CIVL6028 Ground Improvement

Soil Compaction 2 – Experience and Practice

Dr. Fiona Kwok

Room 6-32, Haking Wong Building
The University of Hong Kong
Tel: (852) 2859 2655
Email: fiona.kwok@hku.hk
Items relating to fill compaction for discussions
under Section 6 Earthworks of the General
Specifications for Civil Engineering Works 2006

1. End product specification vs method specification

2. Relative compaction / Relative density as controlling parameter in
quality control
3. Requirements on OMC necessary?
4. Method of evaluation of test results (e.g. acceptance criteria for
specified Relative Compaction)
5. Use of vibrating hammer vs. 2.5 / 4.5 kg hammer
6. Enhanced method of measurement of in-situ bulk density
7. Quick determination of moisture contents of fill materials
1. End product specification vs method
specification
• Becareful for big particles
Compaction of general fill material with a
large portion of coarse material

gravel
Compaction of public fill

• Soil fill is controlled by end product specification and rock fill

is controlled by method specification.

• Method of specification is generally less time-consuming as no

quality control tests need to be conducted but the
requirement for site supervision is more demanding.
2. Relative compaction / Relative density as
controlling parameter in quality control
Use of the standard compaction method on uniform sand may
cause difficulties on the interpretation of MDD and OMC.

1.9
15
1.8
Dry density (kg/m)
1.7 1.75
1.65

0 5 10 15 20
Moisture content (%)

Proctor Test on uniform sand

• Relative density for course-grained soils but not for fine-
grained soils

• Lee and Singh (1971) reviewed 47 different soils and

suggested a relation between the relative compaction and
density index:

• ID = 5(RC - 80). Hence, a 95% RC corresponds to an ID = 75%

• The trial minimum and maximum density tests on typical fill materials
in Hong Kong (with fine contents exceeding 25%) in Public Works
Central Laboratory shows that the results could be subject to
measurement error mainly due to loss of fines. Besides, any small
uncertainty on determination of maximum and minimum dry density
would be magnified in the estimation of relative density. As such, the
use of relative density as an acceptance criterion for fill compaction
of typical fill materials in Hong Kong is not recommended.

• In case where uniform sands are used as fill materials and that the
determination of the maximum dry density by Proctor test is not
feasible, the Engineer may consider the use of relative density as an
acceptance criterion. Details requirements, e.g. grading of
cohesionless fill, laboratory testing standards and acceptance criteria
for relative density, should be established and specified in the
Contract.
3. Requirements on OMC necessary?
• Moisture content of fill material

froittore
comet
affectgerer
• The shape of the Proctor curve gives hints on the sensitivity
of moisture content variation
• Wider acceptable range for clay and silty materials

Sand Clay

(on site)
Heavier compactive
energy
MDD MDD
95% MDD 2.5kg Proctor
2.5kg Proctor 95% MDD

±3%OMC

OMC ±3%OMC

OMC
 dilatory angle

loose
Similar to
w
Similar behavior was observed in the friction angle, dilatancy angle and
the maximum q of Soil 2.
For soil 3, there was no obvious difference in the friction angle, the
dilatancy angle and the maximum q of Soil 3 when the compaction
moisture content was changed from OMC-5.1% to OMC+6.9%
• The engineering properties can be enhanced if soil with high coarse content
(i.e. 90%) is compacted with moisture content dry of optimum but with
some reduction when compacting above OMC.
• In contrast, for soil with higher fines content, similar
shear strength parameters are resulted and some properties other than
shear strength parameters appear to be degraded during inundation if
specimen is compacted deviated from the OMC.
• Based on the previous review on sand replacement test results in Hong
Kong (Chung and Chu, 2020), most of the fill materials was compacted in
dry side and classified as sandy GRAVEL to silty/clayey SAND. It implies that
the effect of moisture content below OMC on the shear strength
parameters of soil stayed on the conservative side.
Recommendations

• The noticeable reduction in engineering properties caused by the

increase in compaction moisture content suggests that parameters of
soil compacted to the designed level of RC and at moisture content
3% above OMC should be used in geotechnical design.

• For soil with high content of sand and gravel (gravel content > 40%
and sand and gravel content > 90%), the effect of moisture content on
shear strength and stiffness is considered as beneficial
when compaction is in the dry side. The control with respect to the
dry side of OMC can be considered as a guidance for effective use of
the compactive effort in the field in achieving the required RC.
4. Method of evaluation of test results (e.g.
acceptance criteria for specified Relative
Compaction)
From 10 government projects with fill compaction (2014-2018)
A total no. of 32,742 tests
Fill materials are mainly silty/clayey very sandy GRAVEL or silly/clayey
very gravelly SAND
Non-compliance:

• R.C. > 100% :

Relative Compaction
• Non-compliance:

• For data on the deviation from OMC, the moisture content of the soil
measured is the in-situ moisture content taken at the time where
sand replacement test was conducted. It was not the moisture
content of fill during placing.
Methods of evaluation of test results?

1. e.g. Evaluation by the single result method

2. e.g. Evaluation by the attributes method

3. e.g. Evaluation by the variables method

(ref. BS EN 16907-5-2018, ISO 2859 series, ISO 3951 series, ISO 16269-
6)

In HK, we use single result method. What if the test results fails?
Evaluation by the attributes method
Evaluation by the variables method
Recommendation

• For project containing less than 200 numbers of individual RC, the existing
acceptance criteria (i.e. individual RC shall be at least 95%) should be
followed.

• If the project contains at least 200 numbers of individual RC, the following
acceptance criteria are proposed:
1. During the initial production of the first 200 numbers of individual RC (in
which data of retest should not constitute part of the initial production),
the current acceptance criteria (i.e. individual RC shall be at least 95%)
should be followed;
2. After the initial production of the first 200 numbers of individual RC,
a) Individual RC shall be at least 90%; and
b) Rolling average of 3 consecutive RC shall be at least 95%.
5. Use of vibrating hammer vs. 2.5 / 4.5 kg
hammer
Soil 1
Soil 2 Soil 3
• It is worth to note that fill material with 10-30% fines is commonly
encountered in Hong Kong.
• Although the compaction mode in vibrating hammer test could
simulate the compaction in field operation for coarse-grained or
granular soils, the uncertainty in the estimation of the compaction
energy of vibrating hammer should be noted.
• The use of vibrating hammer with unclear energy input could in turn
create uncertainty in the estimation of MDD due to the mismatch in
compaction energy provided in laboratory test and field compaction.
• Besides, loss of fines during vibration process will also add
uncertainty to the MDD.
• Therefore, unless the fill material has insignificant portion of fines or
there are measures to reduce the loss of fine particles in the test, the
vibrating hammer method should be used with caution to
determine the MDD of fill materials.
6. Enhanced method of measurement of in-
situ bulk density
• Available methods (e.g. BS EN 16907-5:2018)

Sand replacement test Nuclear densometer test

• The in-situ dry density is normally obtained on site from sand replacement test (SRT) or
nuclear densometer test (NDT)
Motivation
Require less manpower and more economical
Better construction practices with latest technology
Automation or semi-automation
Applicable to relatively large grain size fill materials

Review
1. Soil Compaction Supervisor (SCS)
2. Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP)
3. Humboldt Geogauge
4. Clegg hammer
5. Panda
6. Electrical Density Gauge (EDG)
7. Electromagnetic Soil Density Gauge (SDG)
Alternative methods to measure in-situ bulk
density / soil strength / moisture content
1. Electrical Density Gauge (EDG)

• EDG measures the electrical

properties of soils (e.g. impedance)
through the use of high frequency
ratio waves travelling between the
metal darts driven into the soil.

• EDG can determine wet/dry density,

moisture content and relative
compaction level based on
impedance and proctor test results. https://www.humboldtmfg.com/electrical-
density-gauge-edg.html

• International test standard is available

(ASTM D7698-11).
2. Moisture Density Indication (MDI)

• MDI uses time domain reflectometry

to determine apparent dielectric
constant and bulk electrical
conductivity of soil, and correlated
to moisture content and density of
soil.

• International test standard

is available (ASTM D6780). https://www.humboldtmfg.com/pdf/edg/Rutgers
U-report-MDI_Nuclear_Gauge%20Comparison.pdf
3. Electromagnetic Soil Density
Gauge (SDG)

• By measuring the electrical

impedance of the soil layer, SDG
can determine wet/dry density, relat
ive compaction and moisture
content with the input
of PSD, Atterberg limits and Proctor
test results.

• International test standard is

available (ASTM D-7830).

Photo credit: Operator’s handbook of SDG200

4. Clegg Hammer

• When the hammer strikes soil

surface, an accelerometer mounted
on the hammer feeds an output
which will be converted to an
“Impact value”.

• “Impact value” can be correlated to soil

strength and CBR.

• International test method is

https://sdinst.com/sites/default/files/do
available (ASTM D-5874). wnload s/cist884_4k5_ordercode.pdf
5. Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP)

DCP evaluates soil densification by

the amount of penetration of a
standard cone.

Penetration index (inch/blow) can be

used to correlate with CBR.

International test standard is

available (ASTM D-6951).

https://www.lrrb.org/p df/200912.pdf
6. PANDA

• It is a dynamic cone penetrometer

with a standard cone driven into soil
using a hammer.

• The measured tip resistance can be

used to calculate the bearing
capacity of soil.

• French standard is available.

https://www.insitutest.com.au/instru
mented-dynamic-cone-
penetrometer/overview/
7. Humboldt Geo-gauge

• It works by applying a vibrating

force at specific frequency, which
produce small deflections in soil.

• Resulting displacement is measured

and displayed as stiffness of soil.

• International test standard is available

(ASTM 6758).

https://www.humboldtmfg.com/geogauge.html
8. Soil Compaction Supervisor (SCS)

• A disposable sensor will produce a

voltage and SCS will measure the
voltage which is primarily dependent
on soil stiffness.

• A red signal will be shown when soil

reaches its maximum achievable
compaction.

http://www.mbweurope.com/utility-
division/reinstate/soil-compaction-
supervisor/soil- compaction-supervisor
7. Quick determination of moisture contents of
fill materials
Determination of moisture contents

• On site: Project based calibration of the Nuclear Density Gauge

• Overestimation of moisture contents (see next page)

• In Lab: Infrared oven (3.5 hours, < 110 degree celcius), Traditional
oven (20 hours) , Microwave (uneven and overheating)

• Other alternative: Hilf method (1959)

Measurement of Moisture Content
of Fill Materials
Moisture content of fill is a key parameter to determine
the relative density of each compacted fill layer. Using
convection oven, it usually takes 20 hours to determine
moisture content of soil.

PWCL has carried out a pilot study to use of infrared heating

technology to dry soil
Significantly reduce the required time for moisture content
determination to 3.5 hours
Control the temperature of soil not exceeding a particular
temperature (i. e. ≤ 110℃)
 Control specimen with
Infrared panel Test specimen
temperature sensor
• Drying method with the adoption of both IR and convection heating
was applicable to determine moisture content of fine-grained to
coarse-grained soil rapidly, within 3.5 hours of drying.
• The difference between the moisture content determined from
hybrid oven drying and conventional oven was in general less than
0.4% for different soil types. The difference is considered practically
insignificant for geotechnical engineering applications.
• Regarding the termination criterion for IR and convection heating
method, the comparison illustrated that soil could be deemed to be
dry if the successive weights of specimens taken half-hourly after 3
hours of drying with IR and convection heating was less than 0.1% of
the original mass of the specimen.
• For some specimens which cannot meet this drying criterion, it is
recommended the specimens to be returned to the hybrid oven for
successive drying and weighted at half-hourly intervals until drying
criterion is satisfied.
• It is expected that the difference in moisture contents between two
oven drying methods would be further reduced, less than 0.4%.
Recommendations
• Infrared heating allows fast heat transfer and convection heating
increases the diffusion rate of water vapor and heating rate.
• All in all, the drying efficiency of the infrared drying process can be
enhanced with convection heating at the same time.
• The study showed that hybrid drying with IR and convection heating is a
promising and quick alternative method to determine moisture content
within 3.5 hours for most of the soils.
• To provide more effective drying, it is suggested that soil
specimen should be crumbled and placed loosely in the container.
• As the temperature during drying process is up to 110 ºC, the method is
considered not suitable for soils containing gypsum, calcareous or organic
matter.
• Drying by other means (e.g. in convection oven at 45 ºC) is
considered more appropriate.
 4.5kg
Proctor
Vibrating
hammer
• Enhanced method of measurement of in-
2.5kg
Proctor situ bulk density

25 26

The in-situ dry density is normally obtained on site from sand

Determination of insitu fill density
replacement test (SRT) or nuclear densometer test (NDT)
Motivation

 Require less manpower and more economical

 Better construction practices with latest technology

NDT
 Automation or semi-automation

 Applicable to relatively large grain size fill materials

SRT

27 28