On Porous Bonded Residual Soil in Natural and Dynamically Compacted States Through Plate Load Tests
Publication: Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering
Volume 146, Issue 8
Abstract
Aspects related to differences in the behavior of plate load tests (PLT) bearing on highly porous, lightly bonded weathered clay in its natural structured and dynamically compacted states are addressed in this paper. Dynamic compaction is a ground improvement technique involving the release of a substantial weight from an elevation to the ground. The studied bonded residual soil presents specific characteristics, such as high stiffness at small deformations due to natural cementitious bonding, high porosity (higher than 50%), and high hydraulic conductivity (about ). Due to dynamic compaction, soil stiffness is reduced at small strains from the breakage of cementitious bonds caused by the impact of the heavy weight. Additionally, porosity is reduced from 55% to approximately 49%, and the degree of saturation is increased from approximately 73% for the natural soil condition to approximately 90%. The angle of internal shearing resistance () increased from 30.5° to 35.4°. The applied pressure-displacement results of PLT that rests on natural and dynamically compacted soils were assessed. The young modulus from PLT () for the naturally bonded state is higher than of PLT on a dynamically compacted state for displacements up to approximately 20 mm. This phenomenon occurs because the latter displayed the bond damage due to tamping that overcame the effects of porosity reduction. In contrast, at large displacements, the effects of the soil porosity reduction caused by heavy tamping are more effective than the effects of bond breakage that ends up increasing the bearing capacity of the PLT from 215 kPa on naturally bonded soil to 297 kPa on dynamically compacted soil.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
All data, models, or code generated or used during the study are available from the corresponding author by request.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to express their appreciation to FAPERGS/CNPq 12/2014–PRONEX (Project No. 16/2551-0000469-2), MCT-CNPq (INCT, Universal and Produtividade em Pesquisa), and MEC-CAPES (PROEX) for the support to the research group.
References
ASTM. 1994. Standard test method for bearing capacity of soil for static load and spread footings. ASTM D1194. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
ASTM. 2003. Standard test method for measurement of soil potential (suction) using filter paper. ASTM D5298. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
ASTM. 2016. Standard test methods for measurement of hydraulic conductivity of saturated porous materials using a flexible wall permeameter. ASTM D5084. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
ASTM. 2017a. Standard practice for classification of soils for engineering purposes (unified soil classification system). ASTM D2487. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
ASTM. 2017b. Standard test methods for liquid limit, plastic limit, and plasticity index of soils. ASTM D4318. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
ASTM. 2017c. Standard test methods for particle-size distribution (gradation) of soils using sieve analysis. ASTM D6913. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
ASTM. 2017d. Test method for particle-size distribution (gradation) of fine-grained soils using the sedimentation (hydrometer) analysis. ASTM D7928. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
BSI (British Standards Institution). 1986. British standard code of practice for foundations. BS 8004. London: BSI.
Burland, J. B. 1990. “On the compressibility and shear strength of natural clays.” Géotechnique 40 (3): 329–378. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1990.40.3.329.
Chandler, R. J., M. S. Crilly, and G. Montgomery-Smith. 1992. “A low-cost method of assessing clay desiccation for low-rise buildings.” Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng.-Civ. Eng. 92 (2): 82–89. https://doi.org/10.1680/icien.1992.18771.
Clayton, C. R. I., and S. A. Khatrush. 1986. “A new device for measuring local axial strains on triaxial specimens.” Géotechnique 36 (4): 593–597. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1986.36.4.593.
Consoli, N. C., F. Schnaid, and J. Milititsky. 1998. “Interpretation of plate load tests on residual soil site.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 124 (9): 857–867. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(1998)124:9(857).
Cuccovillo, T., and M. R. Coop. 1999. “On the mechanics of structured sands.” Géotechnique 49 (6): 741–760. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1999.49.6.741.
Fattah, M. Y., H. M. Al-Musawi, and F. A. Salman. 2012. “Treatment of collapsibility of gypseous soils by dynamic compaction.” Geotech. Geol. Eng. 30 (6): 1369–1387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-012-9552-z.
Guo, F., H. Sun, and B. Wang. 2014. “Experimental research on application of dynamic compaction for the treatment of collapsible loess foundation.” In Vol. 638 of Applied mechanics and materials, 441–444. Zürich, Switzerland: Trans Tech Publications.
Leonards, G. A., W. A. Cutter, and R. D. Holtz. 1980. “Dynamic compaction of granular soils.” J. Geotech. Eng. Div. 106 (1): 35–44.
Leroueil, S., and P. R. Vaughan. 1990. “The general and congruent effects of structure in natural soils and weak rocks.” Géotechnique 40 (3): 467–488. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1990.40.3.467.
Lukas, R. G. 1980. “Densification of loose deposits by pounding.” J. Geotech. Eng. Div. 107 (4): 435–446.
Lukas, R. G. 1995. Dynamic compaction. Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration.
Marinho, F. A. M., and O. M. Oliveira. 2006. “The filter paper method revisited.” Geotech. Test. J. 29 (3): 250–258. https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ14125.
Menard, L., and Y. Broise. 1975. “Theoretical and practical aspects of dynamic consolidation.” Géotechnique 25 (1): 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1975.25.1.3.
Mitchell, J. K. 1981. “Soil improvement—State of the art report.” In Proc., 10th Int. Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, 509–565. Rotterdam, Netherlands: A.A. Balkema.
Qian, L., et al. 2012. “Practice research on wet-collapsible loess foundation treatment by high energy dynamic compaction.” In Vol. 204 of Applied mechanics and materials, 635–639. Zürich, Switzerland: Trans Tech Publications Ltd.
Robertson, P. K. 2016. “Cone penetration test (CPT)-based soil behaviour type (SBT) classification system—An update.” Can. Geotech. J. 53 (12): 1910–1927. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2016-0044.
Rollins, K. M., and J. K. Kim. 2010. “Dynamic compaction of collapsible soils based on U.S. case histories.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 136 (9): 1178–1186. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000331.
Rotta, G. V., N. C. Consoli, P. D. M. Prietto, M. R. Coop, and J. Graham. 2003. “Isotropic yielding in an artificially cemented soil cured under stress.” Géotechnique 53 (5): 493–501. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2003.53.5.493.
Shipton, B., and M. R. Coop. 2012. “On the compression behaviour of reconstituted soils.” Soils Found. 52 (4): 668–681. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2012.07.008.
Slocombe, B. C. 2007. “Dynamic compaction.” In Ground improvement. 2nd ed., edited by M. P. Moseley and K. Kirsch, 93–118. London: Spon Press (Taylor & Francis Group).
Terzaghi, K. 1943. Theoretical soil mechanics. New York: Wiley.
Winterkorn, H. F., and H. Fang. 1975. Foundation engineering handbook. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
©2020 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: May 29, 2019
Accepted: Mar 26, 2020
Published online: Jun 13, 2020
Published in print: Aug 1, 2020
Discussion open until: Nov 13, 2020
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.