Influence of Relative Compaction on the Shear Strength of Compacted Surface Sands

Home , Direct shear test, Proctor compaction test

International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, Vol. 5, No. 1, February 2014

Nabil F. Ismael and Mariam Behbehani

strength characteristics of the compacted fill. Abstract—Construction of structures always involves This paper aims to answer these questions and to learn excavation, and recompaction following foundation installation. more about the properties of compacted sand fills by means In some cases foundations are placed on compacted sandy soils. of a laboratory-testing program. Testing included basic The influence of relative compaction on the strength of sandy characteristics, compaction tests, and direct shear tests. In soils in Kuwait is examined herein by a comprehensive laboratory testing program on surface samples. The program view of recent work indicating significant soil improvement includes basic properties, compaction and, direct shear tests. with artificial cementation [6], the effect of using 1 % by Various soil parameters were determined including the weight ordinary Portland cement additive (Type I) on the compaction characteristics, the cohesion c, angle of friction φ. shear strength parameters of compacted surface sands is also The results indicate that as the relative compaction increases examined. towards 100%, the strength increases and the soil compressibility decreases. A comparison was made between the soil parameters for the samples compacted on the dry side, and on the wet side of optimum moisture content at several relative II. TESTING PROGRAM compaction ratios. The difference in the values obtained for the The testing program consisted of: two cases are explained. The effect of using 1% by weight 1) Collecting large bulk sample of surface sand from one cement additive is also examined. site in Kuwait. Index Terms—Relative compaction, shear strength, cohesion, 2) Determine the soil composition and grading angle of friction, silty sands. characteristics and classification by mechanical analysis and Atterberg limit tests. 3) Carry out the Modified Proctor Compaction test. I. INTRODUCTION 4) Carry out 5 sets of direct shear tests on samples The soil profile in Kuwait consists of a surface layer of compacted at 100% relative compaction, 95% relative windblown dune sand underlain by cemented sands that are compaction, and 90% relative compaction. Two sets of locally known as gatch. The properties and behavior of the samples were tested at 95% relative compaction and two surface layer has been examined in detail [1]-[3]. It varies in sets at 90% relative compaction. One set were samples thickness from site to site from 0 to 7m and consists compacted at moisture content on the dry side of predominantly of fine sand or silty sand. Cemented sands are optimum, and the other set were samples compacted at formed due to the excess of evaporation over rainfall and the moisture content on the wet side of optimum. Relative precipitation of cementing agents such as carbonates and compaction is defined as the ratio of the compacted dry sulphates in the soil matrix. This deposit is usually dense to density to the maximum dry density. very dense and the degree of cementation varies with depth 5) Carry out 3 sets of direct shear tests on samples from weak or uncemented to moderately or strongly compacted to 100% and 95% relative compaction as cemented. The characteristics of cemented sands in Kuwait described above but with 1% by weight Portland cement were determined at several sites [4], [5].These natural soil additive after curing for a period of one week prior to deposits are encountered during excavation for foundation testing. construction. A. Site Investigation and Soil Classification With the recent population growth, and economic Bulk surface soil samples from a site in Al Rai area were development in Kuwait, several cases were encountered collected from excavated test pits. The soil came from where construction on compacted fills was necessary. The excavation during the making of a roadway project. The housing authority had a large area for construction of two samples were taken directly to the laboratory at Kuwait storey villas where loose sand extends from ground surface to University for examination, analysis and testing. A sieve a depth of 5m to 6m. The question posed was if this layer is analysis test was first done to classify the sample and show its removed and compacted to 95% relative compaction or as particle size distribution. Fig. 1 shows the particle size specified in the contract, and the foundations are placed on it, distribution curve which indicates that there was no gravel what is the allowable soil pressure for foundation design?, and that the sample is predominantly fine sand with about and what is the effect of the relative compaction on the shear 10% fines. After the sieve analysis test was done, the sample was Manuscript received July 3, 2013; revised September 1, 2013. tested for its Atterberg limits (liquid and plastic limits). The Nabil F. Ismael is with the Civil Engineering Department, Kuwait University, Kuwait (email: [email protected]). sample was classified as well graded sand with clay (SW-SC) Mariam Behbehani is with Ministry of Public Works, Kuwait.

DOI: 10.7763/IJESD.2014.V5.441 8 International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, Vol. 5, No. 1, February 2014 according to the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM prepared with and without the cement additive. D-2487). C. Test Results and Discussion

Table I shows a summary of the results of the direct shear tests. Fig. 3 shows the variation of the angle of frictionφ, and cohesion c with the relative compaction.

TABLE I. SUMMARY OF THE DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Relative compaction Cohesion (kPa) Angle of friction (degrees) 90 % dry 43.7 35 95 % dry 37 37 100 % 41 41 90 % wet 43 32 95 % wet 72 34 95 % dry with 1% cement 47.3 42.2 95 % wet with 1% cement 83.6 46 100 % with 1% cement 41 51.4

Fig. 1. Particle size distribution curve From Table I and Fig. 3 it can be seen that as the relative compaction increased the angle of friction also increased for B. Test Procedure both cases with and without cement additive. Without cement Modified Proctor Compaction tests were carried out on the the angle of friction on the wet side is lower than the dry side samples to determine the compaction curve. Different dry whereas with the 1% Portland cement the angle of friction in unit weights were calculated at different water contents. Fig. the wet side is higher. On the other hand, the cohesion 2 shows the plot of dry unit weight versus water content component of strength c has not been greatly affected by the indicating the maximum dry unit weight and optimum water degree of relative compaction or the addition of cement. All content and the dry unit weights and water contents at 90%, values of c were about 45 kPa expect at 95% relative 95% and 100% relative compactions. compaction on the wet side of the optimum where a larger value of c was measured.

Fig. 2. Modified Proctor Compaction curve for the test sand

Later, laboratory direct shear tests were carried out on the compacted samples at 90%, 95% and 100% to find the shear strength parameters. The compacted samples were prepared by static compaction using hammering and were divided into layers depending on their density; the denser the sample the more the layers. First, tests on the 90% and 95% relative compaction samples were done for both the dry and wet side of the optimum. Then tests were done on samples compacted to 100% relative compaction and optimum moisture content. Tests were then repeated on samples prepared with 1% Portland cement additive at 95% and 100% relative compaction. These tests were carried out to show the effect of relative compaction on the shear strength parameters (cohesion and angle of friction) of the compacted specimens Fig. 3. Variation of the angle of friction and cohesion with the relative compaction.

9 International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, Vol. 5, No. 1, February 2014

Fig. 4 shows larger stiffness for samples compacted on the dry side of optimum as compared to samples compacted on the wet side of optimum. As shown, the horizontal shear displacement is smaller at different shear stress levels for the samples compacted on the dry side of the optimum indicating a stiffer and less compressible sample as compared to samples compacted on the wet side of optimum.

Fig. 5. Shear stress versus horizontal displacement from direct shear tests on samples compacted at 100% relative compaction at different normal pressures.

Fig. 4. Shear stress versus horizontal displacement from direct shear tests on samples compacted at 90% relative compaction at different normal pressures.

Fig. 5 shows the shear stress versus displacement curves for samples compacted at 100% relative compaction. As shown, larger stiffness and strength were measured with the addition of 1% cement additive. Fig. 6 shows the shear stress vs displacement curves from direct shear tests on samples compacted at different relative compactions and at different normal pressures. Shown compaction on the dry side of the optimum shows that as relative compaction and normal stress increased, the strength and stiffness increased. Similar findings were obtained from the tests carried out on the wet side of optimum.

10 International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, Vol. 5, No. 1, February 2014

strength and stiffness compared to samples on the dry side of the optimum.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authors acknowledge the College of Graduate Studies for supporting this research project. Thanks to Mr. Sulaiman Al-Haji of the civil engineering department, Kuwait University for his help in performing the laboratory tests.

Fig. 6. Shear stress versus horizontal displacement from direct shear tests on REFERENCES samples compacted at different relative compaction and at different normal [1] N. F. Ismael. “Allowable pressure from loading tests on Kuwaiti soils,” pressures on the dry side of optimum. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, vol. 2, no. 22, pp. 151-157, 1985. [2] N. F. Ismael, A. M. Jeragh, M. A. Mollah, and O. Al-Khalidi. “A study of the properties of surface soils in Kuwait,” Journal of the Southeast III. CONCLUSION Asian Geotechnical Society, Bangkok, Thailand, vol. 1, no. 17, pp. 67-87, 1986. A laboratory testing program was carried out to determine [3] N. F. Ismael, O. Al-Khalidi, and M. A. Mollah. “Saturation effects on the influence of relative compaction on the shear strength of calcareous desert sands,” Transportation Research Record 1089, 1987. surface sands. Direct shear tests were carried out on [4] N. F. Ismael, A. M. Jeragh, M. A. Mollah, and O. Al-Khaldi. “Expansive behavior of subgrade soils in arid areas,” Transportation compacted sand at different relative compaction. Based on Research Record 1288, 1991. test results the following conclusions were reached: [5] N. F. Ismael, “Properties and behavior of cemented sand deposits in 1) As the relative compaction increased the angle of friction Kuwait,” Soils and Foundations, Japanese Geotechnical Society, Japan, vol. 4, no. 39, pp. 47-59, 1999. φ increased from 35º at 90% relative compaction on the [6] N. F. Ismael, “Influence of artificial cementation on the properties of dry side of optimum to 41º at 100% relative compaction. Kuwaiti sand,” Kuwait Journal of Science and Engineering, Kuwait The angle of friction decreased on the wet side of the University, Kuwait, vol. 27, pp. 59-76, 2000.

optimum reaching 32º at 90% relative compaction on the wet side of the optimum. For relative compactions 90%, Nabil F. Ismael was born in Egypt, 1946. He 95% and 100%, the angle φ was lower on the wet side of obtained his B.Sc.in civil engineering from Cairo University, Egypt 1966, M.Sc., 1970 and Ph.D, the optimum. 1974 from Duke University, N.C.,U.S.A. His 2) The cohesion c was fairly constant expect for one point major field of study is geotechnical engineering. at 95% relative compaction on the wet side which His is presently a Professor and Chairman of civil engineering at Kuwait University, Kuwait. He showed a large value of c. has previous experience as a senior engineer, 3) The addition of 1% by weight cement additive Ontario Hydro, Toronto, Canada, and as a civil substantially increased the angle of friction φ by 5º to 12º engineer at the Port Authority of N.Y & N.J, USA. He has about 100 publications in International Journals and Conference Proceedings. whereas it had no effect on the cohesion. Professor Ismael is a member of many professional societies including the 4) The stiffness, as determined from the slope of the shear Egyptian society of engineers, the deep foundations institute and the stress versus shear displacement curves, generally Canadian geotechnical society increased with the degree of relative compaction, and Mariam Behbehani has obtained her B.Sc.and M.Sc. degrees from Kuwait with the addition of cement additives. University, Kuwait. She is a civil engineer with the Ministry of Public 5) The shear stress versus displacement curves indicate that Works, Kuwait with the addition of 1% by weight cement additive, samples on the wet side of the optimum show larger