IJSTE - International Journal of Science Technology & Engineering | Volume 3 | Issue 04 | October 2016

ISSN (online): 2349-784X

Case Study on Output/Productivity of Pneumatic

Tired Vibratory Roller (Earth Compaction
Equipment) under Different Job and Management
Conditions
H. T. Kadivar
Lecturer
Department of Civil Engineering
Lukhdhirji Engineering College Morbi

Abstract
The objectives of this study were to workout output of Pneumatic tired Vibratory Roller considering different job and
management factors. With the increased emphasis on road and growth in road network, the technological development and
mechanization is taking place rapidly. Compaction is an important activity in road construction. Output of a compaction
equipment is equipment productivity which is a measure of the performance of the equipment. It is expressed as the output
achieved per equipment hour. The higher the output the better is the productivity. Equipment productivity tells how many units
of output, the equipment produces in an hour. It depends on the job conditions & management conditions as well as the operators
skill, persistence and co-ordination with other construction forces. To workout output of Pneumatic tired Vibratory Roller, two
different sites were selected. Hourly output and volumetric capacity were calculated based on field observation data.
Keywords: Pneumatic Tired Vibratory Roller, Output, Job Conditions, Management Conditions
________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I. INTRODUCTION

A roller is a compactor used to compact soil, gravel, concrete, or asphalt in the construction. Earth compaction equipment play a
significant role in the execution of modern high cost time bound construction projects like earthen dams, roads, canals etc. The
modern earth compaction is a self-propelled, rubber tired piece of construction equipment used to shape the ground surface for a
highway, airport, embankment, earthen dam etc. A Vibratory roller consists of a smooth steel drum in which vibrations are
generated by an unbalanced eccentric mass mounted on the axle of the roller or on the frame support by the axle.
Table-1
Typical Range of Operating parameters of Compaction Equipments
Sr. Typical Characteristics
Roller Type
No. Soil Type Velocity (km/h) Roller Weight (KN) Roller Width (m) Number of Passes
1 Static steel Drum Silt, Sand & Greval 3 to 6 30-100 1.0-2.5 6-12
2 Vibratory smooth Drum Clean Sand & Gravel 3 to 6 50-100 1.5 - 2.5 4-8
3 Vibratory pad foot Drum Silt , clayey silt 3 to 6 50-100 1.5-2.5 9-18
4 Pneumatic tyre Silt, Clay & sand 6 to 12 250-900 1.5-2.5 8-12
5 Sheep foot Clay 3 to 6 100-150 1.5-2.5 12-24
Vibratory rollers (fig.1) are applied to fine grained soils and also to sand-gravel mixtures. vibratory rollers are employed for
compaction in confined areas, such as highway shoulders, trench compaction, road widening works, building site preparation
sports and play grounds. The Range of Operating parameters of Compaction Equipments are presented in Table 1.

Fig. 1: Pneumatic tired Vibratory Roller

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org 89

 Case Study on Output/Productivity of Pneumatic Tired Vibratory Roller (Earth Compaction Equipment) under Different Job and Management Conditions
(IJSTE/ Volume 3 / Issue 04 / 015)

Output/Production Estimate of Earth Compaction Equipment

CxWxSX1000
output, Q (m3/ hr) = Xt (1) (as per Ref.03)
P
Where, C = Efficiency factor
W = drum width (m)
S = av. Speed (km/hr)
P = number of passes
t = Layer Thickness (m)
Output of the equipment varies with various conditions. Various factors which affect the output of the earth compaction
equipments are broadly grouped under two headings.
Controllable factors (management condition factors)
Uncontrollable factors (job condition factors)
Table - 2
Factors affecting output of earth compaction equipments

II. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two case studies were considered to work out the output of vibratory earth compaction. The models of Earth compaction used
for Case 1 and case 2 is BW212D2A Greaves Bomang and L&T 1104 respectively. Collected primary data includes soil type,
width graded per pass, average speed of earth compaction, number of passes and job efficiency factor. The details of the earth
compaction, job conditions, management conditions and actual productivity of both earth compaction are tabulated in table 3.
Table - 3
Computation of output for Earth compaction equipment
Project characteristics Case Study 1 Case Study - 2
Name of project Rajkot- chotila 4 lane highway project
Bagodara limbadi four Lane high way project (NH
(NH 8A/8B)
8A), nr. Bagodara
Rs. 23 crores (22 Km)
Rs. 11 crore (10 Km)
Estimated cost Sadbhav Eng. ltd.
Rao Conn company
Name of company Earth compaction of Sub
Layer earth compaction for bridge approach
Type of work Grade Layer (200 mm)
30000m3 (one approach)
70180 m3( Sub grade)
BW212D2A,Greaves Bomang (pneumatic tired
Total earth quantity L&T 1104 (Pneumatic tired Vibratory
Vibratory earth compaction)
Type of earth compaction earth compaction)
2.4 m
Drum width 2.15 m
1.5 m
Drum dia. 1.5 m
10176 kg
Operating wt. 10430 Kg
Job & Management conditions :-
10 / 24 hrs (one shift) 10 / 24 hrs (One shift)
- working hours / day
clay (sticky) fine gravel
- type of soil
3 yrs 6 yrs
- age of equipment
5 yrs 5 yrs
- operators experience
Job dimensions :-
100 m 180 m
- Length
16 m 12 m
- Width
0.20 m 0.20 m
- Layer thickness
4 km / hr 3.8 km / hr
- Av. Speed of earth compaction
2
Output of earth compaction :- Output q (m / hr) = CXWXSX1000 / P (According to S.C.Sharma )
C = eff. Factor 0.7 (Good operating condition) 0.7 (good operating condition)
2.4 m 2.15 m
W = drum width 4 km / hr 3.8 Km / hr
S = av. Speed 7 6
P = No. of passes =0.7 x 2.40 x 4.0 x 1000 / 7 0.7 x 2.15 x 3.8 x 1000 / 6

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org 90

 Case Study on Output/Productivity of Pneumatic Tired Vibratory Roller (Earth Compaction Equipment) under Different Job and Management Conditions
(IJSTE/ Volume 3 / Issue 04 / 015)

Output q = 960 m2 / hr. = 953 m2 / hr

Volumetric capacity
Q m3/hr = q x t = 960 x 0.20 = 192 m3 / hr = 953x 0.20 =190m3 /hr
Where t = layer thickness 0.20 m 0.20 m

III. FINDINGS FROM CASE STUDIES

1) Considering of Case 1 and 2, it has been observed that Hourly output of earth compaction of case-2 (953.16 m2 /hr) is
slightly less as compared to output of case-1(960 m2/hr).
2) 2. Operating conditions on both the site were better, therefore Job efficiency factor in both cases is taken 0.7 (Good
operating condition) for calculation of productivity of roller.
3) Width compacted per pass in case-2 is less as compared case-1. Roller efficiency is inversely proportional to the number of
passes made. Every additional pass increases the time and cost of the job.
4) Age of the equipment in case-1 is 3 years, while in case-2 it is 6 years. Newly equipment produce high output as compared
to older one because of less maintenance problems.

IV. CONCLUSION

From the case studies, it has been realized that the Output of earth compaction depends on various job conditions and
management conditions. Job length, working space, soil condition are Main factors which affect the output of grading
equipments. The ratings given in the manufacturers catalogues represents optimum figures under ideal conditions which can
rarely be realized at site. It will have to be multiplied by a utilization factors which may vary depending on normal working site
conditions.
Output of grading equipment is an important basis for its selection to do an operation as well as also for economic analysis and
replacement decision.

Disclaimer
This is a pure academic research with no intention to promote or discourage any brand of construction equipments.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I wish to express my deep sense of gratitude to my guide Prof. J.J.Bhavsar (Civil Engg. department, BVM Engg. College,
V.V.nagar) for his intellectual guidance and valuable suggestions and Prof. Balasubramanian D. Iyer (course co-ordinator,
ISTAR,V.V.nagar) for his motivation and keen interest.

REFERENCES
[1] K.K.Chitakara, Construction Project Management, Tata McGraw Hill Publishing Company Limited, New Delhi.
[2] R.L. peurifoy and W.B. Ladbetter , Construction planning equipment & methods, Mc Graw Hill book company, forth edition.
[3] S.C. Sharma, Construction equipment and its management khanna publishers, Delhi, third edition
[4] Dr. Debasis Sarkar and Deep Shah , A framework for application od genetic Algorithm in productivity optimization of Highway Equipments using
EVOLVER software European International Journal of Science and Technology Vol. 2 No.5, 2013
[5] Dr. Zoltn A.Vattai and Jzsef Kroly, Construction Equipment Earthwork & Soil Compaction Budapest, 2009-2010
[6] Journal , Civil engineering & construction review
[7] Frank Harris construction plant, 1981, Garland STPM Press, New York.
[8] Field Manual 5-434, Earthmoving Operations Headquarters Department of the Army Washington, DC 15 JUNE 2000.
[9] David A. Day, Neal B. H. Benjamin, Construction Equipment Guide John Wiley & Sons
[10] Dr. Ali Maher and Dr. Nenad Gucunski, IRC:SP:97-2013 , Guidelines On Compaction Equipment For Road Works, November 1998
[11] Shashi K. Gulhati, Manoj Datta, Geotechnical engineering , Tata McGraw-Hill, 2005.

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org 91