Back to Search Start Over

Laboratory Compaction of Soils using a Small Mold Procedure

Authors :
John H. Grove
Edmund Perfect
Martín Díaz-Zorita
Source :
Soil Science Society of America Journal. 65:1593-1598
Publication Year :
2001
Publisher :
Wiley, 2001.

Abstract

The compactability of a soil can be determined from parameters derived from laboratory compaction curves generated using the Proctor test. However, this is a destructive, time-consuming, and labor-expensive procedure. Our objective was to evaluate a new more rapid test to determine the maximum dry bulk density (ρ Max b and soil water content at ρ Max b (SWC Max ) from laboratory compaction curves using a mold with smaller dimensions than established for the standard procedure. Laboratory compaction curves were developed for nine soils with clay contents ranging from 232 to 385 g kg -1 using the standard Proctor test procedure and the proposed procedure, which uses a 54-mm diam. mold and a 24.4 N rammer dropped from a height of 305 mm to produce a compactive effort (CE) of 109 kJ m -3 drop -1 . At a CE of 545 kJ m -3 , which is similar to the 540 kJ m -3 produced by the standard test, the ρ Max b and SWC Max parameters derived from the proposed procedure were positively and significantly correlated with those derived from the standard Proctor test. With both procedures, ρ Max b decreased and SWC Max increased as the soil clay content increased. The small mold method did not affect the linear relationship between soil clay content and ρ Max b , However, different relationships between SWC Max and clay content were observed, depending on the compaction procedure. Use of the small mold procedure requires less dry sieved soil, saves time, and labor in evaluating soil compactability. Based only on the reduction in rammer drops, use of the small mold procedure involves 15 times less labor requirements than the standard Proctor test.

Details

ISSN :
03615995
Volume :
65
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Soil Science Society of America Journal
Accession number :
edsair.doi...........7fc83660493637ea3ab704f8728da555
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2001.1593