬁed by

comparing the predicted results with the experimental data

(%)

40

16 reported by previous static and dynamic compaction tests.

The predicted results of the compaction curves using the new

20 model match the experimental data well. A simple chart, based

12

on this model and using only liquid limits, is presented to

8 0 estimate γdmax and OMC quickly. This chart covers a large range

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

of LL values (20–120%). The proposed chart has been validated

Liquid limit, LL (%)

using data for 147 different clay soils (LL: 17–110%). The chart

generally shows a good agreement with the experimental data.

24

Optimum moisture content,

RP-Max. Dd-model

Max. Dry density, (kN/m3 )

RP-OMC-model

20 RP-OMC-Exp. data

References

(%)

40

16

Agus, S.S, Schanz, T, Fredlund, D.G., 2010. Measurements of suction versus

20 water content for bentonite–sand mixture. Can. Geotech. J. 47, 583–594.

12

Agus, S.S., 2005. An Experimental Study on Hydro-mechanical Characteristics

of Compacted Bentonite–Sand Mixtures (Ph.D. Dissertation). Faculty of

8 0 Civil Engineering, Bauhaus-Universität Weimar, Germany.

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Al-Badran, Y., 2001, Collapse Behavior of Al-Tharthar Gypseous Soil (M.Sc.

Liquid limit, LL (%)

Thesis), Civil Engineering, Baghdad University, Iraq,.

Fig. 17. Optimum moisture content (OMC)-Max. Dry unit weight (γdmax) chart Al-Badran, Y., 2011. Volumetric Yielding Behavior of Unsaturated Fine-

using the yielding model depending upon LL and the experimental results from Grained Soils (Ph.D. Thesis), Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Germany.

literature: (a) modiﬁed proctor (MP), (b) standard proctor (SP), and (c) reduced Al-Badran, Y. Schanz, T., 2009a. Yielding surface model of volume change

proctor (RP). for ﬁne-grained soils.In: 4th Asia-Paciﬁc Conference on Unsaturated Soils,

23–25 November 2009, Newcastle, Australia, pp. 863–871.

Al-Badran, Y., Schanz, T., 2009b. Soil–water characteristic curve and

consolidation for ﬁne-grained soils. In: 4th Asia-Paciﬁc Conference on

1993; Al-Zoubi, 2008; Benson et al., 1997; Leong et al., 2007; Unsaturated Soils, 23–25 November 2009, Newcastle, Australia, pp. 243–249.

Horpibulsuk et al., 2006, 2008a, 2008b; Ellis, 1980; Gurtug Al-Kafaji, A.N., 1993. Estimation of soil compaction parameters by means of

and Sridharan, 2002; Sawangsuriya et al., 2008; Tripathy and Atterberg limits. Q. J. Eng. Geol. 26, 359–368.

Schanz, 2007; Pereira and Fredlund, 2000; Pandian et al., Al-Zoubi, M.S., 2008. Swell characteristics of Natural and treated compacted

clays. Electron. J. Geotech. Eng. 13 (Band D).

1997; Delage et al., 1996; Tarantino and De Col, 2008; Ariﬁn, Y.F., 2008. T-H-M Behavior of Compacted Bentonite–Sand Mixtures:

Hoffmann and Tarantino, 2008; Kabir and Taha, 2004; Sun An Experimental Study (Ph.D. thesis). Faculty of Civil Engineering,

et al., 2007; Jotisankasa et al., 2007; Al-Khafaji, 1993; Bauhaus-Universität Weimar, Germany.

Romero, 1999; Agus, 2005; Ariﬁn, 2008) were used beside ASTM, 1997. Soil and Rock. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA

the results of the present study to validate the proposed chart. (Annual Book of Standards. Volumes 04.08 and 04.09).

Backer, R., Frydman, S., 2009. Unsaturated soil mechanics: critical review of

The total data comprise 211 peak compaction points, PCPs: 42 physical foundations. Eng. Geol. J. 106, 26–39.

for MP, 147 for SP, and 22 for RP, respectively. Fig. 17 Baille, W., Tripathy, S., Schanz, T., 2010. Swelling pressure and one-

presents a comparison between the new chart for the peak dimensional compressibility behavior of bentonite at high pressure. Appl.

compaction points and the experimental data. The ﬁgure shows Clay Sci., 1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2010.01.002.

that the new chart results generally show a good agreement Basheer, I.A., 2001. Empirical modeling of the compaction curve of cohesive

soils. Can. Geotech. J. 38, 29–45.

with the experimental data. Thus, the proposed chart can be Basheer, I.A., Neuromechanistic-Based Modeling and Simulation of Constitu-

used for the fast estimation of the maximum dry density (γdmax) tive Behavior of Fine-Grained Soils (Ph.D. Dissertation), Kansas State

and the optimum moisture content (OMC). University, Manhattan, Kans, 1998.

Y. Al-Badran, T. Schanz / Soils and Foundations 54 (2014) 426–438 437

Basheer, I.A., Najjar, Y.M., 1995. A neural network for soil compaction. Numerical United States Waterways Experiment Station, Soil and Pavement Labora-

Models in Geomechanics, Numerical Methods in Geomechanics, vol. 5. tory, Vicksburg, Miss.

NUMOG. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 435–440. Jesmani, M, Manesh, A.N., Hoseini, S.M. R., 2008. Optimum water content

Benson, C., Trast, J., 1995. Hydraulic conductivity of thirteen compacted and maximum unit weight of clayey gravels at different compactive efforts.

clays. Clays Clay Min. 43 (6), 669–681. Electron. J. Geotech. Eng. 13 (L).

Benson, C.H., Gunter, A.G., Boutwell, G.P., Trautwein, S.J., Berzanskis, P.H., Joslin, J.C., 1959. Ohio's Typical Moisture–Density Curves. 239. American

1997. Comparison of four methods to assess hydraulic conductivity. J. Society for Testing and Materials, Special Technical Publication STP

Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 123 (10), 929–937. 111–118.

Casini, F., Vassallo, R., Mancuso, C., Desideri, A., 2007. Interpretation of the Jotisankasa, A., Ridley, A., Coop, M., 2007. Collapse behavior of compacted

behavior of compacted soils using Cam-clay extended to unsaturated silty clay in suction-monitored oedometer apparatus. J. Geotech. Geoen-

conditions. In: 2nd International Conference Mechancis of Unsaturated viron. Eng. 133 (7), 867–877.

Soil,7–9 March, Weimar, Germany. Kabir, M.H., Taha, M.R., 2004. Assessment of physical properties of a granite

Blotz, L.R., Benson, C., Boutwell, G., 1998. Estimating optimum water residual soil as an isolation barrier. Electron. J. Geotech. Eng. 9 (Bundle B).

content and maximum dry unit weight for compacted clays. J. Geotech. Korﬁatis, G.P., Manikopoulos, C.N., 1982. Correlation of maximum dry

Eng. 124, 907–912. density and grain size. J. Geotech. Eng. 108, 1171–1176.

Daniel, D., Benson, C., 1990. Water content-density criteria for compacted soil Kurucuk, N., Kodikara, J., Fredlund, D. G., 2008. Theoretical modelling of the

liners. J. Geotech. Eng. 116 (12), 1181 (1130). compaction curve. In: Unsaturated Soils Conference, Advances in Geo-

Daniel, D., Wu, Y., 1993. Compacted clay liners and covers for arid sites. J. Engineering, Durham, UK, 2008, pp. 375–379.

Geotech. Eng. 119 (2), 223–237. Lawton, E.C., Fragaszy, R.J., Hardcastle, J.H., 1989. Collapse of Compacted

Davidson, D. T., Gardiner, W. F., 1949. Calculation of standard proctor Clayey Sand. Journal of Geotech. Engrg. , ASCE, 115 (9), 1252–1267.

density and optimum moisture content from mechanical, analysis, shrink- Lee, P.Y., Suedkamp, R.J., 1972. Characteristics of Irregularly Shaped

age and factors and plasticity index. In: Highways Research Board Compaction Curves of Soils. National Academy of Sciences, Washington,

Proceedings of the Annual. Meeting, vol. 29, pp. 447–481. DC (Highway Research Record No. 3811-9).

Delage, P., Graham, J., 1995. Understanding the behaviour of unsaturated soils Leong, E. C., Wee, H. S., Raharajo, H. One-dimensional compressibility of

requires reliable conceptual models: state of the art report. In: Alonso, E.E., unsaturated soils. In: 3rd Asian Conference on Unsaturated Soil, China,

Delage, P. (Eds.), In Proceedings of the ﬁrst international conference on 2007, pp. 237–242.

unsaturated soils. Rotterdam, Balkema, pp. 1223–1256. Li, H., Sego, D.C., 2000. Eq. for complete compaction curve of ﬁne-grained

Delage, P., Audiguier, M., Cui, Y., Howat, M., 1996. Microstructure of a soils and its applications. In: Shanklin, D.W., Rademacher, K.R., Talbot., J.R.

compacted silt. Can. Geotech. J. 33, 150–158. (Eds.), Construction and Controlling Compaction of Earth ﬁlls, vol. 1384.

DIN. Baugrund und Grundwasser. Benenen und Beschreiben von Boden und American Society for Testing and Materials, Special Technical Publication

Fels, 1987, Deustche Institut für Normung e.V., Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin. STP, pp. 113–125.

Dixon, D.A., Gray, M.N., Thomas, A.W., 1985. A study of the compaction Li, Z.M. (1995) Compressibility and collapsibility of compacted and saturated

properties of potential clay-sand buffer mixtures for use in nuclear fuel lossial soils. Proc. 1st Int. Conf. On Unsaturated Soils, Paris. EE. Alonso

waste disposal. Eng. Geol. 21, 247–255. and P. Delage (eds.), Balkema, 1:139-144.

Ellis, C. I., 1980. Soil compaction at low moisture content-ﬁeld trials in Sudan. Livneh, M., Ishai, I., 1978. Using indicative properties to predict the density–

In: 7th Regional Conference for Africa on Soil Mechanics and Foundation moisture relationship of soils. Transp. Res. Record 690, 22–28.

Engineering, Accra, Ghana, 1–7 June. Mitchell, J.K., 1993. Fundamentals of Soil Behavior, 2nd edition Wiley, New

Gens A., Alonso E.E., Suriol J., and Lloret A. (1995) Effect of the structure York.

and volumetric behaviour of a compacted soil. In: Alonso and Delage Nagaraj, T.S., Lutenegger, A., Pandian, N.S., Manoj, M., 2006a. Rapid

(Eds.), In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Unsaturated estimation of compaction parameters for ﬁeld control. Geotech. Test. J.

Soils, Paris, France, Vol. 1: 83–88. 29 (6), 1–10.

Gurtug, Y., Sridharan, A., 2002. Prediction of compaction characteristics of Nagaraj, T.S., 1994. Analysis and Prediction of Compaction Characteristics of

ﬁne-grained soils. Geotechnique 52 (10), 761–763. Soils. Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India.

Hilf, J.W., 1991. Compacted ﬁll. In: H.-Y. Fang (Eds).Foundation Engineering Nagaraj, T.S., Bindumadhava, J., 1992. Analysis of compaction characteristics

Handbook.. Chapman and Hall Ltd., London, UK, pp, 249–316. of ﬁne grained soils. In: Indian Geotechnical Conference, Calcutta, vol. 1,

Hindi, A.R. O., 1967. Identiﬁcation, physical properties and compaction of pp. 441–444.

swelling soils in western Egypt. Bull. College Eng. 1 (1), 15–38. Nagaraj, T.S., Srinivasa Murthy, B.R., 1986. A critical reappraisal of

Hoffmann, C., Tarantino, A., 2008. Effect of grain size distribution on water compression index Eq.s. Geotechnique 36 (1), 27–32.

retention behavior of well graded coarse material, unsaturated soils: advances Nagaraj, T.S., Schanz, T., Prasad, K.N., 2006b. Generalized State Parameter

in geo-engineering. In: Toll, D.G., Augarde, C.E., Gallipoli, D., for Constitutive Relations. Indian Geotechnical Society, ING, Chennai,

Wheeler, S.J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1st European Conference on India (14–16 December).

Unsaturated Soils. Leiden: CRC Press/Balkema, Durham, UK, pp. 291–298. Najjar, Y.M., Basheer, I.A., 1996. Utilizing computational neural networks for

Honda, M., Ohno, S., Iizuka, A., Kawai, K., Ohta H. A study on yield stress in evaluating the permeability of compacted clay liners. J. Geotech. Geol.

unsaturated clay. In: 3rd Asia Conference on Unsaturated Soils, China, Eng. 14, 193–212.

2007, pp. 219–222. Pandian, N.S., Nagaraj, T.S., Manoj, M., 1997. Reexamination of compaction

Horpibulsuk, S., Rachan, R, Katkan, W., 2006. Prediction of compaction characteristics of ﬁne-grained soils. Geotech. Test. J. 47 (2), 363–366.

curves at various energies using a one point tests. In: International Symposium Pereira, J., Fredlund, D.G., 2000. Volume change behavior of collapsibility

of Lowland Technology, September 14–16, 2006 in Saga, Japan. compacted Gneiss soil. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 126 (10), 907–916.

Horpibulsuk, S., Katkan, W., Apichatvullop, A., 2008a. An approach for Ramiah, B.K., Viswanath, V., Krishnamurthy, H.V., 1970. Interrelationships

assessment of compaction curves of ﬁne- grained soils at various energies of compaction and index properties. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Southeast

using a one point test. Soils Found. 48 (2), 115–126. Asian Conference on Soil Engineering, Singapore, pp. 577–587.

Horpibulsuk, S., Katkan, W., Naramitkornburee, A., 2008b. Modiﬁed Ohio's Razouki, S.S., Haik, M., Spyridon, G., Mosa, S., Wazir, H., Majead, G.,

curves: a rapid estimation of compaction curves for coarse- and ﬁne- Ibrahim, E., 1980. On the compaction and CBR behavior of Basrah soil.

grained soils. Geotech. Test. J. 32 (1), 1–12. Bull. College Eng. 4 (1), 107–133.

Howell, J.L., Shackelford, C.D., Amer, N.H., Stern, R.T., 1997. Compaction of Razouki, S., Kuttah, D., Al-Damluji, O., Nashat, I., 2008. Using gypsiferous

sand-processed clay soil mixtures. Geotech. Test. J. 20 (4), 443–458. soil for embankments in hot desert areas. In: ICE, Construction Materials,

Jeng, Y.S., Strohm, W.E., 1976. Prediction of the Shear Strength and vol. 6, CM2, pp. 63–71.

Compaction Characteristics of Compacted Fine- Grained Cohesive Soils. Rethati, L., 1988. Probabilistic Solutions in Geotechnics. Elsevier, New York.

438 Y. Al-Badran, T. Schanz / Soils and Foundations 54 (2014) 426–438

Ring, G.W., Sallgerb, J.R., Collins, W.H., 1962. Correlation of compaction Tarantino, A., Tombolato, S., 2005. Coupling of hydraulic and mechanical

and classiﬁcation test data. Highway Res. Board Bull. 325, 577–587. behaviour in unsaturated compacted clay. Géotechnique 55 (4), 307–317.

Romero, E., 1999. Characterisation and T-H-M behavior of unsaturated Boom Tripathy, S., Schanz, T., 2007. Compressibility behavior of clays at large

clay: an experimental study (Ph.D. thesis), Uni. Polytecnica de Catalunya. pressures. Can. Geotech. J. 44, 355–362.

Sawangsuriya, A., Edil, T., Bosscher, P., 2008. Modulus-suction-moisture Turnbull, W.J. Computation of the optimum moisture content in the moisture–

relationship for compacted soils. Can. Geotech. J. 45, 973–983. density relationship of soils. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International

Schanz, T., Ariﬁn, Y., Agus, S., Khan, M., 2010. Time effect on the total Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Rotterdam,

suction of bentonites. Soil Found. J. 50 (2), 195–202. vol. 4, 1948, pp. 256–262.

Sridharan, A., Nagaraj, H.B., 2005. Plastic limit and compaction characteristics Wang, M.C., Huang, C.C., 1984. Soil compaction and permeability prediction

of ﬁne-grained soils. Ground Improv. 9 (1), 17–22. models. J. Environ. Eng. 110, 1063–1083.

Sun, D.A., Sheng, D., Xu, Y.F., 2007. Collapse behavior of unsaturated Wheeler, S.J., Sivakumar, V., 1995. An elasto-plastic critical state framework

compacted soil with different initial densities. Can. Geotech. J. 44 (6), for unsaturated soils. Géotechnique 45 (1), 35–53.

673–686. Wheeler, S.J., Sharma, R.J., Buisson, M.S.R., 2003. Coupling of hydraulic

Tarantino, A., De Col, E., 2008. Compaction behavior of clay. Géotechnique hysteresis and stress–strain behaviour in unsaturated soils. Géotechnique

58 (3), 199–213. 53 (1), 41–54.

- Compaction VTransféré parsipilPI12
- Sand Cone TestTransféré parCondro darmo
- 01 PresentacionISTRAMTransféré parLuisRodrigoPerezPinto
- CEEN3160 F10 Lab4 Proctor SandConeTransféré parZedrickTrinidad
- LAB1Transféré parPrisonerKit Choi
- exp 1 Compaction Test ( Proctor Test ).docxTransféré parSudesh Nair
- To Assess the Degree of CompactionTransféré parAira Nelle Boyoten
- Soil CompactionTransféré parIcha Estrada
- Aazokhi Waruwu -The Compaction Potential in Increasing Compressive and Shear Strength at Peat SoilTransféré parSiska Novelia Zai
- 32 Road Compaction R&B1014Transféré parAnonymous 8kRPSXXTZ7
- Placement Moisture Content-2% FixationTransféré parpenchair
- GeoILab5Transféré parAsad W Waxeer
- D 560 – 96 ;RDU2MC1SRUQ_.pdfTransféré parLupita Carely
- asthooTransféré parjair saravia ore
- Proctor Result Izzah.docxTransféré parAnonymous 3o40lf
- testingTransféré parnerilar
- WMM Job No 026 STransféré parRenugopal
- Moisture in Portland Cement ConcreteTransféré parNabila Mashhor
- Omc -Dry Density Using Light CompactionTransféré parJiji Krishnan
- EFFECT OF USING POZZOLANIC MATERIALS ON THE PROPERTIES OF EGYPTIAN SOILS.pdfTransféré parHery Budianto
- BS EN 13286-2-2010 (2012)Transféré parVag Katsikopoulos
- Richard P Feynman-Surely Youre Joking Mr Feynman v5Transféré parPavan Nayak
- Soil-Compaction Lab 1Transféré parAbdulrahman Alnagar
- 1016040043_Sultan Fat Ihza AbdillahTransféré parRifka Amalia
- AASHTO t255Transféré parSabila Ihsani
- Compaction AssgnmtTransféré parRoji Mol
- GTE-ITransféré parsainath
- Siti Aimi Nadia Mohd YusoffTransféré parshivani
- LAB REPORT NO.4 BODY.docxTransféré parJanissa
- 2.1 Subgrade Soils.pptxTransféré parjong Lac

- Yield Criteria.pdfTransféré parGracie Azevedo
- Apostila_Completa_Orencio (1).pdfTransféré parGracie Azevedo
- Fundamentals of Soil Behavior (J.K. Mitchell & K. Soga)Transféré parEmílioFariasVaz
- anotação comportamento de materiais - vinícius.pdfTransféré parGracie Azevedo
- [1951] Timoshenko S.P., Goodier J.N.-Theory of elasticity.pdfTransféré parGracie Azevedo
- Patologias(Pec1411)(Energia Spt)Transféré parGracie Azevedo
- Análise de Tensões e Deformações em Solos - Izabel Azevedo.pdfTransféré parGracie Azevedo

- is.399.1963Transféré parAnonymous 8Ps6oyzwE
- Stoichiometric Calculations Worksheet KEYTransféré parGabby Lisowicz
- Torque_Tables_02.pdfTransféré paradvantage025
- Famous Laughing Madcaps Syd Barrett Group Now on FacebookTransféré parnamastegroup
- Paralysis After Polio Vaccination Surveillance Report - PDFTransféré parMoralVolcano
- PA-9312_9324_9336Transféré parcadati
- Arri 235 BrochureTransféré parfnv2001
- TEST 1Transféré parCù Minh Hiếu
- Palmistry SecretsTransféré parKainshk Gupta
- Pier Luigi Nervi and the art of buildingsTransféré parfausto giovannardi
- MAY ANN ( OPERATION MANAGEMENT).pptTransféré parmay ann
- CLOSELY SPACED PILE BREAKWATER AS A PROTECTION STRUCTURE AGAINST BEACH EROSIONTransféré parАлександр Кириленко
- Aer - 200kWTransféré parsergomet
- Optical properties and spectroscopic parameters of Nd3-doped borate READTransféré parWan Aizuddin
- Grace Fit 8 Week GuideTransféré parPaula Mastrotta
- All About DiamondsTransféré parpushkar_k123
- What is being environmentally friendly.docxTransféré parAnonymous 6OrHLpl
- Taller Planeación Agregada (1)Transféré parJulio Rodel
- ibandronateTransféré parPratik R Jobalia
- Datasheet BFP640aTransféré parCorey Ramirez
- Secrets of the Reds (Excerpt)Transféré parPaul Rattray
- White and Red Cells DevelopementTransféré parsaint5470
- Jeddah North Area (Znj523) M-eri-12637Transféré parnicoloh2002
- Www Audi Portal Com en Diagnostic Ecu 11020 HTML 1Transféré par81968
- ImpairmentTransféré parShy Ng
- MECH 1100 Quiz 4 practice.pdfTransféré parKloyd Eurolfan
- TREMEC_TR-6070.pdfTransféré parAngel
- Tax2 - Real Property Tax ReviewerTransféré parcardeguzman
- LakotaTransféré parAmal Mechanic
- Lectures1,2,3 of Breast Anatomy,RadiologyTransféré parahmad shaltout