Comparison between static and dynamic laboratory compaction methods

Mohamed Ahmed Hafez Ahmed, M. Doris Asmani, S. Nurbaya

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Compaction is the most important activity in the early stages of construction in order to improve engineering properties of soils. There are two main methods of compaction that are used in this study which are Static Packing Pressure and Standard Proctor Test. The static packing pressure test is different concept from dynamic compaction that has been produced by R.R Proctor, 1993. The concept produced by R.R Proctor has a few imperfections in determine the value of maximum dry density (MDD) and optimum moisture content (OMC). One of these imperfections is where we determine the OMC and MDD in soil laboratory using dynamic method to decide for the MDD and OMC of subgrade in which we use static compaction method to achieve it. Thus, a new method has been invented to determine the MDD and OMC values by using static compaction efforts in order close the gap between laboratory and field data. These study exam different classes of cohesive soils and the results obtained from MDD and OMC will be compared against the field results, it was found that the static pressure method is more practical and sensible than the dynamic compaction. Based in the laboratory results, Sample B under static pressure gives 2.014Mg/m3 as MDD while under dynamic it gives only 1.788Mg/m3. Therefore, the static test reached higher degree of compaction compared to dynamic method. This research will be developed further to improve engineering parameter especially for pavement design which is based on the value CBR. The Packing Pressure Compaction test is introduced as a new laboratory compaction method and it is suitable to measure the degree of compaction for Malaysian cohesive soils.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1641-1650
Number of pages10
JournalElectronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering
Volume15 O
Publication statusPublished - 2010

Fingerprint

compaction
Compaction
dry density
moisture content
Moisture
Soils
cohesive soil
comparison
method
laboratory
Defects
subgrade
geotechnical property
pavement
Pavements
soil
engineering
test

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology

Cite this

@article{73448813baec4182a9401c50beaf482a,
title = "Comparison between static and dynamic laboratory compaction methods",
abstract = "Compaction is the most important activity in the early stages of construction in order to improve engineering properties of soils. There are two main methods of compaction that are used in this study which are Static Packing Pressure and Standard Proctor Test. The static packing pressure test is different concept from dynamic compaction that has been produced by R.R Proctor, 1993. The concept produced by R.R Proctor has a few imperfections in determine the value of maximum dry density (MDD) and optimum moisture content (OMC). One of these imperfections is where we determine the OMC and MDD in soil laboratory using dynamic method to decide for the MDD and OMC of subgrade in which we use static compaction method to achieve it. Thus, a new method has been invented to determine the MDD and OMC values by using static compaction efforts in order close the gap between laboratory and field data. These study exam different classes of cohesive soils and the results obtained from MDD and OMC will be compared against the field results, it was found that the static pressure method is more practical and sensible than the dynamic compaction. Based in the laboratory results, Sample B under static pressure gives 2.014Mg/m3 as MDD while under dynamic it gives only 1.788Mg/m3. Therefore, the static test reached higher degree of compaction compared to dynamic method. This research will be developed further to improve engineering parameter especially for pavement design which is based on the value CBR. The Packing Pressure Compaction test is introduced as a new laboratory compaction method and it is suitable to measure the degree of compaction for Malaysian cohesive soils.",
author = "{Hafez Ahmed}, {Mohamed Ahmed} and {Doris Asmani}, M. and S. Nurbaya",
year = "2010",
language = "English",
volume = "15 O",
pages = "1641--1650",
journal = "Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering",
issn = "1089-3032",
publisher = "Oklahoma State University",

}

Comparison between static and dynamic laboratory compaction methods. / Hafez Ahmed, Mohamed Ahmed; Doris Asmani, M.; Nurbaya, S.

In: Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 15 O, 2010, p. 1641-1650.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison between static and dynamic laboratory compaction methods

AU - Hafez Ahmed, Mohamed Ahmed

AU - Doris Asmani, M.

AU - Nurbaya, S.

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - Compaction is the most important activity in the early stages of construction in order to improve engineering properties of soils. There are two main methods of compaction that are used in this study which are Static Packing Pressure and Standard Proctor Test. The static packing pressure test is different concept from dynamic compaction that has been produced by R.R Proctor, 1993. The concept produced by R.R Proctor has a few imperfections in determine the value of maximum dry density (MDD) and optimum moisture content (OMC). One of these imperfections is where we determine the OMC and MDD in soil laboratory using dynamic method to decide for the MDD and OMC of subgrade in which we use static compaction method to achieve it. Thus, a new method has been invented to determine the MDD and OMC values by using static compaction efforts in order close the gap between laboratory and field data. These study exam different classes of cohesive soils and the results obtained from MDD and OMC will be compared against the field results, it was found that the static pressure method is more practical and sensible than the dynamic compaction. Based in the laboratory results, Sample B under static pressure gives 2.014Mg/m3 as MDD while under dynamic it gives only 1.788Mg/m3. Therefore, the static test reached higher degree of compaction compared to dynamic method. This research will be developed further to improve engineering parameter especially for pavement design which is based on the value CBR. The Packing Pressure Compaction test is introduced as a new laboratory compaction method and it is suitable to measure the degree of compaction for Malaysian cohesive soils.

AB - Compaction is the most important activity in the early stages of construction in order to improve engineering properties of soils. There are two main methods of compaction that are used in this study which are Static Packing Pressure and Standard Proctor Test. The static packing pressure test is different concept from dynamic compaction that has been produced by R.R Proctor, 1993. The concept produced by R.R Proctor has a few imperfections in determine the value of maximum dry density (MDD) and optimum moisture content (OMC). One of these imperfections is where we determine the OMC and MDD in soil laboratory using dynamic method to decide for the MDD and OMC of subgrade in which we use static compaction method to achieve it. Thus, a new method has been invented to determine the MDD and OMC values by using static compaction efforts in order close the gap between laboratory and field data. These study exam different classes of cohesive soils and the results obtained from MDD and OMC will be compared against the field results, it was found that the static pressure method is more practical and sensible than the dynamic compaction. Based in the laboratory results, Sample B under static pressure gives 2.014Mg/m3 as MDD while under dynamic it gives only 1.788Mg/m3. Therefore, the static test reached higher degree of compaction compared to dynamic method. This research will be developed further to improve engineering parameter especially for pavement design which is based on the value CBR. The Packing Pressure Compaction test is introduced as a new laboratory compaction method and it is suitable to measure the degree of compaction for Malaysian cohesive soils.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79251553452&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79251553452&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 15 O

SP - 1641

EP - 1650

JO - Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering

JF - Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering

SN - 1089-3032

ER -