1

Modules 15,16 / Topic 8

COMPACTION – THE DENSIFICATION OF SOIL

Soil is a particulate system, in other words, a discrete medium consisting of
particles of diverse sizes and shapes, in different states of closeness – varying in
description from very loose to very dense. This is unlike materials of construction such
as steel, brick or concrete all of which exist in a continuous state. When we speak of
strength of soil we have in mind its shear strength which is its characteristic strength
parameter (Topic 3). Soil in a loose state is characterised by low shear strength and
if we have a means of making it denser, its shear strength increases with all the
attendant benefits thereof. This is achieved by inputting mechanical energy which
brings the particles closer taking it to a more compact and denser state. Compaction
is this process of making a loose soil denser thereby imparting it greater strength and
stability.

It is now time for us to have a formal definition of the term compaction.

8.1 Definition
Compaction is an artificial process in which through mechanical means soil
particles are constrained to pack more closely resulting in an increase in density (unit
weight) and a consequent decrease in void ratio.

From what has been stated above it is obvious that a well graded soil achieves
greater compaction than a uniformly graded soil for the same energy input, since in
the former, particles of increasingly smaller size are able to occupy and fill the void
space enclosed by the successively larger particles (see Fig 6.1).

A cohesionless soil such as sand, and a cohesive soil such as clay, are both
discrete systems composed of particles. They, however, exhibit a difference in terms
of continuity. Even though discrete, a clayey soil is a more continuous medium
because of the cohesive bond existing between the particles, while in the case of sand,
continuity is merely the result of the mechanical contact between the particles. A
cohesionless soil with some clay content to hold the particles together – normally
specified as fill material for embankments such as for highways and railways – is more
amenable to mechanical compaction than highly cohesive soils where the energy input
may be insufficient to break the cohesive bond between particles.

The input of mechanical energy can be in the form of tamping or ramming (Fig 8.1),
running rollers (Fig 8.2) or even by vibration (Fig 8.3) all of which enable the soil
particles to move into closer packing. Such movement is aided in the presence of
water, which serves as a lubricant in this case, enabling the easy movement of
particles gliding past one another into a state of higher density.

8.2 Aims of compaction

 2

By compacting a soil we achieve the following objectives.

1. Because of increase in shear strength, bearing capacity is increased, active earth

pressure is decreased, and passive earth pressure is increased, besides adding to the
stability of slopes.

2. The reduction in compressibility of the soil leads to reduction in settlement of

foundations.

3. The decrease in the void ratio, e, makes the soil less permeable, resulting in
lowering k, the coefficient of permeability.

At this stage, and before proceeding further, it shall be profitable for us to examine
the basic difference between consolidation and compaction.

Consolidation Compaction
1) natural – occurs when pressure is artificial – occurs by the input

applied on saturated soil of mechanical energy

2) reduction in volume due to reduction in volume due to
the expulsion of pore water the compacting effort
3) the soil must be saturated soil not saturated
4) water does not have any specific role water acts as a lubricant
What is, however, common between the two is the reduction in volume of the soil,
even though due to different causes.

8.3 Measurement of compaction – terminology

In order to express the degree of compaction of a soil, we need a measure for
compaction. The measure of compaction is the dry density (𝛾d) which is defined as
the weight of soil solids per unit volume of the soil in the bulk.

Note:

‘Density’ is a term used in Physics where it means mass per unit volume (kg/m 3).
In geotechnical engineering we use weight per unit volume (kN/m 3) which is therefore
called ‘unit weight’. Actually the term density in relation to compaction is a misnomer,
as we are not dealing with mass, but only weight. The use of the term density here
follows a popular practice, which will continue to remain so, much as we may wish
otherwise. (It is important to realise in this context that ‘mass’ and ‘weight’ are entirely
different quantities (Kurian, 2005 – App.G, also Topic 52). While mass is a base
quantity (along with length and time), weight is a derived quantity as it is a force, viz.
the force with which earth attracts the mass of the object. Since f = m x a, weight =
m x g, where g is the acceleration due to gravity.)
 3

Notwithstanding the terminology we use the same symbol 𝛾 (gamma) for unit
weight as the symbol for density, which in a sense helps us to overcome the confusion
created by the terms.

To express dry density quantitatively, referring to Fig 8.4,

ws
𝛾d = (8.1)
v

As against this, the total unit weight (γt ) which we shall call wet density (γwet ) in
relation to compaction,
w
𝛾𝑤𝑒𝑡 = 𝛾𝑡 = v

ww w- ws w
w= = =w -1
ws ws s

W W
Therefore, w+1=W or Ws =
s 1+w

γwet
Dividing by V, we get, γd = (8.2)
1+w

wet density
or, dry density = 1+water content

WS
Ws WS VS
Further, 𝛾𝑑 = =V = VS VV
v S+ VV +
VS VS

𝛾𝑆
= (8.3)
1+𝑒

= γdry , which from basic Soil Mechanics we know is the unit weight of dry soil, which
we now see is the same as γd , the dry density. Even though quantitatively the same,
there is a significant physical difference between the two terms. When we use γdry we
mean a completely dry soil; on the other hand, when we say γd we actually mean a
wet soil in which we are interested in only the amount of solids (as a measure of
compaction) and are not concerned with the presence of water.

As regards γt , the total unit weight (or wet density, γwet , for us)
w ws + ww
𝛾𝑡 = =
v vs + vv

w
ws (1+ w )
ws
= vv
vs (1+ )
vs

1+𝑤
= 𝛾𝑠 (8.4)
1+𝑒

= 𝛾𝑑 (1 + 𝑤), from Eq.(8.3)

from which
 4

𝛾𝑡
𝛾𝑑 = , (same as Eq.(8.2))
1+𝑤

which shows that wet density (γwet) is the same as the total unit weight (γt), both
quantitatively and physically. (Note further that γd (Eq 8.3) is obtained by putting w
= 0 in Eq. (8.4).)

8.4 Moisture content – dry density relationship

At a given input of compaction energy there exists a relationship between moisture
content or water content and dry density, which is of the form shown in Fig 8.5.

On the dry side the added water creates a coating of a thin film of water on the
surface of the particles imparting a lubricating effect on them which enables them to
move closer to each other under the influence of the compaction effort. This results in
the reduction of air voids which goes on till the peak is reached at which we obtain the
maximum dry density(γd max.) the corresponding moisture content being called
optimum moisture content (O.M.C.). Beyond the peak the added water starts
occupying the pore space preventing the soil particles from moving into that space. As
a result the dry density starts decreasing from the peak value. The corresponding
moisture content is an optimum and not a maximum value unlike dry density which is
a maximum value. The curve of Fig 8.5 is called the ‘moisture content-dry density
curve’ or simply the compaction curve. The moisture content corresponding to the
ascending part of the compaction curve is marked as the dry side of optimum and that
corresponding to the descending part as the wet side of optimum.

8.4.1 Zero air voids curve

Zero air voids correspond to a degree of saturation (S) of 100%. In order to
establish a relationship between γd, w and S, we revert to Eq.(8.3) and substitute γs
with G 𝛾w, where G is the specific gravity of the solids and γw, the init weight of water,
𝐺𝑊
and using the relationship Se = Gw, rewrite e as , Eq.(8.3) takes the form,
𝑆

𝐺.𝛾𝑤
𝛾𝑑 = 𝐺.𝑊 (8.5)
1+
𝑆

Substituting S = 1 (100%) we can obtain γd for various values of w and plot the result
which is also shown in Fig 8.5 marked as ‘zero air voids curve’ or the saturation curve.
It is noted from the figure that zero air voids is a theoretical limit which can never be
reached in practice, signifying thereby that it is impossible to fully expel the pore air or
make the soil fully saturated in the compaction process.

Eq.(8.5) can be used to plot the w-γd relationship for different values of S such as
95%, 80% etc. One can also determine the S corresponding to γ d max_OMC or at any
point on the curve defined by the pair of values of γd_w.

8.4.2 Influence of varying the compactive effort

 5

Our discussion so far pertained to one constant value of the compactive effort, but
without specifying it.

If we successively increase the compactive effort and plot the corresponding

compaction curves, the results will be as shown in Fig 8.6. With increasing compactive
effort the maximum dry density increases with decreasing OMCs, both being
favourable results. These results automatically reverse sign on the decreasing side
of the compactive effort.

8.5 Compaction test

To determine the γd max_OMC values of a given soil from an appropriate test, it is
necessary for us to standardise the compactive effort and a means of delivering it
simply by ramming the soil in a confined space. The Standard Proctor Compaction
Test or AASHO (American Association for State Highway Officials) Test is such a test,
devised by R. R. Proctor in 1933 in connection with the construction of earth dams in
the State of California in U.S.A.

8.5.1 The Standard Proctor Compaction Test

The apparatus for conducting the test consists of 1) a mould for carrying the sample
soil – called the Proctor mould, and 2) a rammer for delivering the compaction energy
(Fig 8.7). The mould is in three parts, viz. the mould proper which is a cylinder open
at both ends, base and collar.

Procedure

Measure the inner height and diameter of the mould. Take the weight of the empty
mould with base.

Air dry the sample soil, break lumps and sieve through a 4.75 mm sieve. Collect
about 15 kg (mass) of the sieved material for conducting a full test for a minimum of
five values of w. Take the first portion of 2.5 kg from the above, add little water and
mix thoroughly using both hands. Fill it in the mould in three layers delivering 25 blows
per layer after placing each layer by simply lifting the rammer and letting it fall freely,
through the cylindrical sleeve, on the fill vertically. The surface of the layer below must
be scarified for ensuring good bond with the succeeding layer. At the end of
compaction detach the collar, cut off the protruding soil at the top and take the weight
with the base. The difference with the empty weight gives the wet weight which when
divided by the volume of the mould gives the wet density. Determine moisture content
using three samples collected from different heights of the compacted soil removed
from the mould with the help of a sample extractor. The dry density is determined
from the wet density and water content.

Now take another 2.5 kg of the sample soil and add about 2 to 3 % more water
over the previous quantity and repeat the test as before. Continue with the test till the
 6

weight reaches a maximum and falls by two or three values. Plot γd vs. w and join the
experimental results by a smooth curve, locate the peak and determine γ d max and
OMC (Fig 8.8). (Note: In general the peak will lie between two experimental results
and will not coincide with any one result. This explains the need for plotting the result
rather than go by the maximum value from the tabulated results.)

8.5.2 Modified Proctor Test

Since the days of the Standard Proctor Test the compactive effort in the field started
getting steadily higher, particularly in the construction of airport pavements (runways,
taxiways and aprons). (One should note in this connection that the pavement loading
intensity in the case of airports today is of a much higher order than the same for
highways.) Hence there arises the need for modifying the test with higher energy input
by revising the specification for the same.

The mould of the modified Proctor test has an effective height of 127 mm, the other
dimensions remaining the same. The rammer weighs 45 N and falls over a height of
450 mm. The mould is filled in five layers and 25 blows are delivered per layer. The
compactive energy is of the order of 2726 kNm/m3 of soil against 605 kNm/m3 in the
Standard test.

Because of higher compactive effort the compaction curve will lie above the
standard test curve (Fig 8.6) giving rise to a higher γd max and a lower OMC, both of
which are advantageous from the field point of view, even though the gain is at the
expense of higher energy input.

The repeated raising and shifting positions of the rammer manually, is a strenuous
experience in the conduct of the test. To overcome this difficulty, electrically operated
machines have been developed which simulate the manual input of the compactive
effort to the great relief of those conducting the test.

8.6 Measurement of soil compaction in the field

It is necessary in many instances to know the wet/dry densities of the soil in the
field, especially before planning activities such as compaction. The same becomes
particularly important in instances such as the construction of earth dams,
embankments etc. to control the field compaction, that is, to know how close are the
field values to the laboratory values of γd max and OMC. This information is vital since
the design of the earth structure has been carried out based on properties such as
shear strength of the soil as compacted in the laboratory. ( This is akin to the design
of R.C. structures based on standard specifications such as M 20 concrete and Fe
415 steel. It therefore points to the need for testing field samples especially of concrete
to see how far the results agree with the values specified in the design. In the case of
concrete, unlike in steel, there is an intermediate phase of ‘mix design’ which ensures
that the concrete so produced meets with the specifications assumed in the design.)
 7

We shall first discuss two tests for the determination of field density.

8.6.1 The core cutter method

This is a simple and direct method for determining the field density.

The apparatus consists of a cutter, dolly and rammer (Fig 8.9). The cutter weight
and dimensions must be noted prior to the test. The cutter with the collar fitted on top
is driven down by a weight falling on a wooden cushion (dolly) placed on top of the
collar.

When the driving is complete the side soils are removed by a spade. The cutter
with the soil is cut at the base and brought out. The collar is removed and the soil
protruding at the ends is trimmed off. The cutter with the soil is now weighed so that
the difference with the empty weight gives the wet weight of the sample which when
divided by the volume gives the wet density. The soil specimen is removed from the
cutter and samples taken for the determination of w. From γwet and w we calculate the
dry density.

The method is not suitable for dry sand as the same cannot be retained in the cutter
while lifting, besides the compaction induced by the vibration generated by the weight
falling on the dolly, which affects the natural density.

8.6.2 The sand replacement method

Keeping a rimmed pan with a central hole of dia. 100 mm on the ground a cylindrical
hole is excavated from which the soil occupying the hole is carefully collected and kept
in the pan (Fig 8.10a). The weight of the soil is determined. Samples from the soil so
collected are used to determine w.

To obtain the field (wet) density we need to determine the volume of this hole which
constitutes the rest of the work.

This makes use of an equipment in the form of a sand pouring cylinder with a
calibrating can (Fig 8.10b). The volume of the cylindrical can can be determined by
measurement. The can is typically of dia. 100 mm and its depth is supposed to be the
same as the depth of the hole excavated in the soil. The sand pouring cylinder has a
conical (upright) funnel-like (inverted) part at the bottom with a stopper at the junction
which allows/closes the flow of sand from the cylinder.

The sand pouring cylinder is nearly filled with dry uniform sand (of size within 600
– 300 µm range). In order to determine the bulk unit weight of the sand the can is
placed at the bottom of the cylinder and sand is allowed to flow down filling the can
and the conical part. The sand in excess of what is needed to fill the can is removed
by running a scale or spatula horizontally across the top of the can. From the weight
and volume of the sand filling the can its unit weight is obtained.
 8

Our next effort is to determine the weight of sand filling the excavated hole so that
dividing the same by the unit weight of sand gives us the volume of the hole.

For this we must first determine the weight of sand filling the conical part. For this
we weigh the cylinder with sand and keeping it on a level surface (Fig 8.10c) we run
sand to fill the cone, close and weigh the cylinder again. The difference gives the
weight of sand filling the cone.

In the final phase of the work, we weigh the pouring cylinder nearly filled with sand
and bring it on top of the cylindrical hole excavated in the ground and empty it until it
fills the hole and the conical part (Fig 8.10d). Now close the stopper and take the
weight. The difference in weight gives the weight of sand filling the cylindrical hole
and the cone. From this the weight of sand filling the cone already determined is
subtracted which gives us the weight of sand filling the hole alone. Dividing it by the
unit weight of sand gives the volume of the excavated cylinder. Knowing the weight
and volume of the excavated soil so obtained we can determine the field density, and
from the water content, the dry density.

We shall now look at a somewhat indirect method for the rapid determination of the
water content in the field which is sufficiently accurate as a routine measure for
controlling the amount of water to be added to reach OMC and the corresponding γd
max.

8.7 Proctor needle for the determination of field water content

The equipment (Fig 8.11a) consists of a needle with a detachable point, attached
to a spring loaded plunger moving within a cylindrical cover, with a handle at the top.

The first part of the test is the calibration of the needle. This is carried out at the
time of the Proctor test itself, in which each specimen in the mould is at a particular
water content. Before extracting the specimen from the mould, the needle is pushed
down vertically at the rate of 12.5 mm/s to a depth of 75 mm. The force needed to
cause this penetration, which is proportional to the compression of the spring is
marked on the plunger, which when divided by the area of the point gives us the
penetration resistance (N/mm2). The test is repeated on specimens at different water
contents and a plot is made between penetration resistance and water content (Fig
8.11b). This is the calibration curve of the Proctor needle. The spring of the spring
loaded plunger is a permanent feature, whereas the point at the bottom of the needle
can be changed to suit the hardness of the soil.

The field part of the work consists in bringing the field soil and compacting it in the
Proctor mould following the same specification as in the test. Now push the needle
into the specimen and note the penetration resistance against which we can obtain
the water content from the calibration curve as shown in the figure.
 9

It is to be noted that penetrating the needle in the field will not give us the result as
the field density need not be the same as the laboratory density against which the
calibration has been prepared.

8.8 Compaction of sand

If we subject a free draining type of pure sand to the compaction test, we get a two-
part moisture content-dry density curve of the type shown in Fig 8.12.

At small moisture contents the thin water films around the grains keep them apart
by surface tension, rather than bringing them closer. The result is that density
decreases reaching a minimum value at A. With increasing water contents this
situation reverses with the curve rising until reaching the peak at B, which corresponds
to 100% saturation, with the density decreasing thereafter with increasing water
contents.

Apart from the above, a change in the compactive effort has a much lesser effect
on cohesionless soils than on cohesive soils. Thus, in general, the compaction
characteristics of cohesionless soils are very different from those of cohesive soils.

The best means of compacting cohesionless soils like sand is imparting vibration.
For vibration to be effective the sand must be either fully dry or fully saturated. Density
index (relative density) is the best measure of expressing the state of compaction of a
cohesionless soil like sand. Vibro-compaction of soils, with its different possibilities, is
dealt with in greater detail later under Topic 31.

8.9 Field methods of compaction of soils

The scope of manual tamping or ramming with flat-footed hand-held rammers is
limited to compacting the foundation trenches of single-storeyed structures or the soil
fill below the floor of such buildings. For major works such as earthen dams or
embankments for highways, railways or airfields, compaction is carried out by rolling
in layers, typically of 150 mm thickness, by rollers hauled by traction vehicles. (In the
case of highways and airfields, rolling is not confined to the embankment soil but
extended to the various layers forming the pavement.) The weight of the roller and the
number of passes needed to bring the soil compacted as close as possible to the
maximum dry density determined in the laboratory depends on the type of soil and the
characteristics of the rollers used in the work.

Rollers used for compaction of soil are divided into four types:
1) Smooth wheeled rollers,
2) Rubber tyred rollers,
3) Sheepsfoot rollers, and
4) Vibratory rollers.
 10

The major characteristics of the above types follow.

1) Smooth wheeled rollers (Fig 8.13)

This has one large wheel in the front and two smaller wheels at the rear. Since the
rear wheels are placed apart at a distance equal to the length of the front wheel (Fig
8.13b), a single pass compacts the entire width from end to end of the rear wheels.

2) Rubber tyred (or pneumatic tyred) rollers (Fig 8.14)

These have pneumatic tyres fixed on two axles - with one number less on the front
axle - spaced in such a way (see Fig 8.14b) that together they cover the complete
width, as in the smooth wheeled rollers.

3) Sheepsfoot rollers (Fig 8.15)

In this case the drum (wheel) incorporates projections which go their entire depth
down compacting the soil locally with the drum compacting the full width. (The name
comes from the resemblance of the projections to a sheep’s foot.) Fig 8.15 shows two
types, (a) the club foot type, and (b) the tapered foot type. These are normally towed
by pneumatic tyred tractors, which can tow up to three rollers in tandem.

4) Vibratory rollers

Weights placed eccentrically across a rotating shaft attached to the drum produce
vibrations in the vertical direction (Fig 8.16).

With regard to the selection of the type of roller, while all the types are suitable for
cohesive soils, the vibratory type is most effective in cohesionless soils.

The performance of a roller depends essentially on its weight/exerting pressure and

the grain size distribution of the soil. In general smooth wheeled rollers are most
suitable for crushed rock, mechanically stable gravel and sands. Pneumatic tyred
rollers are specially useful in closely graded sands and fine grained cohesive soils at
moisture contents approaching their plastic limits. Sheepsfoot rollers are ideal for fine
grained cohesive soils at moisture contents well below their plastic limits.

8.10 Other methods of field compaction

Dynamic compaction by dropping heavy weights from great heights is a technique
of compaction which is described under Topic 36.

Vast deposits of dry loose sands, away from human habitation, have been
effectively compacted by detonating charges of dynamite or TNT buried at depth in
boreholes which are backfilled after placing the charge (Fig 8.17). The energy
released in the explosion brings the loose soil particles to rearrange themselves into
a denser mass, which is evidenced by the depression formed on the surface, Fig 8.17.
The extent of densification and the amount of depression depend upon the quantity of
 11

the charge and the state of looseness of the soil. Repeated detonations can be tried
for additional densification. A set of charges in a grid pattern can be detonated
together for faster results.

In a significant study conducted in Tamil Nadu, India, Gandhi et al. (1999) have
tried the above technique to densify flyash existing in a wet state in an ashpond where
it has been brought in a slurry form from the nearby Mettur Thermal Power Plant, close
to Salem. Apart from distributing charges at many locations, the same were placed at
different elevations at the same location. Saucer shaped depressions were noted in
all cases and the results are presented in quantitative form pointing to the
effectiveness of the technique.

By way of an additional note, the author has developed a technique called

‘centrifugal blast compaction’ for the remote compaction of dry sand in the enclosed
and inaccessible spaces under precast hypar shell footings, for creating a strong soil
interface with the footings. This novel technique is illustrated later in Sec.16.5.2

Reference

Gandhi, S. R., Dey, A. K. And Selvam, S. (1999), “Densification of pond ash by

blasting,” ASCE, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Oct.
1999, Vol. 125, No. 10, pp. 889 – 899.

Soil Mechanics for Road Engineers, DSIR – Road Research Laboratory, HMSO,
London, 1952, xxiv + 541 pp.

Pictures

Some pictures taken at the site during the work reported in the above Reference are
included here, courtesy Prof. S. R. Gandhi.

Pic. 8.1
Pic. 8.2
Pic. 8.3
Pic. 8.4
Pic. 8.5
Pic. 8.6