Comparative study on standard static packing pressure (SSPP) and standard proctor laboratory compaction methods / Doris Asmani Mat Yusof

The most recognizable development of compaction test is known as the Standard Proctor Test, which is used to estimate the density value of soils. However, the laboratory concept produced by Proctor (1933) has a few imperfections in determining the value of Maximum Dry Density (MDD) and Optimum Moist...

全面介紹

書目詳細資料
主要作者: Mat Yusof, Doris Asmani
格式: Thesis
語言:英语
出版: 2012
在線閱讀:https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/17705/2/TM_DORIS%20ASMANI%20MAT%20YUSOF%20EC%2012_5.pdf
_version_ 1846217662476058624
author Mat Yusof, Doris Asmani
author_facet Mat Yusof, Doris Asmani
author_sort Mat Yusof, Doris Asmani
description The most recognizable development of compaction test is known as the Standard Proctor Test, which is used to estimate the density value of soils. However, the laboratory concept produced by Proctor (1933) has a few imperfections in determining the value of Maximum Dry Density (MDD) and Optimum Moisture Content (OMC). It also has some imperfections in application where the method that is applied in the field and laboratory to measure the density of soil are different. The compaction technique applied on the subgrade road layer for cohesive soil is by using roller compactor machine (static technique) while the technique that is applied in the laboratory is by dynamic compaction method. Thus, a new laboratory compaction method has been developed to determine the density, shear strength, and CBR values by using Standard Static Packing Pressure (SSPP) efforts in order to close the gap between laboratory and field data. In this study seven (7) types of soil based on plasticity chart were tested in several tests to obtain the important engineering parameter such as density (pd), water content (wc), shear strength (Cu), compaction energy (E) and CBR value of soils. Based on the laboratory results, it was found that the SSPP method is more practical and sensible than the dynamic compaction.
format Thesis
id oai:ir.uitm.edu.my:17705
institution Universiti Teknologi MARA
language English
publishDate 2012
record_format eprints
spelling oai:ir.uitm.edu.my:177052022-12-29T06:42:22Z https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/17705/ Comparative study on standard static packing pressure (SSPP) and standard proctor laboratory compaction methods / Doris Asmani Mat Yusof Mat Yusof, Doris Asmani The most recognizable development of compaction test is known as the Standard Proctor Test, which is used to estimate the density value of soils. However, the laboratory concept produced by Proctor (1933) has a few imperfections in determining the value of Maximum Dry Density (MDD) and Optimum Moisture Content (OMC). It also has some imperfections in application where the method that is applied in the field and laboratory to measure the density of soil are different. The compaction technique applied on the subgrade road layer for cohesive soil is by using roller compactor machine (static technique) while the technique that is applied in the laboratory is by dynamic compaction method. Thus, a new laboratory compaction method has been developed to determine the density, shear strength, and CBR values by using Standard Static Packing Pressure (SSPP) efforts in order to close the gap between laboratory and field data. In this study seven (7) types of soil based on plasticity chart were tested in several tests to obtain the important engineering parameter such as density (pd), water content (wc), shear strength (Cu), compaction energy (E) and CBR value of soils. Based on the laboratory results, it was found that the SSPP method is more practical and sensible than the dynamic compaction. 2012-04 Thesis NonPeerReviewed text en https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/17705/2/TM_DORIS%20ASMANI%20MAT%20YUSOF%20EC%2012_5.pdf Mat Yusof, Doris Asmani (2012) Comparative study on standard static packing pressure (SSPP) and standard proctor laboratory compaction methods / Doris Asmani Mat Yusof. (2012) Masters thesis, thesis, Universiti Teknologi MARA. <http://terminalib.uitm.edu.my/17705.pdf>
spellingShingle Mat Yusof, Doris Asmani
Comparative study on standard static packing pressure (SSPP) and standard proctor laboratory compaction methods / Doris Asmani Mat Yusof
title Comparative study on standard static packing pressure (SSPP) and standard proctor laboratory compaction methods / Doris Asmani Mat Yusof
title_full Comparative study on standard static packing pressure (SSPP) and standard proctor laboratory compaction methods / Doris Asmani Mat Yusof
title_fullStr Comparative study on standard static packing pressure (SSPP) and standard proctor laboratory compaction methods / Doris Asmani Mat Yusof
title_full_unstemmed Comparative study on standard static packing pressure (SSPP) and standard proctor laboratory compaction methods / Doris Asmani Mat Yusof
title_short Comparative study on standard static packing pressure (SSPP) and standard proctor laboratory compaction methods / Doris Asmani Mat Yusof
title_sort comparative study on standard static packing pressure sspp and standard proctor laboratory compaction methods doris asmani mat yusof
url https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/17705/2/TM_DORIS%20ASMANI%20MAT%20YUSOF%20EC%2012_5.pdf
url-record https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/17705/
work_keys_str_mv AT matyusofdorisasmani comparativestudyonstandardstaticpackingpressuressppandstandardproctorlaboratorycompactionmethodsdorisasmanimatyusof