HIGHWAY R E S E A R C H B O A R D

Bulletin 58

Compaction of
Embankments^ Subgrades^
and Bases

kGADEMY

R£$£ARCH

Ncitioncii Accsdemy of Sciences—

Nationol Research Council
publication 240
HIGHWAY R E S E A R C H BOARD
1952

R . H . BALDOCK, Chairman W . H . ROOT, Vice Chairman

F R E D BURGGRAF, Director

Executive Committee

THOMAS H . MACDONALD, Commissioner, Bureau of Public Roads

HAL H . HALE, Executive Secretary, American Association of
State Highway Officials
L O U I S JORDAN, Executive Secretary, Division of Engineering
and Industrial Research, National Research Council
R . H . BALDOCK, State Highway Engineer, Oregon State
Highway Commission
W . H . ROOT, Maintenance Engineer, Iowa State Highway
Commission
H . P . BiGLER, Former Executive Vice President, Connors Steel
Company
P Y K E JOHNSON, President, Automotive Safety Foundation
G . DONALD K E N N E D Y , Consulting Engineer and Assistant to
President, Portland Cement Association
BURTON W . MARSH, Director, Safety and Traffic Engineering
Department, American Automobile Association
R. A. MOVER, Research Engineer, Institute of Transportation
and Traffic Engineering, University of California
F . V . REAGEL, Engineer of Materials, Missouri State Highway
Department

Editorial Staff

FRED BURGGRAF W . N . CAREY, JR. W . J . MILLER

2101 Constitution Avenue, Washington 25, D . C.

The opinions and conrlu.sions expressed in this publication are those of the authors
and not necessai'ily those of the Hi^hwiiy Research Board.
 HIGHWAY R E S E A R C H BOARD

Bulletin 58

Compaction of
Embankments^ Suhgrades^
and Bases

1952
Washington, D. C.
 DEPARTMENT OF SOILS

Harold Allen, Chairman;

Principal Highway Engineer
Bureau of Public Roads

COMMITTEE ON COMPACTION OF SUBGRADES AND EMBANKMENTS

L. D. Hicks, Chairman;
North Carolina State Highway and Public Works Commission

W. F . Abercrombie, Engineer of Materials and Tests, Georgia Depart-

ment of Highways
C. W. Allen, Research Engineer, Ohio Department of Highways
W. H. Campen, Director, Omaha Testing Laboratories
C. A. Hogentogler J r . , Chevy Chase, Maryland
T. A. Middlebrooks, Chief, Soil Mechanics Branch, Office Chief of
Engineers
W. H. Mills, District Engineer, Asphalt Institute, Atlanta
O. J . Porter, Consulting Engineer, Newark, New Jersey
T. B. Pringle, Chief, Roads and Airfields Section, Office, Chief of
Engineers
C. R. Reid, Los Angeles, California
L. J . Ritter, Professor of Civil Engineering, New York University
J. R. Schuyler, Principal Engineer (Soils), New Jersey State Highway
Department
T. E . Shelbume, Director of Research, Virginia Council of Highway
Investigation and Research
S. E . Sime, Supervising Design Engineer, Bureau of Public Roads,
Kansas City
W. T. Spencer, Soils Engineer, Indiana State Highway Commission

iv
 Preface
• THE ORIGINAL Wartime Road Problems No. 11 "Compaction of Subgrades and
Embankments" was published in August 1945 during World War n . It presented infor-
mation on the mechanics of compaction, on moisture-density relationships, soil clas-
sification, suitability of soils for embankments, methods for controlling moisture
content and density during compaction, and maximum limiting slopes for embankment
construction. It also presented a review of practices current in 1945 and gave a list of
selected references on compaction and allied subject matter.
During and following the war, highways were subjected to a larger number of heavier
wheel loads than prior to the publication of Wartime Road Problems No. 11. That i n -
crease in heavy vehicles has emphasized the need for compaction of subgrades and bases
for pavements. Also, since that time more information has been developed on the
amount of compaction needed in highway and airport subgrades and bases and the rela-
tive permanence of moisture content and density. Recent data are available from care-
fully controlled e}Q>eriments in field rolling which throw some light on the practicable
limits of field compaction f o r different types and weights of equipment Some i n -
vestigations have been completed and others are in progress to determine the feasi-
bility of using vibration as a means of compacting soils, especially soils of a granular
nature.
During the war, attention was given to the use of sheepsfoot rollers having high
tamping-foot contact pressures. Also, efforts were made to use heavy pneumatic-
tire wheel loads for compacting subgrades and bases on some airfields. The result
of some of those efforts has been a trend toward the manufacture of heavier compaction
equipment, both in the sheepsfoot and rubber-tired types on the premise that they offer
possibilities for greater densities or con4>action to greater depths.
This bulletin is the result of efforts by the Committee to list practices pertaining
to compaction equipment and its use and specifications which govern compaction of
embankments, subgrade soils, and bases. In addition, this bulletin attempts to present
latest developments in the technology of soil compaction with special reference to the
use of equipment heavier than that discussed in Wartime Road Problems No. 11.
 Contents
PREFACE V
DEFINITIONS OF TERMS 1
FUNDAMENTALS OF COMPACTION 2
Factors Influencing Density, 2
Influence of Soil Moisture Content, 2
Influence of Soil Type, 2
Influence of Compactive Effort, 4
Other Factors Which Influence Soil Density, 5
INFLUENCE OF DENSIFICATION ON PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SOILS 6
FACTORS INFLUENCING PERMANENCE OF DENSIFICATION 9
DEGREE OF DENSIFICATION NEEDED 10
Embankments, 10
Subgrades, Subbases and Bases, 12
Practicable Limits of Densification, 13
Correlation of Need, Practicable Densification Limits and Permanence, 17
Embankments, 18
Subgrade Materials and Bases, 18
Shoulder Materials, 21
METHODS OF SPECIFYING COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS 21
Control of Density, 21
Control of Compactive Effort, 22
SELECTION AND USE OF EQUIPMENT 23
Ehimping and Spreading, 23
Adding Water to Soil, 25
Handling Excessively Wet Soil, 25
Sheepsfoot-Type Rollers, 25
Methods of Rolling, 27
Smooth-Wheel Power Rollers, 29
Pneumatic-Tire Rollers, 32
Roller Performance on Different Types of Soil, 33
NEW TYPES OF COMPACTION EQUIPMENT 34
Pneumatic-Tire Compactor with Vibratory Unit, 34
Heavy Pneumatic-Tire Rollers, 34
Grid-Type Steel-Wheel Rollers, 36
Three-Wheel Type with Scalloped Ribs on Rolls, 36
Tandem Type with Segmented Front Roll, 36
Tandem Type with Vibratory Intermediate Roll, 36
Vibrating-Base Compactors, 36
Tampers, 36
FIELD CONTROL OF COMPACTION 38
Moisture Content and Density Control, 38
Inspection and Test Methods, 38
Examination Methods, 39
Proctor Penetration Needle, 39
Drying to Constant Weight, 40
In-Place Density Measurement, 41
Moisture-Density Relationship, 42
Correcting for Coarse-Aggregate Content, 46
vii
CURRENT PRACTICES IN COMPACTION METHODS AND EQUIPMENT 50
L i f t Thickness in Embankment Construction, 51
Control of Compaction, 51
Embankments, 51
Subgrades, 51
Bases, 51
Cost of Compaction, 51
Methods of Testing, 55
Backfilling of Trenches, Pipe Culverts and Sewers, 55
Group A - Compaction Without Density Control, 58
Tamping Methods and Equipment, 58
Lift Thickness, 58
Moisture Control, 59
Materials Requirements, 59
Provision for Saturating, Flooding or Puddling, 59
Group B - Compaction With Density Control, 59
Density Requirements, 59
Lift Thickness, 62
Moisture Control, 63
Materials Reqmrements, 63
Provision for Saturating, Flooding or Puddling, 63
Statement of Requirements for Backfilling Sewers, 63
Backfilling Structural Excavation, 66
Lift Thickness, 67
Compaction, 67
COMPACTION EQUIPMENT 67
Sheepsfoot-Type Rollers, 67
Contact Area of Tamper Feet, 67
Contact Pressure, 67
Pneumatic-Tire Rollers, 76
Smooth-Wheeled Power Rollers, 76
Granular-Base Compaction, 76
Smooth-Wheel Power Rollers, 76
APPENDIX: MANUFACTURERS' SPECIFICATIONS 78

viii
Compaction of Embankments,
Subgrades, and Bases

• THIS BULLETIN discusses fundamen- Aggregate, and F i l l Materials, AASHO

tals of compaction, the purpose for which Designation: M 146-49, except as noted.
the compaction is intended, and the amount
needed f o r various soils in different parts Settlement of Embankment. Decrease
of the road structure in the light of how in elevation of the surface of an embank-
compaction is affected by climatic, load, ment due to consolidation of the soil in the
and road conditions. From those con- embankment due to its own weight and the
siderations, suggestions are made on effect of traffic, over a period of time
recommended practice f o r compacting following construction.
embankments, subgrades, and granular Subsidence of Embankment. Decrease
bases and for the control of compaction. in the elevation of the surface of an em-
Soils work for highways maybe classi- bankment due to consolidation or displace-
fied broadly into four categories: (1) ment of the foundation soil over a period
selection of soil as to quality; (2) pre- of time during or following construction.
diction and control of behavior of soil Embankment Foundation. The mate-
under load; (3) protection of soils against rial on which an embankment is placed.
effects of climate; and (4) improvement Embankment (Fill). A raised structure
of bearing value of soil by drainage, i n - of soil, soil-aggregate, or rock.
corporation of admixtures, or compaction. Subgrade Material (Basement Soil).
There is no other single treatment The material in excavation (cuts), em-
which can be applied to natural soils bankment (fills), and embankment foun-
which produces so marked a change in dations immediately below the first layer
their physical properties at so low a cost of subbase, base, or pavement and to
as does compaction, when it is controlled such depth as may affect the structural
to meet the desired needs. The bearing design.
value of some soils may be increased Subbase. Specified or selected mate-
several times by increase in density of rial of planned thickness placed as a
the order 3 to 5 pcf. Because compaction foundation for a base.
has great influence on the manner in which Base. Specified or selected material
soils behave, it is worthwhile presenting of planned thickness placed as foundation
not only a discussion of factors which i n - for a pavement.
fluence compaction and how compaction is Compaction. The practice of a r t i f i -
obtained but also how it influences the cially densifying and incorporating defi-
nature of soils and how it is affected once nite density into the soil mass by rolling,
it is obtained. The committee believes tamping, or other means.
this broad perspective of compaction is Consolidation. The decrease in the
necessary if it is to be used to the fullest volume of voids, or the increase in den-
advantage in the preparation of embank- sity, for the most part inelastic, which is
ments, subgrade materials and bases for caused by the stresses imposed in the
pavements. supporting soils by permanent foundation
loads, or by the repeated passage of
highway or airplane traffic under actual
DEFINITIONS OF TERMS service conditions. (P)
I Bearing Value. The unit load JSj for a
The terms embankment, embankment specified amount of settlement (A) and a
foundation, subgrade materials, bases, specified loaded area (A).
and subbases, as used here, comply with Bearing Capacity. That unit pressure
the definitions set forth in Standard Defini- greater than which progressive settlement
tions of Terms Relating to Subgrade, Soil will occur leading to failure.
 compactingprocess (this includes addition
1051
-Modlfiet AASilO and mixing in of water or removal of
\
/ water by aeration).
_ - •\ ^
\
. J In addition to the above factors there
\ are the natural effects of "curing," which
A"-lorido SoId
may increase the density of the soil.

\
95
Influence of Soil Moisture Content If
a soil IS compacted under a given com-
.90 -AASH pactive effort at each of several moisture
X Method siano Clay contents, there results a moisture-
85
\, density relationship of the nature shown
for the Louisiana clay m the lower right-
hand part of Figure 1. There is developed,
80 for each soil, a maximum dry density
water Content- Percent of Dry Weigtit at an optimum moisture content for the
compactive effort used. The optimum
Figure 1. E f f e c t of two compactive ef- moisture content, at which maximum dry
f o r t s on the d e n s i t i e s of two s o i l s . density is obtained, is the moisture con-
dition at which the soil has become suf-
ficiently workable under the compactive
FUNDAMENTALS OF COMPACTION
effort used to cause it to become packed
so closely as to expel most of the air. At
The term "compaction" refers to the moisture contents less than optimum, the
act of artificially densifying the soil. soil (except for cohesionless sands) be-
It means the pressing of soil particles comes increasingly more difficult to work
together into a closer state of contact and thus to compress. As moisture
and in so doing e}q>elling air or water contents are increased above optimum,
from the soil mass. The density of soil most soils become increasingly more
is measured in terms of its volume- workable. However, a closer packing
weight and is usually expressed as pounds is prevented when the water fills the soil
of wet soil or dry soil per cubic foot (or pores. Thus the moisture-density re-
as porosity in percent of total volume). lationship established in the test is i n -
Those volume weights are expressed as dicative of the relative workability of the
wet density and dry density, respectively. soil at various moisture contents under
The term "consolidation," by usage, the compactive effort used. The moisture-
refers to closer particle contact obtained density relationships hold for the lab-
in the time-consolidation process whereby oratory compaction test and f o r field
a superimposed load causes closer pack- compaction by rolling. Available data
ing by expelling water and/or air from the from carefully controlled field studies of
soil mass. rolling show moisture-density relation-
ships almost identical with those developed
Factors Influencing Density from laboratory tests. These are de-
scribed later.
There are several factors which i n -
fluence the value of density obtained by
compaction. The most important of these Influence of Soil Type. The nature of
are: (1) the moisture content of the soil; the soil has great influence on the value
(2) the nature of the soil, that is, its grain of density obtained under a given com-
size distribution and its physical prop- pactive effort. Soils ranging from light-
erties; and (3) the nature (including both weight volcanic and diatomaceous soils
type and amount) of the compactive effort and heavy clays to well-graded sandy and
used. gravelly soils may, when subjected to
The following two factors influence identical compaction procedures, yield
density but are of less significance than values of maximum density ranging from
the factors given above: (1) The temper- 60 pcf. or less for the volcanic and di-
ature of the soil and (2) The amount of atomaceous soils, about 9U to lOU pcf.
manipulation given the soil during the for the clays and up to about 135 pcf. or
 SOIL TEXTURE AND PLASTICITY DATA
No Description Sand Silt Qay L L PI
1 Well Graded Loomy Sand 88 10 2 16 NP
2 Well Graded Sandy Loom 72 15 13 16 0
3 Med Graded Sandy Loam 73 9 18 22 4
4 Lean Sandy Silty Clay 32 33 35 28 9
5 Loessial Silt 5 85 10 26 2
6 Heovy Cloy 6 22 72 67 4 0
7 Very Poorly Graded Sand 94 6 NP

Zero Air Voids (G0265)

10 12 14 16 20 22
Moisture - Percent

Figure 2. Moisture-density relationships for seven s c i l s compacted

according to AASHO Method AASHO T99 ( i n part a f t e r 'Public Roads").

more f o r the better-graded, coarse differences in optimum moisture content

granular soils. and maximum density, but also dif-
Examples illustrative of the differ- ferences in how the soils react to the
ences in soil densities obtained under a given compactive effort at moisture con-
given compactive effort (AASHO Method tents less than optimum. This is illus-
T 99) on seven different soils ranging trated by the curve for the heavy clay'
in texture from clays to sands are shown
in Figure 2. It may be seen from the
moisture-density relationships in Figure ' A "heavy" clay Is a clayey soil which is difficult to manip-
ulate. It usually contains more than 50 percent of parUcles
2 that the different soils reflect not only smaller than 0.005 mm. in diameter
 than about 35 percent causes a marked
y decrease in density of the soil mortar
Stona
and yields no significant increase in
i
a a
. •. density of the total mixture.
r o
Influence of Compactive E f f o r t The
tit Dry D m tty of
results of compaction at different com-
-3 Solkto ne MIxtu •
1—
pactive efforts on each of several soils
' no ' - ^ — i gives evidence of the comparative effect
X
of soil moisture content and soil t3rpe on
the degree of compaction obtained. For
Dry Oenflity of S< II Mortar each compactive effort applied m com-
• pacting a soil, there is a corresponding
90i
es optimum moisture content and maxi-
0 e 20 90 40 so 60 mum density. The maximum density
Pareatitoga of Stone in Dry Soil-stona Hliture
increases and the optimum moisture
CI 20 Soil Mo •to • ^ 1 1 content decreases with increase m com-
29% 1".j^Slona
\ ^
Soil Mortar Only pactive effort. That is illustrated in
Saturotion'Llna
Figure 1 which shows moisture-density
• relationships for the AASHO standard
method T 99 (25 blows of a 5y2-lb. ham-
• mer with 2 sq. in. of striking face drop-
ping 12 in. on each of three layers in a
Soil Mortar « 90% 1/30-cu. -ft. mold) and the Corps of
i-.J-st*,. 1 Engineers modification of the AASHO
80,9 10 19 20 29 30 39 method (25 blows of 10-lb. hammer with
Mototura Content of Soil Mortar . % of Dry Soil
2 sq. In. striking face dropping 18 in.
Figure 3. E l f e c t of addition of coerse on each of five layers in a 1/30-cu. - f t .
aggregate on density of s o i l . mold). Moisture-density relationship
curves for each of the two compactive
(No. 6). Moisture content is less critical efforts on a Louisiana clay soil are shown
for heavy clays than for the feebly plastic
soils in which sand and silt grain sizes
predominate. Heavy clays may be com-
pacted through a relatively wide range of
moisture content below optimum with 190
relatively small changes in density. In
1251
contrast, the more granular and better-
graded soils, whichproduce high densities
under the same compactive effort, react
sharply to small changes m moisture con-
tent, producing marked changes in density,
as shown by the curves for Soils 1 and 2 tiio
in Figure 2. Relatively clean, poorly ISIOS

r
SOILS DATA
graded, nonplastic sands of the type Na L i - PI Souree-TMim
1 22 2« Calif Sandy Loom
indicated by Soil 7 in Figure 2 having small 2 22 NP Com Sand
silt and clay content are relatively i n - 3 18 2 M l u Clam Sand
4 NP - FlaSond
sensitive to moisture changes. \ 99 9 26 2 Mill. Silt Compoctin Effort
6 82 91 TwoaCloy
The gravel content in a soil also has 90
7 49 19 Calif Cloy

an influence on the compaction character- Compoctln Effort

AJk.SHjai Mathod
istics of that soil. The effect of increas- 89
ing the proportion of coarse material on
the density of the soil mortar and on the 80
density of the total mix is illustrated in
Figure 3. Increasing the content of coarse 100 900 1000 9000ICOOO 50000 100000
Compaetln Effort-Ft Lb Par Co Ft
material above 25 percent causes a small
decrease in density of the soil mortar, Figure 4. n e l a t i o n s h i p between compac-
while increasing coarse materials to more t i v e e f f o r t and tnaximun- dry d e n s i t y .
 in solid lines in the right-hand side of at about 24-percent compactive effort.
Figure 1. Similar curves for a poorly Thus twice as much compactive effort
graded, fine Florida sand are shown in is required to compact the clay to 95
the left of Figure 1. These graphs show percent as is needed to compact the sand
that the optimum moisture content for to the same percentage of maximum
the clay soil is decreased 6 percent (29 density.
to 23) and the maximum density is i n - The effect of compactive effort is as
creased 12 pcf. (88 to 100) while for the evident and equally as significant in field
Florida sand the corresponding changes rolling as in the laboratory compaction
are only 1 percent and 2 pcf. respectively. test. In rolling, the effort applied is a
If laboratory compaction tests are made product of the drawbar pull (which re-
at each of several different compactive flects the weight) and the number of passes
efforts, there is developed for each soil for the width and the depth of the rolled
a relationship between maximum density area compacted. Increasing the weight
and compactive effort. Similar de- or the number of passes increases the
terminations for each of several soils compactive effort applied. The signif-
make it possible to compare the relative icance of size of tamping foot, contact
effects of compactive effort on the dif- pressure, and l i f t thickness as related
ferent types of soil. The relationships to compactive effort is discussed later.
between maximum density (for each com- The density-measurement method is
pactive effort) and compactive effort are the only procedure available which gives
shown in Figure 4. a direct quantitative measure of the de-
The curves in Figure 4 show that there gree of densification (e^ressed in terms
is, within the range of compactive efforts of porosity, or in terms of weight per
normally used, an almost straight-line unit volume). It should be understood
relationship between effort and density however, that the relationship between
and that there is a marked difference in density and compactive effort is not
the slope of the lines for different types linear and specifying a percentage of
of soils. For example, the Florida sand density does not infer that a compactive
shows a small gain in density with in- effort of similar proportions will be nec-
crease m effort while the California clay essary for compaction. There is how-
(No. 7) shows that increase in effort ever, a relation between wheel load and
materially increases the density. compactive effort, and hence between
Knowledge of the compaction character- compactive effort and bearing capacity.
istics of different soils is of particular A knowledge of the significance of the
value to the engineer who prepares relationship between density, compac-
specifications and to the inspector who tive effort, and bearing capacity is help-
must interpret the results of density ful in the preparation of specifications
tests. For example, the California sand for compaction, whether i t be for sub-
(No. 2) in Figure 4 has a maximum den- grades, bases, or embankments.
sity of 118. 1 pcf. at the compactive effort Other Factors Which Influence Soil
of the AASHO Method T 99 (12,375 ft. - lb. Density. There are several factors which
per cu. f t . ) . The compactive effort nec- influence the density obtained by com-
essary to obtain 95 percent of maximum paction but do so in a small degree. Soil
density is 3500 ft. -lb. per cu. f t . which temperature has an effect, particularly
is about 28 percent of the compactive on soils high in clay content. Hogentogler
effort of AASHO Method T 99. However, found from laboratory compaction tests
the sand can be poured into place with but on a clayey soil that density (under
little if any compactive effort to obtain AASHO T 99 test procedure) was i n -
a density of 106. 5 pcf. which value is creased 3 pcf. and the optimum moisture
slightly greater than 90 percent of maxi- content decreased 3 percentage units
mum density. Applying the same analysis when the temperature of the soil was in-
to the clay (No. 7) i t may be seen that 95 creased from 35 F to 115 F.
percent of maximum density (AASHO T 99) Compaction tests on some clayey soils
is obtained at about 57-percent compactive show that they are quite sensitive to
effort and 90 percent of maximum density manipulation, that is, the more they are
 IITFMdOplWCL
structure in the same degree. There-
eojOooiA wkMi u o d fore, the engineer should not use com-
ISOntMOMWC paction to Improve bearing capacity with-
1,900 WOBUt m M
out considering the effect which degree of
40JOOOU
ILDFhMOptVa
40^lA»ILLoo4
densification has on volume change and
aCwmgM I
other properties.
IISFtaMOpt wc
4S0»al anntaol One of the prime purposes of com-
paction is to prevent settlement within
embankments. Because compaction and
Cont R i p m n t t Lofteratari
settlement each bring about a closer
otFMM arrangement of soil particles, it is ob-
vious that artificial densification by com-
ILi FhM Opt WC
tMpf.lSbMpalMI paction will prevent later natural consol-
idation and settlement of an embankment
under its own weight.
r u F i i M Opt wc
Increasing the density by compaction
0>M,900L6 Tractor
s increases the resistance to shear de-
formation and makes densification by
compaction a useful tool in designing and
building stable slopes of high embank-
Figure 5. Unconfined compressive strength
of field-compacted clayey sand con'pared
ments, which if not compacted, would not
# i t h s t r e n g t h of l a b o r a t o r y specimens be stable.
having approximately s i m i l a r d e n s i t i e s Other conditions being equal, the bear-
( a f t e r Corps of E n g i n e e r s ) . ing value of a soil increases with i n -
crease in density. A great many labora-
worked, the lower the density for a given tory studies have shown how soil density
compactive effort. Manipulation has little and soil moisture content influence bear-
effect on the degree of compaction on ing capacity. Only recently (1, 2) have
soils which are dominantly silty or sandy. large-scale efforts been made to develop
Curing, that is, a drying following comparable data on the relationship be-
compaction, is not a factor which i n - tween bearing value and soil density under
fluences the mechanical process cf com- both field and laboratory conditions.
paction, but it may affect an increase in Figure 5 shows unconfined compressive
the density of subgrade and base material, strengths of a clayey sand compacted to
especially if those materials contain co- various densities at optimum moisture
hesive materials. Density may increase content in the laboratory. Figure 5 also
on drying as much as 3 to 4 pcf. shows unconfined compressive strengths
of undisturbed cylinders cut from f i e l d -
INFLUENCE OF DENSIFICATION ON compacted lifts. The field lifts were
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SOILS compacted with different numbers of
passes or coverages of different types of
The behavior of a soil in a compact rolling equipment and represent a range
state differs from the behavior of the of field compaction. It may be seen that
same soil in a loose state. Compaction compressive strengths are approximately
under controlled moisture content i n - doubled by compaction, yet the greatest
fluences all of the physical properties of density shown is not beyond the limits
the soil mass related to performance of obtainable in highway construction.
embankments, subgrades, and bases in Increasing the density reduces both
highways. These major properties are the total porosity and the sizes of the pore
bearing value, water movement (capil- spaces of soils which contain sufficient
larity, water-retention capacity, and fines to make them compressible. It is
permeability), volume change (shrink- that phenomenon, plus the increased
age and swell), and resistance to frost friction developed, which increases bear-
action. ing capacity and resistance to shear de-
Compaction does not improve all soils formation and decreases elastic deforma-
for all uses in different parts of the road tions. The reduction in pore spaces re-
 1
ISO LEGEND
Blows per Weight Drop in
^125 Layers layer hammer inches
0 • 5 55 10 lb. 18 (Mod AASHO effort)
a- 5 26 10 Ibi 18
1100 5 12 10 lb
A- l8(Equiv.std AASHO effort)
£

1
75 NOTES' Specimens compacted in
60in.dia.mold
Tested as molded
50

25

140
V Figure beside
curve is molding
water content
,126

\ ,
1 1 11
Figure
m >ldedbeside curve is
dry density

128
124 Note X point s

\\ \\ \
135 e 125 A h t n i n a H f p mm —

center plot
130 _I22
i
.Sl25
>>
•8 120 *
120
>
\\. X \

I'
o 115
>
iia
5 10 15 115 120 125 130 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12
Water content in percent dry weight Molded dry density in lbs. per cu. ft. Molding water content in percent dry weight
Molding \M)ter Content vs. Density ond CBR Density vs. CBR Water Content vs. CBR

Figure 6. Relationsliip between CBR values and density and moisture. Tests were made on specimens at the as-moulded moisture
content ( a f t e r Corps of Engineers).
8

duces permeability, thus restricting both in the field and in the laboratory,
percolation of water. When compaction to determine the desirable range of
is accomplished with proper moisture moisture-density control to hold vol-
control for the particular soil, i t re- ume change to a minimum. The work of
stricts capillary movements, making the Allen and Johnson (3), McDowell (4),
soil less susceptible to increase in mois- Russell (5), and the Corps of Engineers
ture by absorption, and thus restricts (6) is indicative of the nature of work
changes in bearing capacity. done.
The importance of reducing the porosity Swell or shrinkage and its relation to
in finely grained soils and its relation to initial density and moisture content is
bearing capacity may be seen by com- easily determined by direct swell and
paring porosities with the porosity at the shrinkage tests. Normal soils (not in-
plastic l i m i t The plastic limit is a cluding micaceous, diatomaceous, and
critical moisture content affecting the other soils having certain constituents)
bearing capacity of fine-grain soils which show a good relationship between swell and
are characterized by becoming plastic plasticity index (when correction is made
when wet. At or slightly above the plastic for plus No. 4 mesh sieve content). The
limit, small increases In load yield large fact that swell is so important has caused
increases in deformation. It is practically most investigators to test soils for bear-
possible to compact nearly all soils to ing capacity in an expanded condition by
densities having porosities less than the fabricating specimens in a wet condition
porosity at the plastic limit. Compac- for testing or testing specimens after they
tive efforts equal to 100 percent or more have had an opportunity to absorb water
of standard (AASHO Method T 99) may be and swell. The work of TurnbuU and
required to reduce the porosity below that McRae (8) shown in Figure 6, indicates
which holds f o r the plastic limit f o r very the relationship between moisture con-
heavy clays. That may not be desirable tent, density, and bearing capacity as
for subgrades for high-sweUing clay e^qiressed by the California Bearing Ratio
soils. Volume change (shrink and swell) (CBR) for a given soiL The work of
is an important soil property which af- Benkelman and Olmstead (7), shown in
fects the behavior of subgrade materials. Figure 7 and 8, indicates the relationship
Soils which exhibit volume change may between soil strength, as determined
swell nonuniformly on absorbing water the triaxial testing apparatus, and soil
and suffer a reduction in bearing capacity. density and moisture content
In swelling they may become the cause of The relationship between soil-density-
rough riding pavements. They may also moisture-content and volume change I S , in
shrink nonuniformly and cause uneven itself, a broad subject. Space does not
settlement and contribute to fractures permit complete coverage here. The best
In pavements. results may be obtained by recognizing the
Compaction has a marked influence influence of compaction and moisture
on the volume change of clay soils. Den- control on the related properties of volume
sity influences volume change, the great- change and bearing capacity and com-
er the density the greater the potential pacting subgrade soils so that the range
swell, unless the soil is restrained by of shrinkage and swell will be a minimum.
force. An expansive clay soil should Increasing recognition is being given to
be compacted at a water content and to the influence of moisture and density
a density at which swelling will be a control on the susceptibility of soils to
minimum. Likewise, it should be com- cause segregation of ice on freezing and
pacted so shrinkage will be a minimum. subsequent reduction in bearing capacity
Although the two conditions may not be during the frost-melting period. Reliable
the same, a soil exhibiting volume change data on the influence of controlled com-
can be compacted at a moisture content paction on damage due to freezing are yet
to a density where both swell and shrink too meager from which to draw con-
will be near a minimum for any given
condition of exposure. ' Whether interpreted through bearing tests, compression
or shear tests
Many investigations have been made.
 9

elusions on which to base a recommended w i l l be a change as i t adjusts itself to the

practice. new conditions under the pavement
High-volume-change soils, i f com-
FACTORS INFLUENCING PERMANENCE pacted at moisture contents less than
OF DENSinCATION optimum, may gain i n moisture, swell,
and suffer a reduction i n density and
There are several factors which tend bearing e d a c i t y f r o m the as-built con-
to change soil density. The two p r i - dition. Contrariwise, i f compacted too
mary factors are climate and t r a f f i c . wet they may lose moisture and shrink
Others are of a secondary nature, as f o r i n a degree sufficient to crack the pave-
example, condition of pavement surface m e n t The studies made by several high-
and nature of base and subbase or shoul- way departments (9) showed clearly the
ders which influence the degree of ex- need f o r control of moisture content and
posure. density to ^ p r o a c h a condition of least
There is no evidence that the main swell and least shrinkage i f damaging
body of an ordinary embankment suffers effects of moisture and density changes
any decrease i n density due to swelling of on high-volume-change clays f r o m the
clay soils, unless i t i s subject to p r o - as-built to the in-service condition are
longed inundation. The surface slopes to be held to a minimum.
may increase i n porosity with t i m e , but Granular soils retain a large measure
f o r most cases only surface softening w i l l of their compaction. The clayey-sands,
result. Likewise, there is no evidence sandy clays, and the silty soils are af-
that i t continues to settle i n detrimental fected in a lesser degree and need to be
amounts f o r some period following ade- compacted i n accordance with the de-
quate and uniform compaction, either as a gree of protection offered by the type
result of climatic o r t r a f f i c conditions. thickness and cross-section of the pave-
For practical purposes normal embank- ment used and other conditions which
ments retain their degree of compaction, prevail locally. Seasonal changes which
except i n the upper and outer portions affect swell and shrinkage are the most
subject to seasonal wetting and drying severe i n areas near and bordering s e m i -
and f r o s t action: The item of perma- a r i d regions where long, hot dry periods
nence is significant f o r compacted e m - may occur. Even more-severe seasonal
bankments only when they are subjected to changes may occur i n humid regions where
unusual conditions. deep freezing occurs.
Subgrade materials, subbases, and The freezing of wet soils results i n the
bases are subject to more severe ex- formation and often the segregation of ice,
posure to climatic changes and t r a f f i c which on thawing, may cause a reduction
than embankments. Climatic conditions i n soil density. Upon the redistribution of
may bring about permanent or seasonal the thaw water in the s o i l , there is a r e -
reduction or gain i n soil moisture and, as gain in soil density. There is evidence
a result, may decrease o r increase soil that some reduction occurs i n the density
density and cause distortion of the road of fine-grained soils, i f they are i n a
surface. saturated condition p r i o r to freezing.
In considering the permanence of com- The incidence of a greater number of
paction, the engineer needs to take into near-legal-axle weights i n recent years
account two stages i n the l i f e of the road. and the experience on a i r f i e l d s give
The f i r s t concerns the period during which evidence that t r a f f i c has an influence on
the road adjusts itself to i t s environment, the permanence of compaction i n bases
that i s , f r o m the "as-built" to the " i n - and subbases. Heavy t r a f f i c may bring
service" condition. The second concerns about an increase i n density over that ob-
changes i n density of the subgrade mate- tained during construction, causing a
r i a l s which result f r o m seasonal or long- rutting of a flexible-type pavement or
time changes i n climatic conditions after subsidence of a r i g i d pavement. Although
the road has been i n service f o r some there are a few factual data, i t is quite
time. If the soil i s compacted too little generally believed that even relatively
or too much, too wet or too d r y , there clean, coarse granular bases suffer some
 10

TABLE 1

REOOV.MENDED MINIMUM REQblREMEl^TS FOR OOMPACIION OF EMBANKMENTS

CONDITION OF EXPOSURE

CONDITION 1 CONDITION 2
a ass of (Not Subject to InundaUon) (Subject to Periods of Inundation)
Soil
(AA9C
M 145-49 Height of CDtnpaction (% Height of Coinpaction (%
Fill (ft.) Slope of AASHOMax. D.) Fill (ft.) Slope of AASHO Max. D)

A-1 Not a i t i c a l W to 1 95+ Not C r i t i c a l 2 to 1 95

A-3 Not C i i U c a l IK to 1 100+ Not C r i t i c a l 2 to 1 100+
A-2-4 Less than Less than 10^ 95
A-2-5 Less than 2 to 1 95+ 10 to 50 3 to 1
95 to 100
A-4 Less than 50^ Less than 5(
2 to 1 95+ 3 to 1 95 to 100
A-5 Less than SO
A-6 Less than 50 2 to 1 90-95' Less than SO 3 to 1 95 to 100
A-7

REMARKS
Recoimiendations for (jondition 2 depends upon height of f i l l s . Higher f i l l s of the order of 35 to 50 f t .
should be oompscted to 100 percent, at least for part of f i l l s subject to periods of inundation. Ihusual
s o i l s nhich have low resistance to shear deformation should be analyzed by soil-mechanics methods to de-
termine permissible slopes and minimum compacted d o i s i t i e s .

'The lower values of minlnmn requirements < i l l hold only for low f i l l s of Che order of 10 to IS f t . or less and
for roads n o t s u b j e c t to inundation nor c a r r y i n g large T o l u m e s of v e r y heavy loads

reduction i n density in f r o s t areas, and Part of

that t r a f f i c w i l l recompact such granular Road Structure Purpose of Densification
bases after the f r o s t leaves the ground. Embankments To prevent detrimental
It i s now generally accepted that only that settlement
compaction can be "maintained" which w i l l To aid in providing stable
be regained by t r a f f i c . slopes
The extent to which the original degree
of compaction i s preserved depends on the Subgrade To provide bearing
protection the soil receives. F u l l width, Materials capacity
impervious pavements or pavements with To control volume change
surfaced shoulders provide more protec- To provide uniformity
tion against i n f i l t r a t i o n of surface water
than normal-width pavements with shoul- Bases and To provide uniform hig^
ders built of average soils which shrink Subbases bearing capacity
and swell seasonally. The use of shoul-
ders made of select, dense, l o w - v o l - It should be the aim of the engineer to
ume-change material, the maintenance of obtain, as nearly as possible, the densities
tight joints, and the provision of good necessary to satisfy the needs for the con-
surface drainage a l l contribute toward ditions involved.
maintaining density i n subgrade materials.
Embankments

The minimum densities necessary in the

DEGREE OF DENSIFICATION NEEDED construction of embankments^ depend on
the soil type, the height of the embank-

The purpose of compaction i n the ' The term "embankment," as used here, refers to that part
different parts of the road structure may of the raised structure below the depth of the subgrade mate-
rials influenced by traffic loads and effects of climate.
be itemized as follows:
 11

ment, the design slopes, and the condition produce adequate results. However,
of exposure. The necessary minimum r e - under conditions of saturation by inun-
quirements f o r compaction should be de- dation i t i s advisable to increase compac-
termined by consideration of a l l those tion to about 100 percent f o r high f i l l s of
factors and should not be based upon a the order of 35 to 50 f t .
single requirement. Sandy and gravelly The plastic soils (A-6 and A-7) show
soils of the A - 1 , A - 2 , and A - 3 groups the greatest improvement f r o m c o m -
(13) can be compacted to relatively high paction. They should be compacted to
densities. Some of the very-sandy soils relatively high densities (low porosities)
exist i n the d r y , uncompacted state at if stable slopes are to result f o r the high-
densities of the order of 90 percent of er f i l l s . Recommended minimum r e q u i r e -
AASHO maximum densities and attain ments f o r compaction of embankments are
densities of that magnitude o r hi gher under given i n Table 1.
n o r m a l construction procedures without Because of their need f o r greater r e -
benefit of r o l l i n g and have stable slopes sistance to softening,reduction i n strength,
at those densities. When they are placed and erosion, embankments subject to flood-
where they are not subjected to wetting, ing require better compaction than those
there is l i t t l e danger of excessive settle- not subject t o inundation. Experience has
ment. However, i f subjected t o satura- shown that well-compacted soils o f f e r
tion, they may settle i n detrimental amount much-greater resistance to stream eros-
unless compacted to about 95 percent of ion during overflows than uncompacted o r
maximum density. The relatively clean poorly compacted soils. Clay soils are
granular soils retain their stability when greatly improved i n that respect.
saturated. Rigid control of moisture f o r soils
The f r i a b l e soils of the A - 2 , A - 4 , and dryer than optimum i s not necessary f o r
A-5 groups can also be compacted with embankments not to be subjected to f l o o d -
relative ease but require relatively high ing. The moisture content may be w i t h -
densities i f stable slopes are to be built. in the range below optimum which p e r m i t s
They are more subject t o reduction i n obtainingthe desired density with the c o m -
shear strength on saturation and require paction equipment available. Sheepsfoot-
higher densities to produce stable slopes. type r o l l e r s which produce high unit
Normally, 95 percent compaction w i l l pressures and other types of r o l l e r s which

K
V 0*

z
4

7 y \ 14

V
5

y
2
•
•^16
\
825 o

to
3
1 12
II
• 2
S 98

'• \
/ NUUE E R IND C « T E ! THE
NU M S E R INOICA E S TH E 2
NUMB E R OF T E S T V A L U E S NUMBER OF T E S T VALUES ^
INCLU DED IN AVERAGE OF V - L INCLUDED IN THE AVERAGE /
MAX V - L V A L U E S V - L FOR E A C H VALUE O F MOISTURE
2 \
V
1 1
•» 5 6 , 7 4 5 6 7
AVERAGE MAXIMUM (V-O-KIP/SO FT AVERAGE MAXIMUM ( V - L ) - K I P / S Q FT

F i g u r e s 7 and 8 . R e l a t i o n o f maximum V - L ( t n a x i a l s h e a r ) w i t h
d e n s i t y and m o i s t u r e .
12

SI(VM - U S standard Siiei

100 40 eo 10

Sand-Clay
HMViaaz Slltyday andy Clay

HMvyClay
SDty Clay
Sandy Clay
Sand
Bnwtl-Sand-Cloy

oa 009 09 I 8
Portlela Sb«-mm Oloimtar

F i g u r e 9. G r a i n - s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n and A t t e r b e r g l i n i t s o f s o i l s
used i n B r i t i s h f i e l d - c o m p a c t i o n experiments ( a f t e r W i l l i a m s ) .

produce heavy wheel loads and high unit design or the depth to which climate
pressures p e r m i t securing desired densi- affects the s o i l , whichever is the greater
ties at low moisture content. Moderately depth. Because of the effect of climate on
plastic soils i n Groups A - 4 through A - 7 bearing capacity and on the permanence
should be compacted at moisture contents and effectiveness of compaction, more
not greater than 2 or 3 percentage points careful consideration need be given com-
over optimum to insure uniform density paction of various types of subgrade mate-
and to avoid the unsatisfactory construc- r i a l s f o r different climatic conditions than
tion condition of low stability and rutting is necessary f o r embankments. The need-
under heavy construction eqmpment. ed density and moisture content f o r ade-
High-silt-content soils of low plasticity quate bearing capacity may not be ideal
in Groups A - 4 and A-5 and sandy silts of f o r holding volume change within desired
Group A-4 should be compacted at mois- limits.
ture contents not in excess of optimum to Several state highway departments
insure uniform density and to avoid the recognize, i n their methods f o r design-
instability and rutting under heavy con- ing flexible type surfaces (11), that the
struction equipment which occurs when bearing capacity of the s o i l must be based
these soils are placed at moisture contents on a degree of saturation which occurs
which exceed optimum. under service conditions. I f compaction
Soils compacted at optimum moisture can be controlled to approximate that
content have lower permeability and a condition, insofar as is practical under
greater resistance to softemng than dry construction methods used, there w i l l
soils at equal densities. Therefore, f i l l s result a minimum change in moisture
or portions of f i l l s subject to inundation content and density f r o m the as-built
or scour should be compacted at moisture to the in-service condition. Because the
contents as near optimum as is practicable chief function of a subgrade is to c a r r y
and economical f o r these conditions. loads, that function must be considered
with respect to the relative permanence
Subgrades, Subbases, and Bases of the densification. The smoothness of
the riding surface depends on the u n i f o r m -
The t e r m subgrade material (base- ity of compaction, hence any factor which
ment soil) is intended to include soil to influences uniformity also needs con-
the depth which may affect structural sideration.
 13

Obviously the highest density obtain-

able consistent with a moisture content
less than optimum provides the greatest •—S Conn
bearing capacity. Nonplastic, granular : 120
CL wtragn
soils and subbase and base materials
have l i t t l e or no volume change and r e -
tain a high degree of their compaction.
Thus, i t is advantageous f r o m a l l con- .110 /
siderations to compact those soils to
high densities.
100
The less-plastic soils of the silty and
clayey groups, which have low volume 9 10 19 20
changes, decrease in bearing capacity as Molttura Conttnt- Plrcmt
40,000 Lb. Whttl Lood Rubbtr T i n Rolltr hf lotion
the degree of saturation is increased. Protura 97p • I Contoct Prouaro 69p s I 6 Inch Lift*
Those soils should be compacted to mod- Dwisily ot le Inch Depth Clayey Sand UL • 18 PI • £
erately high densities. A reduction in
density and an accompanying increase in F i g u r e 11. Typical moisture-density data
moisture and reduction in bearing capacity f r o m c o n s t r u c t i o n l i f t s on s a n d y soil
occur on soils having high volume change. ( a f t e r Corps of E n g i n e e r s ) .
Thus, unless temporary advantage of high
bearing capacity during the early l i f e of Practicable L i m i t s of Densification
the road is desired, and volume change
(and road smoothness) is not a prime The graphs i n Figure 4, which i l l u s -
factor, those soils should be compacted trate the relationship between density and
to densities and at moisture contents compactive e f f o r t f r o m laboratory tests,
which constitute the best compromise indicate no decrease i n rate of density
between need and permanence. Because gain with increase in compactive e f f o r t f o r
granular soils retain compaction except the greatest compactive e f f o r t s shown.
in areas of severe f r o s t and because Undoubtedly that is due to compacting soils
high densities are desirable, knowledge in a mold whose side-waU f r i c t i o n makes
of the practicable maximum f i e l d l i m i t s that possible. However, f o r f i e l d com-
of compaction is important. Hence, rec- paction there is a practicable maximum
ommended procedures f o r selecting the l i m i t of density which can be obtained
best densities are given later i n this with reasonable economy f o r each c o m b i -
bulletin. nation of soil and compacting equipment.
Specifications f o r bringing about the best
results obtainable consistent with the de-
sired economy cannot be a r r i v e d at w i t h -
LEGEND out a foreknowledge of the practicable
-• 250IH I Sll«p»tool,9 RlMM-
Sin Li(H,l8in.0«pm
l i m i t s f o r various types of equipment on
4 9 0 p t . i Shnpstool,9Pfl«Mt
ein Liflt,IPin Depth
different types of soils.
-•—15001b VIUI>l>Winl,6Cimragn|
3in L i t l l , 9 i i i D«plh The recent trend towards the use of
-a— 40O0O lb. Wh««l Lood.e CowrogeJ
I8in D«pth I higher contact pressures and heavier
AASHO T99-3eOpl WC
and Moxifnjm Oaniity
equipment has made possible the attain-
ModlfiMAA.SKO Opt « C
ond Maximum Otnsity
ment of higher densities on well-graded,
granular soils and on the more-compress-
Soil
Cloyay Sand ible clayey soils. Their use has not i n -
L-ie PI-2
% Sand-SZ creased materially the densities obtain-
» SiH • 2
X Cla> ' I S able onvery-sandy materials nor on v e r y -
f r i a b l e silty soils. Data f r o m three i n -
IS 20 23
Sal tUbtirCartant- Percent
vestigations and f r o m several years of
compaction practice make i t possible to
F i g u r e 10. Typical moisture-density data predict with reasonable accuracy the
f r o m c o n s t r u c t i o n l i f t s on s a n d y soil highest degree of compaction practicable
( a f t e r Corps of E n g i n e e r s ) . with present equipment.
 14

in rows of 4. Tamping-foot areas 5. 25

water Content - Percent of Dry Weight
10 15 20 25 vi and 5. 5 sq. in. Tamping-foot pressures,
Indiana, 209 and 290 p s i . : Ohio, 223 and
290 psi.
3-Wheel Type. 10-ton, 325 and 350 lb.
120
per inch of width of r e a r r o l l s .

\\
Pneumatic-Tire Type- 9-Wheel, 35 p s i .
Modified A AS.HO / t i r e pressure, 225 lb. per inch of t i r e

y
d IIS -~ltt«l M a l l l
width i n contact with ground.
^Zfiro Air \'olds

RESULTS
no /
Field Compoctlon —
20,000 on1 4 0 p 0 0 l h Wheel
\ \
\ \
Indiana
Load 6 Coverages ^ \
105 Soils. Silts and silty clay loams, P. I .
A range 8 to 17.
AASMO » e t h o d - v / Moisture Content. Approximately o p t i -
100 — T 9 9 - 3 ( ) 290^000 and 790P.8I mum as determined AASHO Method T
/ / S h eepsfbot Rollers 6 Poss u
1 1
99.
Testa Made an Silty Cloy Sail Having 10% Sond,63%Silt, Density, L i f t Thickness, and Number of
27%Clay L L ' 3 7 P I » I 4 S p G f 2 7 2
Passes.
Sheepsfoot Type. 95 to 96 percent of
F i g u r e 12. R e s u l t s o f f i e l d and l a b o r a -
AASHO maximum dry density on 6- i n .
t o r y compaction on s i l t y c l a y s o i l ( a f t e r
&>rps o f E n g i n e e r s ) .
loose l i f t s i n 5 to 6 passes.
3-Wheel Type. 97 to 100 percent of
AASHO maximum dry density on 6-in.
The f i r s t of the investigations r e f e r r e d loose l i f t s i n 1 or 2 coverages. 101 to
to were two e:q)erimental f i l l construc- 104 percent of AASHO maximum dry den-
tion projects (12) constructed i n 1938, sity on 9-in. loose l i f t s i n 2 to 2% cov-
one In Delaware County, Ohio, and the erages. 100 percent of AASHO maximum
other i n Gibson County, Indiana. The r e - dry density i n 12-in. loose l i f t s i n 2 cov-
sults of the two experiments are sum- erages.
marized as follows: Pneumatic Type. 99 percent of AASHO
maximum dry density on 6-in. loose l i f t s
Rollers Used (Indiana and Ohio) in 2 coverages. 97 percent of AASHO
maximum d r y density on 9-in. loose l i f t s
Sheepsfoot Tsrpe. Dual-drum oscillating in 3 coverages. 97 percent of AASHO max-
Type 40 and 44-in. -diameter drums 48 imum dry density on 12-in. loose l i f t s i n
in. wide, 88 to 112 tamping f t . per d r u m 4 coverages.

TABLE 2

SUMMARY OF BRITISH F I E L D AND LABORATORY COMPACTION STTJDIES ON F I V E S O I L S

BRITISH* MODIFIED MAXIMUM F I E L D COMPACTION (pcf.)AND

STANDARD AASHO OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT ( P e r c e n t ) F O R
S O I L TYPE DIFFERENT ROLLERS
Density Opt. M.C Density Opt. M.C. 8-Ton I^eunatic •aubfoot" 'Taper Foot"
(pcf.) (Percent) (pcf.) (Percoit) 3-Wheel Roller (115 p s i . ) (249 p s i . )
Gravel-sand-clay 129 9 138 7 138-7 126-7 129-6 128-5
&nd 121 11 130 9 132-8 127-11 - - - -
Sandy-aay 115 14 128 11 116-14 108-19 119-12 120-12
Silty-aay 104 21 120 14 111-16 104-20 116-14 115-14
Heavy-Qay 97 26 113 17 104-20 98-25 107-16 107-15

' f t i t i d i Standard Test does not d i f f e r greatly from AA90 Method T 99.
 15

TABLE 3
BRITISH STANDARD COMPACTION ON 5 SOILS BY 4 ROLLERS

Gravel-Sand- Sandy Silty Heavy

Roller Clay Sand Clay Clay Clay
% % •n % %
8 - t o n , 3-wheel 107 109 101 106 107
Pneumatic 97 105 94 100 101
Club- foot 100 — 103 111 110
Taper-foot 99 --- 104 110 110

Ohio type 42-in. -diameter by 48-in. drums

having 88 f t per drum i n rows of f o u r
Soils. Approximately equal percentages of with 2V4 by 2% i n . (SVw sq. i n . ) contact
sand, s i l t , and clay. Majority of soils in area and ballasted contact pressure of
P. I . range of 15 to 25. 249 psi.
Moisture Control. M a j o r i t y within 1 per- 3-Wheel Type. 8 ton, 186 lb. per i n .
cent of optimum. of width of f r o n t r o l l 311 lb, per i n . of
Density, L i f t Thickness, and Number of width of rear r o l l s .
Passes. Pneumatic-Tired Type (with pairs of
Sheepsfoot Type. 97 to 101 percent of wheels on oscillating axles). 9 wheeL
AASHO maximum dry density on 6-in. 36-psi. inflation pressure 39 psi. con-
loose l i f t s i n 6 to 9 passes. 97 percent tact pressure, 3,000 1b. per wheel.
of AASHO maximum dry density on 9-in.
loose l i f t s i n 6 passes. The B r i t i s h studies were unique i n two
3-Wheel Type. 101 to 105 percent of respects. They made a l l tests on one
AASHO maximum dry density on 6-in. thickness of l i f t . They obtained m a x i -
loose l i f t s i n 2. 5 to 3. 3 coverages. 104 mum compaction f o r each r o l l e r , each
percent of AASHO maximum dry density soil being " f u l l y compacted" at each m o i s -
on 9-in. loose l i f t s i n 6 coverages. ture content to enable finding maximum
f i e l d density and optimum moisture con-
The B r i t i s h Road Research laboratory tent f o r each soil f o r each r o l l e r . F r o m
(13) released results i n 1950 of r o l l i n g 4 to 16 passes were required f o r f u l l
e}q)eriments on f i v e different soils rang- compaction with pneumatic and 3-wheel
ing f r o m a gravel-sand-clay to a heavy r o l l e r s and f r o m 16 to 64 with sheepsfoot
clay. The characteristics of the five types. The results b r i n g out some i n t e r -
soils are indicated i n Figure 9. The esting relationships between maximum
B r i t i s h studies included (among others) f i e l d density and f i e l d optimum moisture
the foUowing types and weights of r o l l e r s : content and soil type and equipment. The
Sheepsfoot Type. "Club-foot, " f i x e d - results of the B r i t i s h investigations are
f r a m e , dual-drum type. 42-in. -diameter shown in Table 2.
by 48-in. drums having 64 tamping feet Tables 3 and 4 show the relative p e r -
per drum i n rows of f o u r with 4 in. by centages of B r i t i s h standard compaction
3 i n . (12 sq. i n . ) contact area, and b a l - and modified AASHO compaction obtained
lasted tamping-foot pressure of 115 psi. by the different types of r o l l e r s on the
"Taper - f o o t , " d u a l - d r u m , oscillating f i v e soils.
TABLE 4
MODIFIED AASHO COMPACTION CW 5 SOILS BY 4 ROLLERS

Gravel-Sand- Sandy Silty Heavy

Roller Clay Sand Clay Clay Clay
% % % % %
8 - t o n , 3-wheel 100 101 91 92 92
Pneumatic 91 98 84 87 87
Club- foot 93 — 93 97 95
Taper-foot 93 --- 94 96 95
 16

TABLE 5

STANDARD AASHO AND MODIFIED AASHO OOMPACIION OBTAINED ON A aAYEY SAND

IN F I E L D ROLLING EXPERIMENTS ( A H E R CORPS OF ENGINEERS)

Equipment Passes Compacted L i f t M o d i f i e d AASHO S t a n d a r d AASHO

Thickness Density Density
Afo. m. % %
250-psi. 9 6 94 98
Sheepsfoot
450-pai. 9 6 93-95 97-99
Sheepsfoot
1500-lb. 6 3 94-95 98-99
Wobble-Wheel
Pneumatic T i r e
20,000-Ib. 4 6 95 99
Wheel-Load
Pneumatic T i t e
40,000-lb. 4 6 94-96 98-100
Wheel-Load
Pneumatic T i r e
40,000-lb. 8 6 95-97 99-102
Wheel-Load
Pneumatic T i r e
Laboratory Standard Optimum moisture, content was 11.5 percent. F i e l d optimum moisture contents ranged
from 11.5 to 12.2 perceit.

TABLE 6

STANDARD AASHO AND MODIFIED AASHO COMPACTION OBTAINED ON A SILTlf CLAY IN

F I E L D ROLLING EXPERIMENIS ( A H E R CORPS OF ENGINEERS)

Equipment Passes Compacted L i f t M o d i f i e d AASHO S t a n d a r d AASHO

Thickness Density Density
Wo. m. % %

250 p s i . 6 6 92 102
Sheepsfoot
500 p s i . 6 6 91-92 102
Sheepsfoot
750 p s i . 6 6 91- 92 102- 104
Sheepsfoot
10,000 l b . 6 92- 94
103- 104
Wheel Load
Pneumatic T i r e
20,000 l b . 92- 93 102- 103
Wheel Load
Pneumatic T i r e
40,000 l b . 93- 94 103- 104
Wheel Load
Pneumatic T i r e
Laboratory Standard AASHO optimum moisture content was 17.9 percent. Field optimum moisture contents
ranged fran 18.5 to 19.5 percent.
 17

TABLE 7 Standard AASHO maximum density were

AVERAGE DENSITIES OF obtained with relative ease. Five to six
HIGHWAY SUBGRADE MATERIALS passes of sheepsfoot r o l l e r s having medi-
um contact pressures (200 to 250 p s L ) ;
Type of Subgrade Material . Densities
one to two coverages of 10-ton, 3-wheel-
AAa» Modified AA30
type r o l l e r s and two to three coverages
Bases 100.5 96.5 of pneumatic-t}rpe r o l l e r s gave 95 percent
Granular Materials 101.2 96.7 or more of standard compaction on most
S i l t - C l a y Materials 96.8 88.8 soils on l i f t thicknesses of the order of 6
to 9 i n . of loose depth (approximately 4 to
The Corps of Engineers (14, 15) have 7 i n . of compacted depth.) Increasing the
conducted field-compaction e:q)eriments contact pressures of the tamping feet on
under conditions of close control of mois- sheepsfoot-type r o l l e r s without some i n -
ture content and rolling. The tests were crease i n the contact area brought only a
made on two types of soils. One soil was small gain i n compaction. The higher
a clayey sand having a plasticity index of contact pressures were only partly effec-
2, The other was a silty clay having a tive because the bearing capacity of the
plasticity index of 14. A significant fea- soils i n the loose state could not withstand
ture of the tests was that the effectiveness the pressures and the r o l l e r s sank deeper
of the different r o l l e r s was compared on into the soil until the effective contact
the basis of the number of passes which pressure equalled the bearing capacity of
might be used normally on a construction the soil. Thus, the benefit of higher con-
project. tact pressures cannot be realized unless
The f i e l d and laboratory moisture- the contact area also i s adequate f o r the
density relationships obtained on the clay- soil.
ey sand are shown i n Figures 10 and 11. The e3q)eriments showed that 100 p e r -
The equipment used, number of passes, cent, or more, of standard (AASHO T-99)
l i f t thickness, and relative densities at compaction was obtained by increasing the
f i e l d optimum moisture content expressed number of passes. Thus i t is practicable
as percentages of AASHO maximum den- to specify 100-percent compaction f o r
sity (T 99) and modified AASHO maximum special conditions where densities of that
density are shown i n Table 5. order are desirable. Also, some r o l l e r s
Field and laboratory moisture-density are more effective on some soils than on
relationships f o r the silty clay soil are others and some soils attain a high degree
shown i n Figure 12. The equipment used, of compaction with less compactive e f f o r t
and relative densities at f i e l d optimum than others.
moisture content expressed as percent-
ages of standard AASHO and modified Correlation of Need, Practicable Densi-
AASHO maximum densities are shown in fication L i m i t s , and Permanence
Table 6.
The three r o l l i n g experiments showed The data presented are too meager
that densities of 95 percent or more of f r o m which to develop f i r m rules f o r the
TABLE 8
DENSITIES OF SUBGRADE MATERIALS UNDER RIGID PAVEMENTS IN KANSAS

D e s c r i p t i o n of Average F i e l d Dry Average AASHO Relative

S o i l Group D e n s i t y for Group Standard Density Compaction
for Group (AASHO T 99)
RcL
S o i l s found under pumping 98.9 104.3 94.8
s l a b s ( a l l s o i l s had l e s s
than 50% sand and g r a v e l )
S o i l s h a v i n g l e s s than 50% 99.8 106.8 93.5
sand and g r a v e l from under
non pumping s l a b s
S o i l s h a v i n g more than 50% 115.5 117.6 98.3
sand and g r a v e l
18

TABLE 9
MOISTURE CONTENTS OF SUBGRADE MATERIALS UNDER FLEXIBLE PAVEMENTS
(After Kersten)

State Textural Soil Sa t u r a t i o n Plastic Limit Optimum M.C.

group 2
Minnesota Sandy Loam 78 75 101
Kansas Sandy Loam 65 73 82
Arkansas Sandy Loam 59 72 73

Minnesota Clay 83 91 105

Kansas Clay 92 103 112
Arkansas Clay 92 105 109

promise may need to be made f o r very

TABLE 10 high f i l l s indicating high compaction r e -
AVERAGE MOISTURE CONTENTS POUND quirements. That must then be done
IN THE SUBGRADE GROUPS ( a f t e r H i c k s ) by flattening slopes o r using selected
AA30T99 Plastic Saturation
soils. An analysis of conditionjs f o r high
Class of Soil
(AA310 W 145-49) Optimum Limit f i l l s should be made by soil mechanics
methods which are beyond the scope of
A-l-b 82.5 36.4 69.0 this r e p o r t
A-2-4 75.5 43.7 62.9 Subgrade Materials and Bases. The
A-2-6 104.3 62.3 85.3
selection of the best density range f o r
A-4 106.1 65.0 82.6
54.0 89.8
subgrade soils varies widely because of
A-5 114.7
A-6 109.1 75.2 85.4 the difference m the behavior of soils
A-7-5 118.9 68.2 91.2 under service conditions. I t i s entirely
A-7-6 109.4 70.9 90.9 possible that the compaction which i s
deemed best f r o m the designers point of
selection of the most desirable l i m i t s of view i s not practicable f o r construction
densification f o r different types of soils. and contrary, that deemed best f r o m the
However, the data do indicate trends which construction point of view may not p r o -
can be used as a broad basis f o r applying vide the desired subgrade condition.
compaction to a good advantage. This I t I S not possible to present i n tabular
requires a correlation between compac- f o r m recommended compaction l i m i t s f o r
tion needs, the l i m i t s of compaction which subgrade materials f o r a l l types of pave-
can be obtained practicably and the r e l a - ments, loadings, s o i l types and climatic
tive permanence of the compaction under conditions. The best that can be done
the conditions of exposure e3q)ected. here i s to consider need, permanence,
Through such correlation i t i s possible to and p r a c t i c a l l i m i t s and set f o r t h a meth-
select the range of densities and moisture od of analysis f o r a r r i v i n g at the best
contents which w i l l result i n the 'best' density range.
bearing capacity f o r the service l i f e of Hicks (16) found f r o m his f i e l d survey
the p a r t of the structure m question. of moisture contents and densities i n road
Embankments. Because of the wide subgrade materials and bases under
difference i n the range of values indic- flexible type pavements that heavy v e -
ative of the measures of various soil hicles w i l l cause a higher degree of
properties, hard-and-fast l i m i t i n g values densification than w i l l light vehicles and
of densities f o r compaction cannot be
drawn. Discussion under "Degree of TABLE 11
Densification Needed" and the range of INFLUENCE OF COMPACTION ON MOISTURE CONTENTS
values i n Table 1 relate need with design OF GRANULAR BASES ( a f t e r H i c k s )
of slopes under the two conditions of (1)
Average Standard Optimum Plastic Saturation
inundation and (2) not subject to inunda-
Density Moisture Content limit
tion. The values of relative density
(percent of standard AASHO) are a l l less
% % % %
(For Densities Under lOOX)
than the maximum practicable l i m i t s . 98.5 7 5.0 43.8 60.3
Hence no compromise need be made due (For DensiUes 100% and Above)
to construction limitations. Such com- lOLl 73.1 40.6 6L1
 19

a large volume of t r a f f i c w i l l bring about between densities and average moisture

density equilibrium quicker than w i l l a contents of granular bases. The average
s m a l l volume of t r a f f i c . Thus t r a f f i c i s densities (es^ressed as percentages of
an important consideration. He found that AASHO T 99 maximum densities) and
t r a f f i c w i l l maintain densities greater than moisture contents are given i n Table 11.
100 percent of AASHO maximum density Studies i n Tennessee showed average
in granular subgrade material but densities moisture contents of 23 percent compared
i n s i l t - c l a y subgrade material were much to an average plastic l i m i t of 19 f o r fine
lower. Average values f r o m his survey grained plastic subgrade soils (having
are given i n Table 7. less than SOpercent sand and gravel) under
Some of the recent studies of pumping r i g i d type pavements. The corresponding
of r i g i d type pavements yielded data on values f o r Kansas were 24. 8 and 19.4
relative densities of subgrade soils under respectively. Moisture contents of the
pavements which had been i n service more granular soils (having more than
several years. The results f r o m the 50% sand and gravel) were 17. 7 and 13. 6
Kansas Investigation (17) which was l i m i t e d and their plastic l i m i t s were 15 and 14.1
largely to the eastern one-half of the State respectively. Moisture contents in I l l i n o i s
show average values of density f o r each of subgrade soils underlying granular bases
three broad soil groups f o r that locality. averaged 22. 5 percent and corresponded
The results are shown i n Table 8. to an average plastic l i m i t of 21.3 p e r c e n t
The densities found i n granular soils Thus the fine g r a i n subgrade soils existed
under r i g i d type pavements in service at a condition near saturation while the
were found higher than those of the f i n e r granular soils existed at a condition of
grained soils. about 83 percent saturation.
Kersten's (18, 19) study of the moisture It is recognized that the values given
contents of soils under flexible pavements w i l l not hold f o r a l l climatic conditions.
and the reports of the Highway Research They do however, point out that there is
Board Committees on Warping (20) and a range f o r density and f o r moisture
Pumping (21) of Concrete Pavements p r o - content which can be maintained f o r each
vide evidence of the range of moisture type of soil and type of pavement f o r a
contents which exist i n subgrade mate- given locality. I t follows that the least
r i a l s under pavements. The average volume change w i l l occur i f compaction is
values obtained i n three States f r o m aimed at the range which is most apt to
Kersten's w o r k indicate the range of s o i l "stay put" i n the subgrade material. The
moisture found under flexible pavements range of desirable moisture content can
i n those localities. The values are given be obtained f o r any locality by a survey of
in Table 9 f o r only two different types of f i e l d conditions on pavements which have
soils to show the difference i n soil mois- been i n service f o r some time. I t should
ture content f o r sandy loam soils and clay be kept i n mind that they reflect in some
soils. degree the i n i t i a l moisture contents and
Hicks' 1948 report of seasonal meas- densities at which they were compacted.
urements of subgrade soil moisture con- In a r r i v i n g at the best ranges of m o i s -
tents under flexible type pavements also ture content and density, i t is desirable
showed that soU moisture i s related to to make an analysis of the needs f o r the
soil texture. The relationship expressed conditions and correlate those needs with
i n terms of average moisture contents other factors. One way of making such
found i n the various Subgrade Soil Groups, analysis consists of stating design and
(Soil Classification Method AASHO M construction requirements and the c o r -
145-49) I S shown i n Table 10. responding ranges of moisture content
Generally the s o i l moisture increased and density. The desirable values f o r
during the f a l l and winter, reached a one may not coincide with that f o r the
maximum during the month of A p r i l and other, necessitating a compromise to
receded to a minimum during late sum- obtain the best practicable values. E x -
mer or early f a l l . amples 1 and 2 illustrate that approach
Hicks also reported on the relationship f o r determining the best range of values.
 20
EXAMPLE 1

Conditions: A r i g i d pavement, a subgrade soil exhibiting high-volume change overlaid

by a 4 - to 6-in. granular base.

DESIRABLE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

Description of Requirements Corresponding Approximate Range of

Density Moisture Content
Maximum bearing values consistent (% of AASHO Maximum Den.) (% of Optimum)
with minimum swelling or shrinking
f r o m as-built to in-service condition
and f r o m season to season f o r main-
tenance of smooth riding surface.

1. Due to soil swell or shrink 90-95 100-115

2. Due to freezing and thawing 90-95 less than 65

CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS AND LIMITATIONS

Adequate Bearing Capacity

a. For hauling purposes when 95-100 95-100

subgrade i s subject to con-
struction t r a f f i c

b. When paver and trucks do not No construction requirements. The density

use area to be paved and moisture values may be as desired w i t h -
in reasonable l i m i t s .

^ h e effect of density on f r o s t action i s not well established. Meager data show that,
f o r certain conditions, heaving increases with increases i n density to a maximum,
then decreases. The effect of moisture content i s known to be great. No significant
heaving and accompanying softening occurs at moisture contents below the value given.
EXAMPLE 2

Conditions: A densely-graded, granular base of nonplastic materials of considerable

depth f o r a flexible pavement c a r r y i n g a large volume of heavy t r a f f i c .

DESIRABLE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

Description of Requirements Corresponding Approximate Range of

Density Moisture Content
(% of AASHO Maximum Den.) (% of Optimum)
Maximum bearing capacity which can ^
be maintained under the t r a f f i c 105-115 95-100
carried

CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS AND LIMITATIONS

Maximum practicable density obtain-

able with heavy rr o llll e r s i s only con- 105-110 95+
struction limitation

These values v a r y with type of materials. I t i s assumed i n this statement that the
thickness of the base course i s adequate to c a r r y such loads without overstressing
the subgrade.
 21

The best compromise value f o r the clay METHODS OF SPECIFYING

soil w i l l depend on the exact properties of COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS
the soil and conditions under which i t must
serve. Except f o r a very-hig^-volume- There are three methods i n use f o r
change s o i l o r f o r s e m i a r i d o r subhumid stating minimum reqvdrements f o r c o m -
conditions, a range of density centering paction: (1) controlling soil density, (2)
about 95 percent of AASHO T 99 i s ade- controlling compactive e f f o r t , and (3)
quate. F o r s e m i a r i d and subhumid con- a combination of 1 and 2.
ditions on the very heavy clay, a value Each of the methods can be made to
of 90 percent or less may be necessary. produce satisfactory compaction i f i t con-
Subgrades f o r intermediate soils of low t r o l s s o i l moisture content and is properly
volume change may well be compacted to applied to the existing conditions. Each
densities of 95 to 100 percent. has some advantages as well as d i s -
The compromise on the granular base advantages. I t i s the purpose here to
material i s entirely that of obtaining the point out the advantages and disadvantages
maximum density practicable. That may of the methods.
require the use of relatively heavy r o l l e r s
or the use of thin l i f t s and close control Control of Density
of moisture content to obtain the high de-
gree of compaction which i s desirable The problem of compaction i s basically
f o r bases. one of controlling the amount and size of
A suggested range of densities f o r pore spaces of the soil. When the spe-
subgrade soils and base materials i s cific gravity of the s o i l i s relatively u n i -
given i n Table 12. I t i s recognized that f o r m , controlling the dry weight per
a desirable range of density and moisture cubic foot gives close control of porosity.
contentf or a semiarid or subhumid climate A large m a j o r i t y of agencies specifying
may d i f f e r f r o m that of humid climate. control of compaction do so throu^^ the
Likewise, s m a l l differences may be desir- medium of controlling dry weight per
able i n southern compared to northern cubic foot and also stating maximum and
climes, especially on soils whose suscep- minimum l i m i t i n g values of moisture
t i b i l i t y to freeze damage bears a strong content. I n most instances the AASHO
relationship to degree of densification. T 99 maximum density and optimum
moisture content f o r m the basis f o r the
Shoulder Materials. Because of the specification as, f o r example, specify-
severe exposure of shoulder materials to ing a minimum compaction of 95 percent
the climatic elements, i t i s poor economy of AASHO maximum density and a m o i s -
to compact f i n e - g r a i n clayey soils i n road ture content range of 90 to 110 percent
shoulders to high densities. I f compacted of optimum moisture content
to high densities they w i l l swell and p r e - Some of the advantages and disad-
vent good surface drainage. Moisture vantages of that method may be stated
contents f o r compaction are not c r i t i c a l b r i e f l y as follows:
and need be only sufficient to obtain good
bonding, or knitting, of the soil to m i n i - Advantages
mize erosion. The following tabulation
suggests desirable ranges of compaction 1. Because soils seldom d i f f e r great-
l i m i t s f o r shoulder materials. ly i n specific gravity, i t constitutes a
definite means f o r measuring the degree
of densification obtained.
DENSITlf RANGE MOISTURE CON- 2. Unless encumbered with other r e -
TYPE OF S O I L (% o f AASHO TENT RANGE strictions i t gives the constructor a wide
T 99 Max. D . ) (% of Optimum) range in latitude of equipment and methods
Fine-grained clay
to acquire the desired compaction.
85-90 75-100
S i l t a and sands 90-95 85-100
Granular material Roll i n a moist condiuon Disadvantages
with smooth-wheel or
cubber-tire r o l l e r . 1. I t does not t e l l the constructor
22

f i e l d testing. However, i f i t i s accom-

larzpief panied by control of moisture i t has no
e 173% opt wc
advantage over the dry density method
2l9X-l29Xof
and has even greater disadvantages.
opt«q Figure 13 shows a typical dry weight-
moisture content relationship and the c o r -
responding relationship between wet
weight per cubic foot and moisture content.
Density and optimum moisture content
114 Spitt'90X0(1
values are: maximum dry density 109. 6
per cu. f t . , maximum wet density 127.2
per cu. f t , optimum moisture content 15
I09i6p.ci percent, optimum moisture content 17. 5
eisxopt wc.
percent
If f o r example, a minimum wet weight
of 90 percent of maximum i s specified
(114.5 per cubic foot wet weight) that
wet weight w i l l require a mininium dry
weight of 104.9 per cubic foot (equal to
95. 7 percent of maximum dry weight) at
9.2 percent moisture content. I f no
maximum moisture content is specified
94Zpe.l \
and the f i e l d moisture-density r e l a t i o n -
B6Xal ship i s s i m i l a r to the wet weight curve,
a dry density 90 pcf. (equal to about 82
percent of maximum d r y weight) i s p e r -
MOISTURE CONTEMT- PERCENT OF DRY WEKSHT mitted at the moisture content approach-
ing saturation. I f f o r example, the m o i s -
F i g u r e 13. I n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s between ture content is l i m i t e d to a maximum of
s p e c i f i e d v a l u e s b a s e d on w e t - and d r y - 125 percent of optimum* (wet weight per
volume weights. cubic foot) or 21. 9 percent, the density
requirement of 90 percent of maximum
which equipment i s best suited, nor how
wet weight w i U p e r m i t a d r y weig^it of
much r o l l i n g is necessary to obtain the
94. 2 pcf. which is equal to 86 percent
specified density.
of maximum d r y weight Thus, i f the
2. I t requires f i e l d testing equipment
specification i s stated as a percentage
and personneL of maximum wet weight, i t p e r m i t s a
3. I t requires some t i m e , depending decrease i n dry weight (and a marked
on equipment and method and s k i l l of the decrease i n bearing capacity) with i n -
inspector, to measure the dry density. crease i n moisture content. That should
4. I n unusual cases where sfpecific be taken into consideration and accounted
gravities are not known and may d i f f e r f o r i n determining specification l i m i t s
markedly, i t does not r e f l e c t the true based on wet weight per cubic f o o t
densification of the soil.
5. There i s sometimes danger that
a s o i l may be improperly identified and
an improper laboratory density value Control of Compactive E f f o r t
assigned. Care i s needed to compare
f i e l d and laboratory values f o r s i m i l a r There are two methods of specifying
materials. control of compaction by specifying r e -
quirements controlling the compactive
The degree of compaction may also e f f o r t used. One method which i s used by
be controlled by specifying l i m i t s of wet many agencies i s that of specifying types
weight per cubic foot. This method has and weights of r o l l e r s , and by controlling
the advantage i n that wet weight per cubic
* Normally too wet for ease in handUng
foot can be determined rather quickly i n
 23

l i f t thickness and the amount of rolling. The second method has not yet been
The amount of r o l l i n g is governed by developed. I t has the obvious advantages
specifying the number of passes or cov- of the density method without the d i s -
erages or by including r o l l e r hours as advantage of present methods which specify
a bidding item and placing control of the some percentage, usually less than 100
total e f f o r t used under the immediate percent, of the density obtained under
supervision of the project engineer. This standard compactive e f f o r t .
method of control usually includes control Most specifications f o r compaction
of soil moisture content Often this combine density control with control over
method also includes specification r e - equipment, giving minimum requirements
quirements relating the number of com- f o r equipment (as to size, weight, and
paction units to the rate of earth moving ratio of units to rate of earth moving),
or requires a maximum output per com- l i f t thickness, and control of moisture
paction unit. content.
A second method which has been p r o -
posed by some engineers d i f f e r s f r o m the SELECTION AND USE OF EQUIPMENT
present density-control method only i n the
manner m which i t is put to use. I t con- The success, that i s , the economy and
sists of specifying a given compactive ef- ease, of obtaining compaction depends i n
f o r t f o r the material to be compacted, i f i t large measure on the methods and on the
be embankment, subgrade, or base. For type and weight of equipment used f o r r o l l -
example, i t is indicated that some base ing. I t also depends on the equipment and
materials can be compacted i n the f i e l d to methods used i n placing and preparing the
the density obtained i n the laboratory under soil f o r rolling.
two AASHO T 99 compactive e f f o r t s (2
times 12,375 f t - l b . per cu- f t ) . That Dumping and Spreading
compactive e f f o r t then f o r m s the basic
requirement and the maximum density Compaction depends on the size of the
obtained at the compactive e f f o r t i s the loaded area, the pressure exerted on the
density to be obtained i n the f i e l d . The loaded area, and on the l i f t thickness.
compactive e f f o r t can be applied to the L i f t thickness is an important factor gov-
identical sample removed f r o m the base erning the degree of compaction obtained.
in the in-place density test, and used to Many of the difficulties of obtaining the
determine the sufficiency of f i e l d com- desired compaction can be traced to l i f t
paction. I f , f o r example, i t is found that thickness in excess of that which can be
a density less than that of Standard AASHO handled by the r o l l i n g equipment used.
Method T 99 is required f o r a clay sub- It varies f o r different types of soils f o r a
grade s o i l , specifications might be based given piece of r o l l i n g equipment
on compactive e f f o r t equal to 80 percent
Proper spreading is largely a matter of
of standard e f f o r t (9,900 f t - l b . per cu.
attention to the job. I t can be done d i -
f t ) which would be equivalent to 20 blows
rectly by adjusting scrapers during dump-
of a 5%-lb. hammer dropping 1 f t on
ing. Proper spacing of dumps f r o m
each of three layers.
wagons makes a simple job of bulldozing
The f i r s t method given above has the or blading of the loose soil to proper l i f t
advantage of keeping control i n the hands thickness. Close attention to the effective-
of the engineer. The effectiveness and ness of the r o l l e r in early t r i a l runs w i l l
economy of the method depend i n a large soon indicate the best l i f t thickness f o r
degree on the care with which the quan- the various types of soils.
tities are set up and the resourcefulness It is not possible to predict the exact
of the project engineer and his knowledge l i f t thickness which results i n the most
of soils and the use of equipment f o r economical r o l l i n g f o r a l l soils and types
compaction. I t has the disadvantage of and weights of equipment However, some
preventing resourceful contractors f r o m general rules can be laid down. Gen-
developing and using better equipment erally, the heavier the equipment the
and methods f o r compacting soil to ar- greater the l i f t thickness which can be
rive at a lower construction cost. handled. The rule does not hold i n the
24

TABLE 12

SUGGESTED RA^GE OF DENSITIES FOR SUBGRADE SOILS AND BASE MATERIALS IN CDNSTRUCTICN

MOISIVRE
TYPE OF SOIL TYPE OF PAVEMENT MINIMUM CONTENT RANGE REMARKS
DENSITY RANGE (PERCENT
(PERCENT OF AASHO OF AASHO
MAXIMUM DENSITY) OPTIMUM)
Moderate to h i § ^ Flexible 95-100 95-100
volime change pre- 90-95 100-110 When construction t r a f f i c
dcminantly clayey Ihgid Condition 1 does not use prepared sub-
soils 95+ <100 grade. Wien construction
Condition 2 t r a f f i c hauls over pre-
pared subgrade.

Predoninantly s i l t y and Flexible 100+3 95-100

sandy s o i l s having
l i t t l e or no volume Rigid 100+3 95-100
change

Good quality granular Flexible 100-110 95-100 Maxmum practicable den-

materials suitable for s i t y varies with type and
base and subbase con- grading of material. A
struction. maximum range can be se-
lected according to
material.

Rigid 100-105 95-100 For condition 1 above"

100-110 95-100 For condition 2 above

"The lower range of densities and h i ^ e r r m g e of permissible moisture coDtoits f o r Condition 1 may make
I t d i f f i c u l t to obtain h i ^ densities i n base m a t e r i a l s .

TABLE 13

EQUIPMENT AND METHODS FOB ADDING WATER PRIOR TO COMPACTION

TYPE O F SOIL EQUIPMENT AND METHODS FOR INCORPORATING WATER WITH SOIL

Heavy Q a y s D i f f i c u l t to work and to incorporate water uiifonnly. Beat results usually obtained
by sprinkling followed by mixing on grade. Heavy disc harrows are needed to break
dry clods and to aid in cutting in water, followed by heavy-duty culUvators and
rotary speed mixers. L i f t thickness i n excess of 6 i n . loose measure are d i f f i c u l t
to work. Time i s needed to obtain uniform moisture distribution.

Medium Qayey Can be worked i n p i t or on grade as convenience and water hauling conditions dictate.
Soils Best results are obtained by sprinkling followed by mixing with cultivators and rotary
speed mixers. Can be mixed i n l i f t s up to 8 i n . or more loose depth.

Friable S i l t v J - \ These s o i l s take water readily. They can often be handled economically by diking and
and Sandy Soils ponding or cutting contour furrows in p i t and flooding u n t i l the desired depth of
moisture penetration has taken place. That method requires watering a few days to
2 or 3 weeks i n advance of r o l l i n g (depending on the texture and compactness of the
s o i l s ) to obtain uniform moisture distribution. These s o i l s can alao be handled by
sprinkling and mixing, either i n - p i t ot on-grade, and require r e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e mix-
ing. Mixing can be done with cultivators and rotary speed mixers to depths of 8 to
10 i n . or more without d i f f i c u l t y .

Granular ftse and These materials take water r e a d i l y . Best results are obtained by sprinkling and mix-
Subbase Materials ing on the grade. Any good mixing equipnbit i s adequate.
 25

same proportion for sheepsfoot rollers plows, cultivators, or rotary mixers.

as for other types, because some stock Rotary speed mixers, with their tail-hood
models have about the same length of sections raised, permit good aeration
tamping foot regardless of the contact and constitute one of the best methods of
pressure and size of tamping feet In facilitating soil drying.
any instance, the maximum l i f t thickness Where wet soils must be used and where
which can be compacted in different soils dry soils are also available, the mixing
should be determined during the early of the two has proved a good way to reduce
stages of rolling on a project Small the excess moisture content in the wet
differences in soil moisture may make soil. Rapid mixing can be accomplished
the job values differ markedly. with the use of rotary speed mixers.
Another method which has been used is
Adding Water to Soil alternate-layer construction, where a
layer of wet soil about a foot deep is cov-
It is often necessary to increase the ered with a layer of dry, stable soil. The
moisture content of embankment soils, thickness of the layer of dry soil is ad-
subgrade materials, and base materials justed to that necessary to permit hauling
to make it possible to obtain the desired equipment to be carried, so both layers
degree of compaction and the uniformity. can be compacted sufficiently to provide a
Due to the variable conditions encountered, stable embankment.
there can be no single method nor piece If wet soils are encountered in only the
of equipment which is always superior. surface soils, the simplest method is to
The soil can be watered on the grade or in blade off or otherwise remove the ex-
the p i t Although sprinkling is most com- cessively wet topsoils. That will m many
monly used, there are instances where cases permit construction to proceed
watering can be done most economically using the subsoils.
by flooding the pit, provided that the Wet soils can often be placed in the
water soaks in readily to adequate depths. outer part of the embankment where they
There are also some differences in the will not endanger the stability of the road-
relative efficiency of various pieces of bed section and where they will dry suf-
mixing equipment on different soils. ficiently to attain the necessary stability
Table 13 summarizes some rules which before being covered with a second layer
have been found to be useful in incorporat- of wet material, should the quantity of
ing water into soils and base materials. wet material make that necessary.

Handling Excessively Wet Soil Sheepsfoot-Type Rollers

When the soil moisture content marked- The weight of the roller, the area and
ly exceeds that needed to obtain the re- shape of the feet, and the spacing of the
quired density, the moisture content must feet are variables in the sheepsfoot roller
be reduced or the soil must be relegated to which influence compaction. Other var-
a use where the excessive moisture con- iables include soil type, moisture content,
tent is not detrimental. Drying great initial density, and thickness of l i f t
quantities of soil from highway cuts is at The existence of so many variables makes
best a slow and costly process. It has it difficult to present specific recom-
been done successfully the use of ag- mendations on the selection and use of that
gregate-drying kilns similar to those used type of roller without many reservations.
in asphalt plants. However, most drying The best that can be done at this time is to
has been air drying, which relies on aera- discuss the effect of the variables and then
tion and exposure to the sun's rays to re- make recommendations based on the
move excess moisture. In drying by trends which have developed to date.
aeration, the object is to manipulate and The contact pressure should be as
expose the wet soil to the air and sun and large as possible without greatly exceed-
to keep mixing and reexposing wet soil to ing the bearing capacity of the soil. If
promote the fastest drymg practicable. that is exceeded, the roller will sink
Manipulation can be done by the use of deeper until greater contact area reduces
26

BL0W5 PER LAYER NUUBER OF PASSES

LABCRATORY CGHPACT10N FIELD COUPACTION
K A V T WEEPSFOOr ROLLER

Figure 15. R e l a t i o n s h i p between compac-

t i v e e f f o r t and dry density ( a f t e r Ckirps
of E n g i n e e r s ) .
a 4 a 9 toniping f M t , 64 p«r dnim In rowi
of 4 en 46 long by 4 2 ' In Dion
Ttenplng foot pnsnrt tISp 11
lar soils, which depend on their fnctional
2J « zr lompUg f w l , 66 p<f drum In
ro«« of 4 on drnni 4 8 ' long by 42" in dum. qualities forbearing capacity. Increasing
nminig fool p m u r t 2 4 9 p . i l
the size of the loaded area increases not
only the total but also the unit-contact
pressures which can be used effectively.
Excessive pressures and small contact
areas will shear the soil. Although nomi-
NUM6ER OF KSSES nal tamping-foot areas seldom exceed 7 sq.
i n . , there is ample experience to indicate
Figure 14. R e l a t i o n s h i p between number
o f p a s s e s of s h e e p s f o o t r o l l e r s and
that greater areas are desirable for the
percent coverage which may be expected friable soils, which are dominantly silty
from random r o l l i n g ( a f t e r Williams and or sandy in nature.
Maclean). There is little evidence to indicate that
increasing the length of tamping feet will
the contact pressure to that which the soil permit more efficient compaction by per-
will carry, even if it must sink so far mitting greater thickness of lift. Some in-
the drum makes contact with the soil. The crease in l i f t thickness is gained by i n -
bearing capacity increases with increase creasing contact pressures on the larger
in density, which explains why a sheepsfoot feet,> but the inherent character of the
roller "walks up" when contact pressure is sheepsfoot roller is such that stock models
not too great (22). can seldom compact efficiently to depths
The bearing capacity decreases with greater than 10 to 12 in. of compacted
decrease in size of loaded areafor granu- thickness.
TABLE 14

CONTACT PRESSURES AND SIZES OF TAVPING FEET BEST SUITED FOR COMPAaiNG
DIFFERENT SOILS WITH SHEEPSFOOT HOLLERS

SOIL TYPE CONTACT AREA CONTACT PRESSURE REMARKS

(sq. i n . ) (p.s.i.)

Friable silty and clayey These groupings are based on stock models
sandy soils which depend for use m compacting to densities of about
largely on their fnctional 7-12 75-125 95% AAEHO T 99 maximum density at moisture
qualities for developing contents at or s l i ^ t l y below optimuir, when
bearing capacity. 6- to 9- in. compacted l i f t thicknesses are
developed. I t is also based on the experi-
Inteimediate group of ence that rollers are most easily towed
clayey silts, clayey sands 6-10 100-200 when their weight allows them to begin to
and lean clay soils which 'Vialk up" as rolling progresses. I t is
have low plasticity. realized that much heavier contact pressures
may be more desirable i f contact areas are
Medium to heavy clays. 5-8 150-300 increased and that such increases are
necessary i f higher field densities are to
be produced.
 27

The spacing of the feet has a bearing umt contact pressures far in excess of
on contact pressures and percent cov- those shown are being used and are giv-
erage, that is, the actual area of tamp- ing good results. However, those rollers
ing feet in contact with the ground in are settling to a depth which adjusts the
one pass divided by the area passed contact pressure to that of the soil, hence
over. Other things being equal, the do not walk up and require greater drawbar
greater the tamping-foot area, the fewer pull for towing. It should also be borne
passes required to compact the soiL It in mind that plastic soils at moisture
has been shown in actual rolling tests (23) contents well below optimum require
that random rolling will give 32 percent much greater contact pressures if ade-
coverage in 4 passes and 53 percent cov- quate densities are to be obtained.
erage in 8 passes of a roller having 64 3- Methods of Rolling. When commencing
by-4-in. tamping feet per drum (42 in. compaction on a project, even though op-
diameter by 48 in. long) and corresponding erators and inspectors are e:q)erienced,
values of 19 and 34 for a roller having' it is well worth while to conduct tests on
similar size drum but having 88 2%-by- trial lifts to determine the best rolling
2V4-in. feet per drum (SVis sq. i n . ) . The procedure. Assuming there is no choice
relationship between percent coverage and of equipment (as to size of tamping feet),
number of passes is shown by the two then test rolling is limited to determining
curves in Figure 14. The values given the best lift thickness which can be com-
for the two rollers will serve to indicate pacted, the number of passes required
comparable values for other rollers. for the major soil types encountered,
The number of passes has large i n - and the need for increasing or decreas-
fluence on the degree of densification ob- ing foot pressures. Such test rollings
tained. It has beenfound that the relation- should include a minimum of variables,
ship between density and number of passes and the soil should be at optimum mois-
is approximately a straight line when ture content. Usually three lifts are suf-
plotted on semilogarithmic paper, as is ficient to show minimum rolling neces-
the relationship found in the laboratory be- sary to produce the required density.
tween number of blows and the density ob- For example, loose lifts of 6, 9, and 12
tained in the laboratory compaction test. in. are spread and strips of each are
However, rolling beyond a given number rolled 4, 7, and 10 passes of the roller.
of passes is uneconomical. Comparable Density tests will indicate the most effec-
relationships are shown in Figure 15. tive combination. If the roller walks up
An additional factor influencing selec- too fast and densities are inadequate, the
tion of the proper sheepsfoot roller is the hft thickness may need to be reduced or
rolling radius, because i t determines in the foot pressure increased, or both;
some degree the force required for towing contrariwise, if the roller does not walk
as well as its maneuverability. The up or sinks deeper with increasing number
smaller the rolling diameter (diameter of passes, the shear strength of the soil
of drum plus feet) for a given weight, the is being exceeded and the foot pressures
greater is the drawbar pull both in the need be decreased by removing ballast
straight-away and m turning. from the roller. In either instance the
moisture content may need adjustment.
The factors to be considered in the
selection of a roller which will compact The length of the roUed area, while
the soil to the desired density in the otherwise not significant, may have large
least amount of time are: (1) select the influence on densities in hot summer
maximum contact pressure which the soil months when evaporation is high. Quick
can carry without shear failure as evi- handling of soils on the grade often means
denced by failure of the soil to compact the difference between adequate densities
under rolling, and (2) select the roller with few passes and the addition of and
whicH satisfies No. 1 and which also gives mixing m of water. Routing construction
the greatest coverage per pass. equipment so its compacting effect is
Table 14 may be used as a guide in the well distributed may decrease materially
selection o! rollers for three broad groups the rolling required. Roller speed,
of soils. It must be borne in mind that within the range normally used in towing
28

TABLE 15
RANGE OF QOHPRESSION OF 3-WHEEL ROLLERS

Weight Gtoup Range of Compression

of Drive Ralls
Light (5 to 6 tons) ISO to 225 lb. per lin. in.
of width of drive rolls
Medium (7 to 9 tons) 225 to 300 lb. per lin. in.
of width of drive rolls
Heavy (10 to 12 tons) 300 to 400 lb. per lin. in.
of width of drive rolls

sheepsfoot rollers behind tractors, has

little influence on effectiveness.
The proper balance between earth-
moving equipment and compaction equip-
ment is necessary if compaction is to be
adequate and economical. Productive
capacity of a given group of trucks,
wagons, or scrapers can be estimated for
any given group by the number of units
of each size delivered to the dump. The
roller capacity of sheepsfoot rollers in
terms of cubic yards of compacted soil I S 4
ROLLER SPEED (UPHJ
can also be determined with reasonable
accuracy. The two values should balance Figure 17. Maximum r o l l i n g capacity of
as nearly as possible, with ample reserve 3-wheel r o l l e r . (Eased on 10- to 12-ton
nominal s i z e having 20-in.-wide rear r o l l s
spaced 36 i n . apart providing 2 - i n . over-
lap and complete coverage by rear r o l l s ,
6 - i n . compacted l i f t ) .

roller capacity available i f conditions

change from a soil which rolls with a
minimum of rolling to one which requires
greater effort
Figure 16 shows graphically the maxi-
mum possible productive capacity of a
given sheepsfoot roller (dual-drum type
with 4-ft. drums) for different numbers
of passes and different operating speeds
when compacting a 6-in. compacted lift.
Similar charts may be constructed for
other thicknesses of l i f t
Since increases in speed within rea-
sonable limits do not change the effec-
TABLE 16
RANGE OF (DMPRESSION OF 3-WHEEL HOLLERS
OBTAINED BY BALLASTING

Weight Compression Pressures

S 4 5 Class in Lb. j>er Un. In. of Width of Rolls
RXLER SPEED (UPH)
Guide [toll Drive Roll •

Figure 16. Maximum r o l l i n g capacity of 5- 6 99-129 153-196

sheepsfoot r o l l e r s (based on 6 - i n . compact- 6- 8 119-162 178-241
ed l i f t and 8 - f t . compacted s t r i p with no r/4-10 136-177 218-284
overlap; continuous operation). 9-12 157-212 236-317
 29

type have long been used to obtain com-

paction of soils. Tandem-type rollers
are not widely used for earth work but
are used for final surface compaction of
subgrades and bases. Normally the 3-
wheel type is used in earthwork com-

XKXX)

2 3 4 9 6
ROLLER SPEED (MPK)

Figure 18. Maximum r o l l i n g c a p a c i t y of

3-wheel r o l l e r (on same basis as F i g . 15,
except 9 - i n . compacted l i f t ) . U400

tiveness of sheepsfoot rollers, it may be

seen in Figure 16 that the productive
capacity is directly proportional to the
operating speed. This makes i t worth-
while to consider speed when specifying 2 9 4
roller hours. ROLLER SPEED (MPK)

Smooth-Wheel Power Rollers Figure 19. Maximum r o l l i n g capacity of

3-wheel r o l l e r (on same basis as F i g . 15,
except 1 2 - i n . compacted l i f t ) .
Smooth-wheel steel rollers of 3-wheel
TABLE 17
PRESSURE AND WEIGHT CLASSES OF 3-WHEEL HOLLERS
SUITED FOR COMPACTING DIFFERENT SOILS
Soil Group Weight Group and Pressure
(Wt. per L i n . I n . of Width of Rear R o l l s )
Clean, well-graded sands, uniformly Cannot be rolled s a t i s f a c t o r i l y with
graded sands (one s i z e ) , and some 3-wheel type r o l l e r s
gravelly sands having l i t t l e or no
s i l t or clay
F r i a b l e - s i l t and clay-sand s o i l s 5 to 6 tons, 150-225 lb.
which depend largely on their f r i c -
tional q u a l i t i e s for developing bear-
ing capacity
Intermediate group of clayey s i l t s and 7 to 9 tons, 225-300 l b .
lean clayey s o i l s of low p l a s t i c i t y
(<10)
Well-graded sand-gravels containing 10 to 12 tons, 300-400 l b .
s u f f i c i e n t fines to act as f i l l e r and
binder
Medium to heavy clayey s o i l s 10 to 12 tons, 300-400 lb.
30

vides adequate area to equalize the unit

pressure.
The 3-wheel type has the advantage
of giving complete coverage wherever
the drive rolls pass. The passage of the
guide roll often compacts the soil suffi-
ciently to build up a bearing capacity
adequate f o r the drive rolls. The heavier
umts of this type (10 to 12 tons or great-
er) can often compact lifts of 10 to 12
m. or greater in depth, especially on
friable, fine-grained soils.
The proper balance between capacity
of hauling equipment and roller capacity
1900 IB. W0B8LC WHCEL
is important for 3-wheel rollers. If
LOAD, e P U S E S
2 0 , 0 0 0 L B WHEEL LOAD
sheepsfoot rollers are towed by tractors
4 PASSES having adequate capacity, they -are more
flexible in terms of capacity, because
S 4 0 , 0 0 0 L B WHEEL LOAD.

BTAHOARO AASHO
HODIFIED AA8H0 their towing speed can be increased or
decreased. That range is not so great
WATER CONTENT (PERCENT DRY WEIGHT) for 3-wheel roUers. The charts shown
in Figure 17, 18, and 19 permit rapid
Figure 20. (Comparison of f i e l d and lab- estimate of the rolling capacity of 3-wheel
oratory compaction data for clayey sand rollers of lO-to-12-ton capacity for com-
( a f t e r (Corps of E n g i n e e r s ) .

paction, because of the greater pressure

exerted by the rear (driving) rolls.
Rollers of the 3-wheel group may be
obtained in a wide range of sizes and
weights. The 3-wheel types may, for
convenience, be divided into three weight
classes. The weight classes and the ^ -
proximate range of contactpressures, ex-
pressed in terms of pounds for linear in.
of width of tire on the drive rolls, are
given in Table 15.
Some manufacturers make no provision
for ballasting 3-wheel-type rollers to
provide a range of compression for a
given weight Others do, however, pro-
vide for ballasting to give a range between
maximum and minimum pressure suf-
ficiently great to be of value in adjusting u 600

a given weight class for best performance

on different soils. An example of one
manufacturer's specifications is given
in Table 16 to illustrate the range of
compression which may be obtained by
ballasting.
The principles which govern the re-
lationship between contact pressures and 4 6 8
compaction apply to 3-wheel type rollers ROLLER SPEED (M.PM)

equally as well as to the sheepsfoot tjrpe; Figure 21. Maximum r o l l i n g capacity of

3-wheel rollers adjust their contact pres- pneuniatic-tire r o l l e r (based on 2 - a x l e ,
sures to the bearing capacity of the soil 13-wheel, type, r o l l i n g width, 84 i n , no
by simply sinking to that depth which pro- overlap, 6 - i n . compacted l i f t ) .
 31

Figure 22. Heavy s i n g l e - a x l e , multiple-wheel vibratory, pneumatic-

t i r e compactor.
TABLE 18
CONTACT PRESSURE OF PNEUMATIC ROLLER SUITED FOR COMPACTING DIFFERENT SOILS

Soil Group Contact Pressure

Clean sands and some gravelly sands. 20 to 40 p s i . i n f l a t i o n pressure,
the greater pressures with the
large size t i r e s .
F r i a b l e - s i l t y and clayey sands which
depend largely on their f r i c t i o n a l
q u a l i t i e s for developing bearing 40 to 65 p s i . i n f l a t i o n pressure.
capaci ty.
Clayey s o i l s and very gravelly s o i l s .

65 p s i . and up i n f l a t i o n pressure.

F i g u r e 23. G r i d Compactor.
32

Figure 24. Heavy, o s c i l l a t i n g multipie-wheel pneurr.atic-tire

compactor.

pacted lift thicknesses of 6, 9, and 12 in. lift with a 1, 500-lb. wheel load as is ob-
The use of test strips to determine tained in a 6-in. compacted lift with a
the best lift thickness is equally as worth- 10, 000-lb. wheel load. That does not hold
while for the 3-wheel type as for the equally true for cohesionless soils, which
sheepsfoot type, if the most economical depend largely on their frictional quality
compaction is to result. Table 17 may be for developing support. Here the larger
used as a general guide to estimate the the size of tire, the greater is the size of
range of lift thickness for the weight of the the loaded area and the greater the con-
roller. Those values, however, do not fining effect.
hold if moisture contents differ materially The experiments of the Corps of Engi-
from optimum. neers (24) furnishproof of the above state-
Some 3-wheel rollers have little or no ment. Figure 20 shows that the 1, 500-lb.
provision for ballasting; therefore, it is wobble-wheel roller and the 20,000 and
important to select the best weight for the 40, 000-lb. wheel loads developed densities
prevailing conditions. Table 17 gives within about 2 lb. of each other. The data
the approximate ranges of pressure and are not directly comparable because six
weight classes of 3-wheel rollers suited passes of the 1, 500-lb.-wheel-load rol-
for compacting different soils. ler were used, and the lift thicknesses
may not have been proportional to the
Pneumatic-Tire Rollers wheel load, but they do illustrate the
relationships involved.
The pneumatic-tire roller, like the Thus, the contact pressure is a major
3-wheel type, depends on area of contact factor in obtaining densities and the
pressure (the contact pressure is equal to wheel load and number of passes are
the inflation pressure plus some pressure
due to sidewall stiffness), number of cov-
erages, and thickness of lift. The area of
contact and the contact pressure bear a
relation to each other and to the total load
of each wheel. If the contact pressure is
constant, for given tire equipment, i n -
creasing the total load will not increase
the density obtained in rolling. However,
increasing the load will increase the size
of the loaded area and the effective depth
of compaction. Thus, for example, it is Figure 25. Heavy mu1tipie-wheel o s c i l -
possible on a given soil to obtain approxi- l a t i n g , pneuir a t i c - t i re compactor w i t h
mately equal density in a 3-in. compacted indivi<!ual l o a d i n g box for each wheel.
 33
factors in determining the most eco- the bearing capacity of the soil, when it
nomical lift thickness for a given roller. is being compacted, limits the contact
The data given in Table 18 may be used pressure which can be used in rolling.
as a general guide for lift thicknesses Therefore, in selecting a type and a weight
which can be compacted with different of roller, the most economical roller is
contact pressures and wheel loads with that which gives the best economy between
ease and economy. The pneumatic-tire contact pressure and lift thickness, when
roller is quite flexible in that contact due consideration is given to size of loaded
pressures can be changed by changing area.
inflation pressures. Smooth-wheel rollers of the 3-wheel
There is, for each soil (at its field type give good results on all types of
optimum moisture content), a most de- soils except clean, nonplastic sands. The
sirable combination of inflation pressure maximum allowable compression is de-
and lift thickness for a given wheel load termined by the type of soil and the mois-
at optimum moisture content. Table 18 ture content. The rollers are effective in
may be used as a guide for preliminary compacting gravelly soils and clayey soils.
estimates of the approximate ranges of In compacting clayey soils the thickness
contact pressures for compacting dif- of the layer must be so compaction will
ferent soils. be to full depth, otherwise, compaction
The chart in Figure 21 may be used is apt to be limited to a surface crust.
as a guide for estimating roller capacity Sheepsfoot rollers are most efficient
of a given size and weight of pneumatic on fine-grained soils of the plastic groups
roller based on a 6-in. compacted lift and are least efficient on the very sandy
thickness. and gravelley soils.
Pneumatic-tire rollers, as a type, are
Roller Performance on Different Types of suited to compacting any type of soil,
Soil provided the values of contact pressure and
wheel load are proper for the soil being
An attempt has been made to show that compacted.

Figure 26. Very-heavy, tnul t i p 1 e-wheel , o s c i l l a t i n g , pneumatic-

t i r e conr^pactor.
34

ROGER H . C O W K N m
OAYTON.O

.-5

Figure 27. Tanderr. r o l l e r with segmented guide r o l l .

NEW TYPES OF ported by the axle, and held in place by

COMPACTION EQUIPMENT flexibly mounted linkages; and a pair of
unbalanced, weighted shafts which rotate
Several new types of compacting e- and are timed with gears to produce a
quipment, some of which have shown vertical vibrating force which will operate
promise of giving effective and eco- at speeds of 600 to 1, 400 rpm. A photo-
nomical compaction have recently come graph of one of the units is shown in Fig-
on the market: ure 2.

Pneumatic -Tire Compactor with Vibratory Heavy Pneumatic-Tire Rollers

Unit
Several manufacturers are now pro-
This unit is built in two sizes, 30-ton ducing pneumatic-tire rollers of much
and 12y2-ton. The 30-ton unit has two 24- greater weight than the multiple-wheel
by-33 tires (36 ply). The 12y2-ton unit types which have been produced and in
has four 12-by-20 tires (14 ply). The common use for many years. It is now
unit consists of a heavily loaded frame- possible to obtain heavy pneumatic-tire-
work superimposed on coil springs, sup- roller units of 50-, 100-, 150-, and 200-
 35

Figure 28. Tanden r o l l e r w i t h v i b r a t o r y intermediate r o l l .

ton gross weights with maximum wheel types, oscillating units with two wheels
loads of 50 tons. Tire pressures range per axle, and individually loaded wheel
upwards to a maximum of about 150 psi. units. Examples of some of the heavy
The units include single- and dual-axle and very heavy pneumatic-tire roller

#1*

Figure 29. Small, hand-operated s e l f - p r o p e l l e d , v i b r a t i n g - b a s e p l a t e

compactor.
36

units are shown in Figures 24, 25, and

26.

Grid-Type Steel-Wheel Rollers

This type may consist of a towed type

somewhat like a sheepsfoot roller, ex-
cept that the tamping feet are replaced
by an open, square-mesh grid work, as
is indicated in Figure 23, or may consist
of a 3-wheel roller in which the com-
pression rolls are equipped with grids.
The towed units, when equipped with
ballast boxes, can be loaded toproduce
compression pressures in excess of 300
lb. per lin. in. of drum width.
Figure 30. Large, hand-operated, s e l f -
Three-Wheel Type with Scalloped Ribs on propelled v i b r a t i n g - b a s e p l a t e compactor.
Rolls
Vibrating- Base Compactors
A 16-ton, 3-wheel type of roller now
comes equipped with a series of scalloped This type consists of a vibratory unit
ribs on the wheels. Rear rolls have five mounted on a base plate. Previbration
scalloped ribs around the periphery of each set up in the base plate is transmitted to
wheel, the scallops being 4 in. high, 2 in. the ground setting up a movement in the
wide, and 13 in. long at the base and soil which has been found effective in
spaced 272 in. apart from one inside compacting granular materials. One type
edge to the other (4V2 in. center to cen- of unit is a light-weight compactor similar
ter). The position of the scallops in each to that illustrated in Figure 29. Another
row is staggered, and the transverse type is illustrated in Figure 30. This
angle (with the axle) of the scallops is larger unit is constructed in different
reversed on the two wheels. The guide sizes ranging from small self-propelled
roll has 2-in. -high scallops about 8 in. units to large tractor-towed units. Fig-
long. The heavy weight (11,470 1b. per ure 30 illustrates the self-propelled unit.
drive wheel) permits a wide range of
compression pressures, depending on Tampers
the area of scallops in contact with the
ground. Tamping of trench backfill has been
done largely by hand tampers (see Cur-
Tandem Type with Segmented Front Roll rent Practice) or by hand-manipulated
mechanical tampers (largely pneumatic
A conventional tandem roller has been type). Recently a pneumatic-type pave-
built with the guide roll constructed in ment breaker has been used successfully
segments somewhat resemblii^ a sheeps- in compacting trench backfill. Two ad-
foot roller with large rectangular tamp- aptations of thepavementbreakerforcom-
ing feet. This type is illustrated in Fig- pacting backfill are illustrated in Fig-
ure 27. ures 31 and 32. Figure 31 shows one of
the smaller machines which straddles the
Tandem Type with Vibratory Intermediate trench. Figure 32 illustrates one of the
Roll larger machines capable of compacting
backfill in wide, deep ditches.
The unit consists of a heavy-duty tan- A gasoline-driven, manually-operated
dem-type roller in which the center roll rammer has been used in compacting back-
is energized by a motor unit mounted fill adjacent to structures, in trenches,
directly above the center roll. Its prin- and in restricted areas which cannot be
cipal use, to date, has been in the com- reached by motor-driven equipment.
paction of macadam bases (Fig. 28). This type is illustrated in Figure 33.
 37

Figure 31. Pneumatic-driven pavement breaker adapted for con

pacting trench b a c k f i l l .

euaco

Figure 32. Pneumatic-dnven pavement breaker f i t t e d on u n i t for

compacting b a c k f i l l in wide trenches.
38

The rammer operates on regular grade until thoroughly compacted," some control
gasoline. It makes 50 to 60 jumps per of density can be insured through control
minute, the height of jumps being about 13 of moisture content to give the best re-
to 14 in. Productive capacity may range sults. Under conditions of control of
from about 150 to 250 cu. yd. per 8-hr. moisture the standard AASHO compaction
day, the rate depending on the nature of and field density tests can serve as useful
the soil and the degree of densification guides for obtaining compaction.
required.
Moisture Content and Density Control
FIELD CONTROL OF COMPACTION
Inspection and Test Methods. Inspec-
The nature of the specifications de- tion and testing for control of moisture
termines, in large measure, the nature content and density begin with determina-
of methods of testing and inspection for tion of moisture-density relationships
the control of compaction. If specifica- for the soils to be compacted. The pro-
tions govern only the number of passes or cedure given for "Standard Method of Test
coverages, control lies only in inspection for the Compaction and Density of Soils
by counting the number of passes actually AASHO Designation: T 99-49" is recom-
made or, on a general basis, by bal- mended for use. The method "is also ap-
ancing the equipment and inspecting to see plicable for determining the moisture-
that rolling is continuous as long as mate- density relations of soils compacted at
rials are moved. It provision is made for other degrees of intensity produced by
controlling the moisture content as well varying the weight of the rammer, the
as the number of passes, or "rolling height of drop of the rammer, the num-

F i g u r e 33. G a s o l i n e - d r i v e n rammers f o r compacting s o i l in re-

s t r i c t e d areas.
 39

ber of blows per layer, or the number Proctor penetrometer method of deter-
of layers of soil compacted. " That com- mining soil moisture is sufficiently ac-
pactive effort which is necessary and curate for most field purposes. It con-
practicable to produce the desired den- sists of determining the resistance to
sity should be used. penetration when the point is forced
There are several factors which may steadily into the soil (when compacted
influence the values of maximum density in the mold under a standard procedure)
and optimum moisture content obtained in at the rate of V2 in. per sec. to a depth
the test Individually they seldom intro- of 3 in. (25). The penetration resistance
duce serious errors, except in some types must be measured in the mold and not in
of soil. However, if the individual er-
rors are added, the standard values may
be difficult to use as a basis f o r inter- zpoo
preting the results of rolling. Some of
those factors are: (1) initial moisture
content of the soil (before increments are 1,600
added in the test); (2) temperature used
in drying to determine moisture content;
(3) rigidity of the mold during compaction; 1^00
(4) degradation of soft granular particles Penetration
during preparation of sample and testing; Wet Density
Resistance
(5) method of handling large proportions of 800
plus-4 aggregates; and (6) amount of
manipulation during the test.
Determinations of moisture content
400
and density of rolled soils are often
done under one overall test procedure.
However, because there are several ac-
ceptable methods in use, they are de-
scribed here separately. There is no
one best way of determining moisture con-
tent, because the reliability and speed of
any method depends, in a large measure,
on the individual making the determina- Dry Density
tion. The following methods are de-
scribed:
Examination Methods. Experienced
engineers, after they have become famil-
iar with soils, can often judge moisture
contents of soils very closely by exam-
ination. Friable soils contain sufficient
moisture at optimum to permit forming 14 18 22
a strong cast by compressing the soil in Mosttire Content - Percent
the hand. Some clay soils have optimum
moisture contents (AASHO T 99) approx- Figure 34. Density and penetration curves
( a f t e r 'Public Roads").
imately equal to their plastic limits.
Often the amount of moisture in those soils the rolled material. It can be used in the
can be judged closely at those moisture rolled soil as an approximate means of
contents at which a ribbon, thread, or estimating density, provided the operator
cube can be formed of the sample. Stand- has developed the experience necessary to
ard rules have not been written for those interpret density by that means. Ex-
means of appraising the amount of soil amples of density-moisture relations and
moisture. They can be learned only relation between penetration resistance
by practice and should be used by the and moisture are shown in Figure 34.
experienced. Caution should be taken in the use of
Proctor Penetration Needle. The the penetrometer. If the soils contain
40

f/a
2 100 Ue

16 18 20 22 24 26 28
MOISTURE CONTENT {PERCENT OF DRY WEIGHT)

Figure 35. Wet-weight - dry-weight r e l a t i o n s h i p s for determin-

ing moisture content from i n - p l a c e wet d e n s i t i e s and laboratory
moisture-density data ( a f t e r Goldman).

gravel, the penetrometer is apt to give wet density was found to be 120 pcf. That
erroneous results. It may be seen from density line intersects the dry-density
Figure 34 that the penetrometer becomes curve at 101. 5 pcf. (dry weig^it) and 18. 2
less and less sensitive to moisture percent moisture. Since the samples
change the wetter the soil becomes above were identical in moisture content, that
optimum. of the rolled earth-work was also 18. 2
When laboratory moisture-to-density- percent The wet-rolled density of 115
relationship curves are available, the pcf. corresponds to a dry density of 97. 3
moisture content and dry density can be pcf.
estimated with reasonable accuracy with- Drying to Constant Weight The most-
out the aid of the penetrometer by using accurate method of determining mois-
the wet weight of the soil after recom- ture content is that of drying to constant
pacting it in the mold after obtaining the weight in an oven at a temperature of 110
in-place wet density. C (230 F,) - see AASHO T 99-49. It is
First, the lines showing the wet den- not often that temperature-controlled
sities corresponding to various com- ovens can be set up on construction pro-
binations of dry density and moisture con- jects. Small ovens which can be heated
tent are drawn on the graph of the dry- by gasoline stoves can be used. Another
density - moisture - content relationships alternate is that of drying in an open pan
as indicated in Figure 35. The following over a stove. These methods can be
example will illustrate the method: handled satisfactorily only if the operator
A soil sample from the rolled earth- IS cautious in keeping the temperature
work was found to have a wet density of under control and does not overheat the
115 pcf. The same material taken from soil.
the rolled earthwork was recompacted in Evaporating to dryness may be done
the compaction mold to determine the re- in accordance with the foUowingprocedure:
compacted wet density. The recompacted 1. Obtain a representative sample of
 41

about 100 grams or less, the size to be consists of thoroughly dispersing the soil
convenient and within the accuracy of the in alcohol and determimng the amount of
scale used. water removed from the soil by the alcohol
2. Weight sample and record weight. by measuring the change in specific
3. Spread soil to uniform depth in a gravity of the alcohol by means of a
pan. hydrometer.
4. Place in oven or, if drying over Another method (29) involves the use of
burner, place in a second pan to aid in a pressure-type volumeter which can be
preventing burning. used to measure the volume of specimens
5. Dry to constant weight at a temper- and to determine the percentage of water
ature of 230 F. (110 C.). If over stove, in the soil by means of air pressure.
stir often to prevent overheating. There are several other methods for
6. Allow to cool sufficiently to handle. determining soil moisture which are in
7. Compute moisture content as the developmental stage but which have
follows: not been used sufficiently to test their
reliability. Each of the methods de-
Percent _ wt. wet soil - w t dry soil ^ scribed above is reliable. There is some
moisture wt. dry soil difference in the relative accuracy of the
methods. Drying to constant weight at a
The alcohol-burning method may also constanttemperatureof 110 C. is the most
be used to evaporate to dryness. That reliable. The alcohol method is equally
method consists of mixing damp soil with reliable if at least three burnings are
sufficient denatured grain alcohol to form used. The penetrometer and the wet-
a slurry in a perforated metal cup, ignit- density methods are reasonably qmck ways
ing the alcohol, and allowing it to burn off. of estimating moisture content and are
The alcohol method will produce resists not intended to yield values having the ac-
equivalent to those obtained under careful curacy of the drying methods. They can,
laboratory drying. A perforated metal however, if used by e:q>erienced op-
cup (26) is used for drying the soil. The erators, be made to yield values within
suggested procedure is as follows: one or two percentage units of the correct
value where care is taken in their use.
1. Weigh perforated cup with filter
paper in place in bottom. Record weight. In-Place Density Measurement. There
2. Obtain representative sample of are a numt)er of methods which are suit-
about 25 to 35 grams. able, both in speed and reliability, for
3. Place sample in cup and weigh use in determining in-place wet and dry
sample and cup and record weight. densities of soils. Standard methods of
4. Place perforated cup in outside Test for the Field Determination of Density
metal saucer and stir alcohol into the soil of Soil In-Place, AASHO Designation T
sample with a glass rod until the mixture 147-49, provides procedures for two gen-
has the consistency of a thin mud or eral methods, namely; the undisturbed-
slurry. Clean rod. sample method and the disturbed-sample
5. Ignite the alcohol in saucer and method.
sample and bum off all alcohol. The undisturbed-sample method con-
6. Repeat the process three times, sists of removing a sample in as nearly
each time completely burning off the as is practicable the undisturbed state.
alcohol. Properly designed sampling tubes w i l l ,
7. Weigh perforated cup and dry soil in most instances, cause only very minor
after third burmng. The weight of dry changes in soil moisture content and
soil equals this weight minus weight of density. The method of obtaining a sam-
cup and filter. ple with a minimum of disturbance con-
8. Calculate moisture content as shown sists of removing the soil, by use of
under the previous method shown above. small, sharp hand tools (for example,
There are other methods which can be a knife) from around a column of soil.
used for field determination of soil mois- The column of soil may then be coated
ture. One of these, proposed by Bouyoucos with a known weight and volume of paraf-
(27) and further developed by Bonar (28) fin and the volume of the column deter-
 42

CEETB
computing density from volume and weight
mSTUR QF CRY we 0
measurements are generally similar for
TYPICAL
various methods and are not given here.
MOISTURE Nearly all methods have some weak-
DENSITY nesses. Each method must be used with
CURVES
an understanding of its shortcomings. The
sand method is reliable if:
1. The means of depositing the sand in
the test hole is uniform from time to time
for different operators. The cone method
of depositing the sand has given good
results.
2. The sand is calibrated frequently
to determine its weight per cubic foot.
That weight may vary some from hour to
hour with changes in temperature and
humidity.
3. The sand is uniform in size dis-
tribution and yields consistent results.
Standard Ottawa sand has given good re-
sults. Some operators have found screen-
ed concrete sand (usually passing the No.
10 sieve) to deposit to a uniform density.
Others use sand fractions, usually be-
tween No. 10 and No. 40 sieve. The i m -
portant thing is to test for uniformity in
deposition.
4. There are no large aggregates pro-
truding from the edges of the hole which
caimot be surrounded with sand or there
are no large cavities which cannot be filled
by the sand depositing to its natural angle
of repose under the method of deposition
used.
5. There is no jarring which will
M01STUBE=.PERCEMT OF D H Y ' w p C H B
settle the sand, either in the test hole
during measurement or in the container
F i g u r e 36. Typical moisture-den s i t y
during calibration.
c u r v e s (prepared by Ohio S t a t e Highway
T e s t i n g Laboratory from t e s t s on 10,000 6. Care is taken to preclude soil from
Ohio s o i l s a m p l e s ) . reused sand.
The oil method is not satisfactory in
mined by means of a syphon-type over- materials which are so porous that oil
flow volumeter. permeates into cavities adjacent the test
The disturbed sample method consists hole. The rubber-balloon method is ac-
of digging a hole and removing the soil curate only if sufficient air pressure is
by means of an auger or small hand tools used to insure that the rubber membrane
(for example, a spatula and a spoon), completely surrounds protruding aggre-
weighing the removed moist soil, and de- gates and completely f i l l s the test hole.
termining the moisture content and the The undisturbed - sample - overflow - vol-
dry weight of the soil thus removed. The umeter method has no value in soils so
volume of the hole represents the volume friable they will not hold together. The
occupied by the soil. That volume may drive-tube method, sometimes called the
be determined by means of dry sand or "undisturbed - core method," loses its
oil of known volume-weight The rubber- value unless it produces a core of length
pouch method has also been used. The equal to the depth of removed material.
procedures for measuring volume and Moisture - Density Relationship. De-
 43

MolstureContent- Psrcent of Dry Weight

6 8 10 12 14 16 18

3200

2600
2400
2200
^2000

I rypa'A'Soil
I—i rype"B"Soil
OT 1400 I IjVpeVSoll
9 1200 TypeVrSoil
6 0 0 to 32901
Needle VltorMno Range
Type's*^!
6 0 0 to 2290
N6Sdlo Woffc RQnQ6 I ^
I—: 1 TypeVSoil
6 0 0 to 1600
I Needle Range

CTypeTTSoil
Maximum Field
Rofler Curves
e'ersoii
rypeVSon

iType'CTSoili
IOOO%-77.3% Roller curves move down
Working Range and to the right as mois-
Type'^Soil i ture ceases to be uniformly
IOO.O%-9a3%ofOpt, distributed in the soil
Wo{|ilng Range
TypeVSoil | 1
1000% to 3 3 . 3 % of Optimum Moisture
Wbrlcing Range

6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Moisture Content - Percent of Dry Weight

F i g u r e 37. Sample embankment-control curves f o r t y p i c a l curve

c h a r t , s e t s A, B, and C, Noverber, 1941, ( a f t e r 'Wyoming S o i l s
Manual," 1949).
44

termination of optimum moisture con- cross the 122 pcf. line and the 800 psi.
tent and maximum density in accordance penetration line in Figure 36 gives:
with AASHO Method T 99, or some mod-
ification thereof, can be determined by GirvB Moisture Content Moisture Content
test in the field laboratory as well as in at 122 pcf. at 800 psi.
the central laboratory. However, it is P 17.5 18.4
often necessary to make determinations 0 19.5 19.3
more rapidly than can be done by Method R 22.5 20.5
T 99 or some modification of i t One
method for rapid determination of opti-
mum moisture content and maximum den- An examination of the above values
sity is that developed in Ohio by Woods and indicates that a moisture content of 19. 3
Litehiser (30). They found that moisture- to 19. 5 denotes Curve Q as the one which
density curves have characteristic shapes, most nearly fits the soil in question.
the curves for the higher-weight materials Wyoming (31) adopted 20 curves and
assuming steeper slopes and their maxi- made some revisions. It found that the
mum densities occuringat lower optimum moisture content, as determined by dry-
moisture contents. Most soils having ing, often was at variance with the mois-
similar maximum weight per cubic foot ture content indicated on the standard,
give identical moisture-density curves. typical curve chart at the point where the
In the original set, based on 1,088 needle penetration readings and the wet
Ohio soil samples, 9 typical curves were weight per cubic foot would line up verti-
used. The samples tested were placed in cally on a needle-penetration curve and
groups depending upon their wet-weight wet-weight curve of the same number.
peaks. As additional tests were made, That indicated difference in moisture con-
additional typical curves were added. The tent would change the corresponding dry
set in current use, based on 10,000 tests, weight
IS shown in Figure 36. Soils having practically the same maxi-
In determimng the type of curve to mum dry weight would sometimes differ so
use for the soil in question, two easily much in the slope of curves to the left of
made steps of the field test for embank- optimum that it would not be possible to
ment control are required. The f i r s t arrive at a correct maximum dry weight
consists of compacting the soil, for which and optimum moisture content unless the
the density curve is desired, into the penetration reading and wet-weight de-
density cylinder in the standard manner terminations were made at nearly opti-
and calculating the wet weight per cubic mum. Figure 37 indicates the typical dif-
foot. The second consists of determining ferent curve slopes on the dry side of
the penetration resistance and then noting optimum for soils which have similar max-
all possible typical curves in Figure 36 imum density and optimum moisture con-
upon which the wet weight per cubic foot tent. To correct for those differences,
in the cylinder just obtained falls and the two additional sets of typical curves were
moisture content at these points. The prepared.' One of these had flatter-than-
moisture contents from the wet-weight normal forward slopes (Type A in Fig.
and penetration curves which most nearly 37) and the other hadsteeper-than-normal
coincide designate the curve which most (Type C in Fig. 37), The differences in
nearly approaches the true curve for the moisture content were accounted for by a
material. special moisture graph placed above the
wet - weight and penetration - resistance
curves.
Example After a sufficient number of four to
SIX point curves has been determined by
Let 122 pcf. equal the wet w e i ^ t and test to establish the type of curve (A, B,
800 psi. equal the penetration resistance or C), the number of points may be re-
of the soil compacted in the density cyl-
inder. Tabulating the moisture content Because of space required tor the three sets of 20 typical
at which the various wet-weight curves curves, they are not reproduced here
 45
I I
Unit Dry Weight
Total Sample Vs Binder

140

u
130

120

|2 . Binder Is Fraction of Total _

•s Sample Passing ^ In Sieve
I I I I
110 -Values Assumed for Rock
3% Absorption
2.46 BulkSpGr

5 OO

60.
80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Unit Dry Weight of Binder - Lbs. Per Cu. Ft.
F i g u r e 38. Chart f o r determining r e l a t i o n between d r y - > o l -
uir.e weights of minus No. 4 f r a c t i o n and t o t a l sample ( a f t e r
Shockley).

Water Content
Total Sample Vs Binder

Water Content Ratios Are Independent

of Unit Weights of Materials
3% Absorption Assumed for Rock

15 20 25 30
Water Content of Binder - Percent

Figure 39. Chart for determining r e l a t i o n between water con-

tents of minus No. 4 f r a c t i o n and t o t a l sample ( a f t e r Shockley).
46

duced to one to three and the correct on the material passing the No. 4 sieve
curve (or tabulated data) used for as- and from specific gravity and absorption
sociating the penetration resistance and tests can be used for determining, by
wet weight to obtain the correct dry calculation, the theoretical maximum
weight dry weight and optimum moisture content
It was found from the typical curves of the entire sample.
that the amount of field moisture re- Case 1. Where the minus-4 material
quired to secure the same percent of is sufficient in quantity to f i l l the voids
compaction with the roller varies with in the plus-4 material.
the curve type, i . e., it is necessary to The maximum dry weight of the total
work in a narrower moisture range closer soil is computed from the following
to optimum with steep-curve soils (Type f orinula:
C) than with flat-curve soils (Type A). A WjXW^
method was developed for calculating the
approximate minimum moisture content t F W^ + C W^(l + A^) where
required for a sheepsfoot roller having a
contact pressure of 325 psi. to obtain 90 W. Dry weight per cubic foot of entire
to 95 percent of maximum dry weight in sample at its optimum moisture
the field when the moisture is well dis- content.
tributed through the soil and lifts are 5 in. W, Dry weight per cubic foot of minus-
or less loose depth. No. 4-sieve material at its optimum
Determination of the minimum moisture moisture content
content is done by (1) determining the W = Weight per cubic foot of plus-No. 4-
curve type, (2) selecting the percent of sieve material = sp. gr. x 62.4 =
maximum dry weight which wUl define 153.5
minimum moisture-content requirements, F = Percent minus-4 material expressed
(3) plot the dry weight thus obtained (see as a decimal.
Fig. 37) on the dry side of the dry weight C = Percent plus-4 material expressed
curve. The vertical line through that as a decimal.
point (Fig. 37) indicates the minimum A = Percent absorption of plus-4 ma-
moisture content The 95 percent-den- ^ terial expressed as a decimaL
sity point, which is usually about the
maximum that can be e3q)ected from the
roller, is plotted on this line of mini- If test data:
mum moisture content Remain on No. 4 Sieve
The working moisture content is the
average of th^ minimum and optimum 35% = 0. 35
moisture contents. The working range 2. 46 = sp. gr.
is between the two values as is indicated Absorp. 3% = 0. 03
in Figure 37.
Correcting for Coarse-Aggregate Con- Pass No. 4 Sieve
tent The present AASHO Method of Test
T 99 requires separation of the dried 65% = 0. 65
material on the No. 4 sieve and compac- ^ 117. 4 = pcf. dry wt.
tion of that portion passing the sieve. It opt. m. c. =17%
does not provide for determination of the
compacted weight of the total soil (in- Then:
cluding the plus-4 material) either by test
or by computation. The same is true for ^ _ 117. 4 X 153.5 •
the corresponding ASTM TestD-698-42T. ^ t - . 6 5 x l S 3 . 5 + .35 x 117.4 (1 + 0.03)
_ 18020.9 _ 0, .
Where i t is desirable to calculate the
weight per cubic foot and optimum mois- - 142. 068 - ^26- 82 pcf.
ture content, for the entire sample it is The optimum moisture content of the total
necessary to determine the specific material will be:
gravity and absorption of the coarse ma-
terials. Data from the compaction test M j = (CA^ + FMj) where
 47

M. = Moisture content of the total soil ly down to the bottom of the scale to 100
C = Percent retained on No. 4 sieve ex- pcf. which is the umt weight of minus-4
pressed as a decimal material desired.
A = Percent absorption of material re- (B) Moisture content of minus-4-
tained on No. 4 sieve expressed as a sieve material. On Figure 39 enter the
decimal scale on the left side of the chart at 15
F = Percent passing the No. 4 sieVe percent moisture content and continue
expressed as a decimal across to the intersection with the 50-
M, = Moisture content of minus-No. -4- percent-plus-4-sieve line. From that
'^f sieve material expressed as a deci- line read directly down to the bottom of
mal the scale to 27 percent, which is the
moisture content of the minus-4 ma-
The umt dry weight of the minus-No. - terial.
4-sieve material can be computed from Case 2. Where the minus-4-sieve
the formula: material is insufficient to f i l l the voids
FWjW^ in the plus-4 material.
Acceptable subgrade and f i l l material
f W^ - W^ C (1 + A^) and base-course material can be obtain-
If the test data are as given above then: ed in which the minus-No. -4 material
IS not sufficient to f i l l the voids in the
^ _ 0. 65 X 126. 82 x 153. 5 plus-4 material. Reagel (33) has de-
^ f ~ 153. 5 - 126. 82 X 0. 35 (1 + 0.03) veloped a chart and a nomograph to f a -
12653. 5 cilitate determination of standard dry
= 107.78 = * P'^*- weights for that condition. The chart is
reproduced in Figure 40 and the nomo-
The moisture content of the minus- graph in Figure 41.
No. -4-sieve portion will be In the chart, the dry weight of the
M , - CA. minus-4 material has been determined
M, as 112 pcf. and the specific gravity of the
plus-4 material is 2. 55. The f i r s t step
The percentage of rock, moisture con- IS to locate Point A in the parallelogram
tent, and dry weight per cubic foot may of the chart at the intersection of the 112-
vary from one individual sample to an- Ib. value with specific gravity of 2.55.
other. It is desirable to compute the This point on the coordinates is the con-
moisture and density relationships be- dition where the plus-4 voids are just
tween total samples and the minus-No. - filled and shows the percent passing the
4 fraction and construct families of curves No. 4 sieve to be 33. 5 percent and the
for different values of moisture content combined dry weight to be 139. 4 pcf. The
and percent rock. Such charts have been material m question has only 32 percent
prepared by Shockley (32) and are re- passing the No. 4 sieve. Then locate
produced here as Figures^S and 39. The Point B by a 2. 55 line in the parallelo-
curves are for coarse aggregate (plus- gram to a point at the intersection of 32
No. -4-sieve material) having a specific percent on the coordinate. The point on
gravity of 2. 46 and an absorption value the other coordinate gives Point C and
of 3 percent. The use of the curves is the solution as 135. 7 pcf. for the stand-
illustrated by the following example: ard weight of the combined material.
Given: Unit dry weight of total sample In the case of the nomograph (Fig. 41)
= 120 pcf. Plus-No. -4-sieve material = the specific gravity given is 2. 45 and the
50 percent. Moisture content of total dry weight of the minus 4 material is
sample = 15 percent. again 112 pcf. A straight line connecting
To determine: (A) Unit weight of these values gives a value of 34. 7 percent
minus-4 material. On Figure 38 enter (Point A). The material has only 33
the scale on the left side of the chart at percent passing (Point B) which is less
120 pcf. and continue across to the inter- than 34. 7 percent A straight line from
section with the 50 percent plus-4-ma- Point B through the specific gravity value
terial line. From that point read direct- of 2. 45 intersects the combined weight
48
Percent Passing No. 4 Sieve - By Weight
25 JO 32 35 40

5?

Figure 40. Combined dry-weight per cubic foot of r o l l e d - s t o n e

base or stabilized-aggregate base when amount passing No. 4 sieve
equals or i s l e s s than the voids (42 percent by volume) of the
plus No. 4 m a t e r i a l . The intersection of the coordinates of the
parallelogram gives the conditions of minus No. 4 m a t e r i a l ex-
a c t l y s u f f i c i e n t to f i l l the voids in the plus No. 4 m a t e r i a l
( a f t e r Reagel).

line at 131. 9 lb. which is the standard dry terial increases until, at 100 percent
weight per cubic foot for this material. coarse aggregate, the unit weight is that
There are physical limits to any method of solid rock. Practically, according to
of calculation of the influence of material Abercrombie (35) and also according to
coarser than the No. 4 sieve on the weight Walker and Holtz (34), the weight of the
per unit volume (in pounds per cubic foot) total material begins to decrease when
of the total materiaL Theoretically, as the coarse aggregate reaches some value,
the content of coarse aggregate is i n - ranging from about 50 percent to 65
creased, the density of the total ma- percent, until the proportion of coarse
 49

121-
122-

123-
124-

125-
126-
127-

128-
129-

130-
131-.
132-'
/
/ 133-

•41 134-
130
t2 20 y
40 2 25 y 135-

136-
39 230 X
137-
125
38 2 35 y 08-
240/
37 139-
.^45
120 36 140-
2 50
141-
2 55
142-
1-34 -260
143-
115
265
33 144-
2 70
145-
32
no 2 75 146-
31
147-
30
148-
105 149-

150-

151-
B2-

153-
154-

155-
Dry Weight Percent Passing Specific Gravity Combined Weight
Lbs PerCu Ft-«4 0^4 By Weight + #4 Lbs Per Cu Ft

Figure 41. Nomograph for determining combined dry-weights of

base materials ( a f t e r Reagel).
50

aggregate approaches 100 percent, when The 1951-52 survey was broadened further
the unit weight approaches the unit weight to include data on compaction of granular
for the coarse aggregate alone. bases to make this report of current

CURRENT PRACTICES IN COMPACTION

METHODS AND EQUIPMENT TABLE 19
LIFT-THICKNESS REQUIREMENTS BY REGIONS
The Committee on Compaction of Sub- Number of Organizations
grades and Embankments of the Highway Thickness of Layer
Before Compaction Total In Each Region
Research Board made its f i r s t survey of m
compaction in 1942. A second survey was 3-5 1 1 - Mountain
made in 1946 and a third in 1951 and 1952.
6 13 1 - Pacific
Data from the 1942 survey were published 1 - Mountain
in Highway Research Board Wartime Road 3 - Middle East
Problems 11, "Compaction of Subgrades 4 - Southeast
and Embankments" August 1945. Data 4 - North Central
from the 1946 survey were published in 6-8 1 1 - South Central
Highway Research Board Bulletin 5, 1 - Pacific
6-8-24 1
"Report of Committee on Compaction of
Subgrades and Embankments" (1946). 8 14 5 - Middle East
1 - Southeast
The 1951-52 survey attemptedto obtain 1 - South Central
similar data to those obtained in previous 6 - Mountain
studies to determine if any trends were 1 - Pacific
apparent in current practices. In addition, 9 1 1 - Middle East
the 1951-52 study included summaries of 9-12 1 1 - Northeast
current state highway standard specifica-
12 10 7 - Northeast
tions for compaction equipment and on 1 - Middle East
methods of compaction of backfill of 1 - South Central
structural excavation and trench backfill. 1 - North Central

DofC

Note Underlined figures give

compacted deptli,remaining figures
give depth before compaction

Figure 42. Current practices- depth of l i f t .

 51

practices more nearly complete. Report- Control of Compaction

ing of the data from the 1951-52 survey is
made on the same regional basis as was Embankments. Compaction and mois-
made in 1942 and 1946. ture control requirements for embank-
mentshave changedsome, butnot greatly,
Lift Thickness in Embankment Construc- since the 1946 report The results of the
tion 1951-52 survey are given in Table 20 and
in Figures 42 and 43.
The 1946 report brought out that there Subgrades. The 1951-52 survey sought
was a wide variance in lift thickness and information on methods of specifying
showed that a majority of state highway compaction and moisture control for sub-
departments specified a maximum l i f t grades. The results of the survey are
thickness of 6 to 8 i n . , 17 organizations shown in Table 21. Thirty-four organiza-
using a 6-in. -maximum and 13 using an tions indicated compaction requirements
8-in. -maximum l i f t thickness. Those did were no different from the requirements
not include 7 organizations which had for embankments. The remaining replies
more than one class of specifications, one indicated that closer attention, more rigid
of which fell in the 6-or 8-in. -depth control, was beinggivento obtaincompac-
group. The report also showed 8 organ- tion and moisture content in subgrades.
izations which used a 12-in. -maximum Several states specify higher compaction
depth of l i f t The 1942 and 1946 reports for subgrades. Table 21 shows a wide
did not bring out whether the depth of l i f t variance in depth of compaction in the
was depth before compaction or compacted subgrade zone. In most instances the
thickness. depth was given as 6 m. or was considered
The 1951-52 survey showed that of as surface rolling. Others required com-
the state highway departments and the paction to a depth of 8, 12, 18 and 30 i n . ,
District of Columbia, 42 organizations as may be seen in Table 21.
specify thickness of l i f t before compac- Bases. Previous surveys did not re-
tion and 7 specify thickness of l i f t after cord the compaction given granular bases
compaction. (stabilized bases, clay-gravel bases, and
A summary of lift thickness require- sand-clay bases and other bases of natural
ments of the 42 organizations by regions aggregates; this does not include crushed-
is given in Table 19. rock bases nor bases containing plastic or
Seven states specify compacted thick- cementitious binders). The 1951-52 sur-
ness. Six require 6 in. of compacted lift vey indicates that about three eights of the
thickness, and one has two classes of states provide for greater compaction of
compaction - requiring 6 and 12 in. of bases than of embankments (see Table 22).
compacted depth respectively. Those That is accomplished by decreasing l i f t
states are all in the East. thickness, increasing roller weight,
The states specifying the 6-in. lifts specifying higher densities, or otherwise
(before compaction) specify slightly lower exercising more rigid control of rolling.
average density requirements than does
the group which specifies the 8-in. loose Cost of Compaction
depth. That may be due inpart to the fact
that those states contain fairly large Compaction is paid for directly in 12
areas of clayey soils which are difficult states at an average cost for each state
to compact to high densities. ranging from 372 to 25 cents per cu. yd.
It is significant that 7 of the 10 states with an overall average cost of slightly
requiring a 12-in. depth before com- over 9 cents per cu. yd. Six of the e-
paction are in New England, where gen- leven are from the Mountain States re-
erally the soils contain h i ^ percentages gion; two from the South Central and one
of coarse material, and where fine-grained each from the Northeast, North Central,
soils are friable and can be compacted and Pacific areas. In the remaimng
in lifts of greater thickness than can states the cost of compaction is included
heavy clay soils. in the bid price for excavation and borrow
 T A B L E 20
CONTROL O F L A Y E R THICKNESS. COMPACTION AND MOISTURE CONTENT I N E M B A N K M E N T S

C O N T R O L O F COMPACTION CONTROL OF MOISTURE CONTENT

Thickness of Layer
Region and State
Compaction Requirement and
Com- measurement Basis for control Provision for drying excessively wet soils
Loose pacted
(inches) (inches)

NORTHEAST
Connecticut Satisfactory Mm 90% AASHO T 99 in Not speafled Not specified directly
special cases
Maine 12 max Satisfactory Not specified Not specified directly
Massachusetts 12 max Mm 90% AASHO Modified Not specified Not specified directly Moisture content
hmited by density required
Michigan 12 max (1) Under 12 in layer method—satisfactory As required to obtain density If necessary to obtain density Also select
9 max (2) Controlled density method Min 95% As required to obtam density material having proper moisture content
AASHO T 99 for fine grained soils to replace wet soils
Min 95% Michigan cone method for granu-
lar materials
New Hampshire Satisfactory Min 6 passes of tamping type Not specified May be ordered to suspend work
roller when "special compaction" I s in-
cluded in special provisions
New York Min 90% AASHO T 99 Sufficient to obtain required density Yea
Rhode Island 12 max Satisfactory Not specified Not specified directly
Vermont 12 max Satisfactory Roll until roller is entirely sup- Not specified Not specified directly
ported by tamping feet
Wisconsin Until no further compaction is evidenced Visual Material to be dried when excessively wet.
under rollers

M I D D L E EAST
Delaware 6 max Mm 95% of Modified AASHO ± 10% of optimum Yes By manipulation.
Distnct of Columbia 6 max 90-100% AASHO T 99 (See compaction At least equal to optimum Yes By manipulation
Table 1)
Min 90% Max density on wet wt curve Shall not exceed 110% of optimum Yes No additional material may be placed
AASHO T 99
Indiana 9 max Mm 96% AASHO T 99 for soils As required to obtain density As required to obtain density
Kentucky 12 max Mm 90% AASHO T 99 for granular ma- As required to obtam density As required to obtain density
terials
Satisfactory Sprinkling reqmred by engineer Yes Shall be permitted to dry before being
rolled
Maryland 90-100% AASHO T 99 (see compaction Sprinkling if required by engineer Yes Shall be permitted to dry to a mois-
Table 2) ture which will allow compaction Must
not be above 2 percentage points above
optimum percentage
New Jersey. (8 passes of sheepsfoot roller), (5 passes of Not specified If too wet to support 3-wheeled roller is
pneumatic tire roller), (4 passes of 3- considered necessary to dry
wheel 10-ton roller), 90-95% AASHO T 99
(special projects only)
Ohio S max 90-102% AASHO T 99 (see compaction Spnnkling if necessary to obtain density Yes Dned to moisture content not greater
Tables) than optimum ± 2%
Pennsylvania 8 max Satisfactory Not specified Yes Wet material if suiUble when dry
shall be allowed to dry
Tennessee Min 95% AASHO T 99 Optimum moisture content Air dry excessively wet soils on job
Virginia 8 max Minimum 95% AASHO T 99 Optimum moisture content Yes Drying or mixing with dner soils
before rolhng
West Virginia 8 max 90-100% AASHO T (see compaction As required to obtam density Yes Drying until density can be obtamed.
Table 4
SOUTHEAST
Alabama 95-100% AASHO T 99 (100% in top layer) As required to obuin density Yes. By windrowmg
Florida Average 95% of Modified AASHO with no Not specified
test less than 90%
Georgia 6 max Mm 96% AASHO T 99 As required to obtain density Yes. By drying until density can be ob-
tained
Mississippi 6 max Min 90% AASHO T 99 for clay soils, Mm Satisfactory As required to obUin density
OUUUl V^tUUllUtt b max mm W7o AAon\7 1 99 unatir ni|[Q lypo I va t r y i n g a w o wet
pavement
SOUTH C E N T R A L
ArkanBos 12 max Satisfactory Moisture must be such that soil will com- Yea, so soil will compact properly
pact properly
Louisiana 8 Min 95% AASHO T 99 95% of optimum Yes
Oklahoma 6 min Not less than 90% AASHO T 99 When directed by engineer Yes
Texas 6 to 8 Minimum 90 to 100% AASHO T 99 For special projects in gumbo soil slightly Specifications require rollinfc immediately
above to 6% below optimum after being brought to uniform moisture
content No particular method of dry-
NORTH CENTRAL ing specified
Iowa 6 Usually to satisfaction of engineer Some Usually—as directed by engineer 90-110% Yes
percentage of modified AASHO in unusual of optimum in unusual cases
Knnffwp 6 max Tj^?eA—Mm 90% AASHO T 99 Sufficient to insure good bonding Yes, by manipulation
6 max Type B—Compaction until roller feet ride Sufficient to insure good bondmg Yes, by manipulation
surface of compacted lift
6 max Type C—6-16 passes of sheepsfoot type Sufficient to inure good bonding Yes, by manipulation
roller
Minnesota 6-12 (1) Ordinary compaction until no evidence Not specified Not specified
of further compaction
6 max (2) Specified density method Generally As required to obtain density As required to obtain density.
97-98% AASHO T 99
Mlssoun 6 max Min 90% AASHO T 99 As required to obtain density As required to obtain density
Nebraska 6 Min 90% AASHO T 99 (Except in sand 90% optimum ± 4 See Basis for Control
hill region where compaction with con-
struction equipment is deemed adequate )
North Dakota 12 max Standard compaction—rolling with sheeps- Same as for extra compaction except no Yes Drying until desired compaction is
foot roller until no further compaction is specific moisture values nor densities are obtained
^ obtained stated Provision for watering dry soils
12 max Min 95% AASHO T 99 when extra compac- Moisture content as determined by the Yes Drying until specified compaction
tion IS specified on plans engineer can be obtained
South Dakota 6 max Compaction until tamping feet do not pene- Not specified Sprinkling as ordered by Yes As directed by engmeer.
trate appreciably in soil engineer
MOUNTAIN

r
Arizona 8 max Min 95% AASHO T 99 specified by special Not specified, but spnnkling is provided for Yes
visions for high fills andfinegrain soils.
Colorado 8 max 90% Modified AASHO T 99 95% on Optimum ± 2% is objective Yes.
granular soils.
Idaho (c) 8 (a) 90-100% AASHO T 99 (see Compaction Approved moisture content Provision for drying
Table 1)
(b) Compaction by routing all transporting Satisfactory to engineer Provision for drymg
and earth moving equipment over entire
width of each layer
(c) Same as (b) above except top foot shall Satisfactory to engineer Provision for drymg
be constructed in layers not exceeding 4 in
loose thickness
Montana 8 ihax 90-100% AASHO T 99 (see Compaction Not specified As directed by engineer Yes. Drying to proper consistency
Table 4)
Nevada 8 max Min 90% California method 85% on some Not specified As directed by engineer Not specified
secondary roads
New Mexico 6 max Min 95% on soils having AASHO T 99 max- Optimum to optimum minus 5% Yes
imum density less than 120 p c (
Min 90% on soils having AASHO T 99 Optimum to optimum minus 6% Yea
maximum density more than 120 p c f
Utah 8 max 90 to 100% AASHO T 99 (See Compac- Based on optimum Ranges from 5 to 20 Yes
tion Table 4 )
Wyommg 3 max Non-rolled embankment (Compacted with As directed by engineer Yes. Drying to permit acceptable compac-
construction equipment.) tion
6 max r Satisfactory Try to obtain minimum 92% As directed by engineer Yes. Drying to permit acceptable compac-
AASHO T 99 tion.
PACIFIC
California 8 max Min 90% California method Optimum or as required to obtain density
Oregon 6 max Min 95% AASHO T 99 in top 3 ft Mm As directed by engineer Y ^ Permitted to dry when possible
90% below 3 ft
Washington <1) 24 max (1) Satisfactory compaction by routing com- Not specified Not specified.
paction equipment
8 max (2) Satisfactory compaction by rollmg Not specified Not specified
[i! 6 max (3) Minimum 95% AASHO T 99 Optimum db 8% Optimum ± 3%

(a) Using modified AASHO on some current projects.

(b) 12 in maximum in sone more than 3 ft. below surface of embankment 6 m maximum in top 8 ft of fill.
CO
54
EMBANKMENT COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS
TABLE 1

Standard of Compaction or Maximum Density obtained by AASHO Method Minimum Compaction Required
T 99 (P C F.) (Percent of Maximum Density)

89 9 or less 100
90 to 99 9 100
100 to 109.9 95
110 to 119 9 95
120 to 129 9 90
130 and above 90

TABLE 2

CONDITION 1 CONDITION 2
Fills 10 ft or less in height and not subject to Fills exceeding 10 ft m height or subject to long
extensive floods penods of flooding

Mimmum Field Com- Minimum Field Com-

Maximum Laboratory Dry paction Require- Maximum Laboratory Dry paction Requirements
Weight (P C F ) ments (Percent of Dry Weight (P.C F.) (Percent of Dry
Weight) Weight)

89 9 and less * 94.9 and less *«

90-99 9 100 95-99 9 100
100-109 9 95 100-109.9 100
110-119 9 95 110-119 9 98
120-129 9 90 120-129.9 95
130 and more 90 130 and more 95

* Soils having maximum dry weights of less than 90 p c f. will be considered unsatisfactory and shall not be used in embank-
ment
Soils having maximum dry weights of less than 95 p c.f. will be consider^ unsatisfactory and will not be used in embank-
ment under condition 2 requirements.
TABLE 3

CONDITION 1 CONDITION 2
Fills 10 ft or less in height and not subject to Fills exceeding 10 ft in height or subject to
extensive flooding long periods of flooding

Minimum Field Com- Minimum Field Com-

paction Requirements paction Requirements
Maximum Laboratory Dry (Percent of Labora- Maximum Laboratory Dry (Percent of Labora-
Weight (P C F ) tory Maximum Dry Weight (P C F ) tory Maximum Dry
Weight) Weight)

89 9 and less * 94 9 and less

90 0-102 9** 100 95.0-102 9 102
103 0-109 9 98 103 0-109.9 100
110 0-119 9 95 110.0-119 9 98
120 0 and more 90 120 0 and more 95

* Soils having maximum weights of less than 90 p c f will be considered unsatisfactory and shall not be used in embankment
*• Soils having maximum dry weights of less than 95 p c f will be considered unsatisfactory and shall not be used in embank-
ment under condition 2 requirements or in top 8 in. layer of embankment which will make up the subgradc for pavement or sub-
base under condition 1 requirements
Soil, in addition to the above requirements, shall have a liquid limit of not to exceed 65 and the minimum plasticity index
number of soil with liquid limits between 35 and 65 shall be not less than that determined by the formula 0 6 Liquid Limit minus
9.0.
TABLE 4

Maximum Density Obtainable by AASHO Method T-99-49—Pounds Minimum Compaction Required—Per Cent
Per Cubic Foot of Maximum Density

90-99 100
100-U9 95
120 and over 90
 55

S-95

90- ICQ
90-95

S-90-100(e)

b and 90-95
95 Mod
DofC90«0
90Mod

kness

(a) Mini mum 6 passes of tamping

when special compaction is specified
(b) B posses of sheepsfoot roller
5 passes of pneumatic tire roller
4posses of 3 wheel 10 ton roller
(c) Usually to satisfaction of engineers Some compoctio
percentage of mod AASHO in unusual coses satisfaction engineers
(d) Type A-90% AASHO T99 Type B-Solisfoctory
Type C-6-15 posses of sheepsfoot roller
(e) Includes satisfactory compoction byeorth moving equipment
i f ) Try to obtain minimum at 92 percent AASHO T99

Figure 43. Ciirrent p r a c t i c e s minimum compaction requirements

for embankments. Values are percentages of AASHO T99-49 except
as noted.

and is difficult to determine. Five states which rubber-covered rolls operated at

in which compaction is paid f o r indirectly different speeds to provide the mixing
estimated its cost as ranging from 1 to 8 action. That machine also provided a good
cents per cu. yd. with an overall average means of breaking down soils for making
of slightly over 4 cents per cu. yd. the test.
Oven drying or drying in open pans over
Method of Testing electric, gas, or gasoline stoves were
used in almost every state f o r drying
Nine of the states which conduct the field samples for moisture - content
laboratory compaction tests reported us- determination.
ing new samples for each point on the The sand method of determining the
compaction curve, the remainder of the volume of soils in the in-place density
group reusing the remaining part of the test was reported in use in 25 states;
sample after the sample for moisture the rubber pouch, or "balloon," in 7
content determination has been removed. states; the volumeter method in 4 states,
Eleven states reported using mechan- and the oil method in 2 states. Some of
ical mixers for incorporating water with the departments reported using more than
soils for the laboratory compaction test. one method.
Five of those adopted the Hobart food
mixer to that use; five used Lancaster Backfilling of Trenches, Pipe Culverts
type of laboratory mixer widely used for and Sewers
making test batches of concrete, most of
them using the 12-in. -diameter bowl with During July 1949 the committee spon-
the muUer attachment; and one reported sored the publication of a review of the
using a specially constructed mixer in then current "State Highway Standard
 T A B L E 21
CONTROL OF COMPACTION AND MOISTURE CONTENT IN SUBGRADES
03

Depth of subgrade compaction

Region and State .Compaction requirements and measuremt nts Moisture control requirements
In cuts In previously compacted fills

NORTHEAST
Connecticut Thoroughly and uniformly compacted 10-ton
3-wheel roller. No requirements specified
Maine Compacted 10-ton, 3-wheel or approved pneu-
matic tired roller. No requirements specified
Massachusetts Compacted self-propelled roller weighing not
less than 12 tons. No requirements specified
Michigan When required, same as for embankments
Rolled to a firm unyielding surface with 10- Same as for embankments
New Hampshire No requirements specified
ton, 3-wheel roller
New York Min 95 percent AASHO T 99 for top 4 ft be- Not less than 8 inches No requirement
low crown grade, 2 ft wider than pavement Sufficient to obtain density Same as for
and downward and outward on 1 to 1 slope embankments
Rhode Island Compacted uniformly with approved roller
weighing not less than 10 tons No requirements specified
Vermont Compacted with 3-wheel power roller
Wisconsin Same as for embankments No requirements specified
No requirements specified

M I D D L E EAST
Delaware Minimum 95 percent Modified AASHO Constructing equipment will No requirement Optimum ± 10 percent
probably compact sufliciently
District of Columbia 90-100 percent AASHO T 99 (See compaction 12 inches 12 inch (old fills)
table 1-S). At least equal to optimum
Illinois Compaction to the satisfaction of the engineer Covered by special provisions in Same as for other locations Provision for wetting or drying subgrade
special cases
Indiana Same as for embankments As required to obtain density Must be
satisfactory at time of paving or placing
Kentucky sub base
Satisfactory All soft and yielding material See compaction requirements
replaced with suitable material
Maryland Compaction with tandem or 3-wheel, 10-ton
roller, also sheepsfoot or any other method Soft, unstable material shall be removed
to secure required compaction
New Jersey Same as for embankments Surface rolling Surface rolling
Ohio 95-105 percent AASHO T 99 (See compac- No requirements specified
Min 6 inches Mm 6 inches Not greater than optimum +2% (see com-
tion table 2-S) paction table) Not greater than opti-
Pennsylvania Same as for embankments mum in elastic soils
Excavate 9 ins belowfinalgrade No requirements specified Excessively wet
Tennessee Same as embankments Compaction per- material removed
6 inches max Control by field and laboratory tests
formed with 10-ton roller or pneumatic
tired roller
Virginia Minimum 95 percent AASHO T 99 8 inches 8 inches Optimum moisture content
West Virgmia Scarified to not more than 4" and compacted 4 inches 4 inches No requirements specified but must be firm
with 10-ton, 3-wheel roller to firm un- and unyielding
yielding surface
SOUTHEAST
Alabama Minimum 100 percent AASHO T 99 6 inches 6 inches Only as required to obtain density Ma-
Florida nipulation until dry enough to compact
Same as for embankments (Av , 95% Modified 12 if stabilization is required— Optimum used as guide only Provision for
AASHO with no test less than 90% 6 if no stabilization is required drying
Ciporgia Same as for embankments, Minimum (95% 6 in except 12 in over solid rock 6 inches No requirements specified
AASHO T 99)
Mississippi M i n i m u m 9 5 % A A S H O T 99 6 inches 6 inches N o requirements specified Soft yielding
materials removed
N o r t h Carolina Thoroughly compacted w i t h power driven N o requirements specified except a t discre-
r o l l e r w e i g h i n g n o t less t h a n 3 3 0 l b p e r t i o n of engineer
inch of w i d t h of tread
South Carohna S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s ( M i n 9 0 % A A S H O 6 inches where used 6 inches w h e r e used Optimum ± 3 percent
T 99 u n d e r h i g h t y p e p a v e m e n t s )

SOUTH CENTRAL

Arkansas S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s 8 inches N o requirements specified

Louisiana S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s (95% AASHO 8 inches loose 8 inches loose 9 5 % of o p t i m u m
T 99)
Oklahoma 9 5 % of S t a n d a r d P r o c t o r D e n s i t y for sub- 6 inches 6 inches Based on o p t i m u m
grades
Texas S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s (90 t o 1 0 0 % 6 inches 6 inches S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s ( s l i g h t l y a b o v e t o
A A S H O T 99) 5% below o p t i m u m )

NORTH CENTRAL

Iowa Min 9 5 % A A S H O T 99 specified for sub- 6 inches 6 inches 90 t o 110 p e r c e n t of o p t i m u m f o r f l e x i b l e

grade for Flexible T y p e Pavement Sub- s p r i n k l i n g w h e n necessary f o r r i g i d t y p e
grade rolling f o r rigid t y p e p a v e m e n t
Kansas T h o r o u g h l y compacted w i t h approx 5-8 t o n N o requirements specified
t a n d e m or 3-wheel rollers f o r subgrade f o r
P C C pavement
T y p e A A M i n 9 5 % A A S H O T 99 6 i n t o 12 i n 6 i n t o 12 i n As required to obtain density
T y p e A A A M i n 1 0 0 % A A S H O T 99 6 i n t o 12 m 6 i n t o 12 i n As required t o ' b b t a i n density
Minnesota S a m e as f o r s p e c i f i e d d e n s i t y m e t h o d f o r e m - G e n e r a l l y u p p e r 12 i n c h e s G e n e r a l l y u p p e r 12 i n c h e s w h e r e M i n 8 0 % of o p t i m u m
b a n k m e n t s a c c o r d i n g to special provision required
( g e n e r a l l y 97 o r 9 8 % A A S H O T 99)
Missouri S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s ( M m 9 0 % A A S H O 18 i n c h e s 18 i n c h e s N o r e q u i r e m e n t s s p e c i f i e d e x c e p t as r e q u i r e d
T 99) to obtain density
Nebraska S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s ( M m 9 0 % A A S H O 6 inches S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s 1 0 0 % ± 3 (concrete pavements o n l y )
T 99)
North Dakota S a m e as ( o r e m b a n k m e n t s ( M m 9 5 % A A S H O Standard scarify and recompact S a m e as'for e m b a n k m e n t s (stress As required to obtain compaction
T 99 w h e n specified) to 1 2 " t o density of adjacent uniformity)
fills
South Dakota S a m e as e m b a n k m e n t s 12 i n c h e s S c a r i f y 6 inches a n d recompact N o requirements specified Provisions for
d r y i n g i f necessary t o secure s t a b l e r o a d -
bed
MOUNTAIN

Arizona S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s ( M m 9 5 % A A S H O 6 inches w h e n required 6 inches w h e n required N o requirement specified Engineer tries to

T 99 b y special proviaion) obtain approximately optimum
Colorado S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s e x c e p t w h e n s u b - 12 i n c h e s 12 i n c h e s O p t i m u m ± 2 IS o b j e c t i v e
grade IS o f selected m a t e r i a l s
Idaho Higher compaction required i n subgrades than 12 i n c h e s 18 i n c h e s N o requirement specified except at direction
i n e m b a n k m e n t s (see T a b l e 3 - S ) of engineer
Montana S a m e a s f o r e m b a n k m e n t s e x c e p t l a s t 10 f t 8 inches 8 inches M o i s t u r e c o n t r o l r e q u i r e d as d i r e c t e d b y
below grade on high fills engineer
Nevada S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s N o requirements specified
N e * Mexico S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s (90 t o 9 5 % A A S H O 6 inches 6 inches Optimum to optimum—5% Provision for
T99) drying
Utah S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s (90 t o 1 0 0 % 8 inches ± 8 inches ± Provision for w e t t i n g or d r y i n g subgrade at
A A S H O T 99) '° direction of engineer
Wyoming S a m e as ( o r e m b a n k m e n t s t o a d e p t h o f a t Mm 6 inches Mm 6 inches R e q u i r e m e n t s based o n w o r k i n g range of
least 6 inches W y o m i n g A , B and C t y p e curves

PACIFIC

California M m 9 0 % California method compaction 4 in 30 inches 30 inches S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t

compacted layers for 2 H f t below profile
grade
Oregon No requirement specified Provision for
S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s ( 9 5 % A A S H O T 9 9 ) wetting or d r y i n g UJ
Washington U p t o 2 2 i n i n s p e c i a l cases 1 to 6 in (surface rolling only) O p t i m u m ± 3 in compaction Method C only.
S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s
 58
Group A Compaction Without Density
SUBGRADE COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS
Control
TABLE 1-S

Of the 48 states and the District of

Standard of compaction or M a x i m u m
Density obtained by Method A A S H O
M i n i m u m compaction
required (Percent of Columbia, 41 specify that the soil shall be
T 99 ( p c f ) M a x i m u m Density)
tamped or that the soil shall be thoroughly
or carefully, firmly or solidly tamped,
90 t o 99 9 100
100 t o 109 9 95 rammed or compacted. Nearly all specify
1 1 0 t o 119 9
120 t o 129 9
95
90 quality of compaction in terms of "to the
130 a n d above 90 satisfaction of the engineer. "

TABLE 2-S Tamping Methods and Equipment. The

above group provides the followmg re-
Minimum subgrade
compaction require-
quirements for tamping methods and
Maximum laboratory dry weight ments (Percent of equipment (when inaccessible to a roller).
(p.c t) laboratory maximum
Of these 41 states, 11 do not state
dry weight)
whether compaction of backfill shall be by
9 4 9 a n d less ** hand or mechanical methods, nor do they
95 0-102.9
103 0 - 1 0 9 9
105
102 state requirements for hand tamping
110.0-119 9
120 0 a n d m o r e
100
96
equipment.
Five states mention hand tamping but
* * S o i l s w i t h a m a x i m u m d r y w e i g h t o f less t h a n 9 5 p c f make no mention of mechanical tamping.
shall be u n s a t i s f a c t o r y f o r us^ i n the 6 - i n c h c o m p a c t e d soil
layer i m m e d i a t e l y beneath t h e p a v e m e n t a n d shall be replaced
Two of these 5 states list no requirements
w i t h suitable soil or g r a n u l a r l a y e r
T h e moisture content of all subgrade materials at t i m e of
for hand tamping equipment. One state
c o m p a c t i o n shall n o t be greater t h a n 2 percent o v e r t h e o p t i - provides only that heavy iron tampers be
mum. T h e moisture content a t t h e t i m e of c o m p a c t i o n of
g r a n u l a r m a t e r i a l s c o n t a i n i n g 15 t o 4 0 p e r c e n t p a s s i n g a n u m b e r used. Two states require "heavy iron
200 sieve, of p r e d o m i n a n t l y s i l t y or s a n d y s i f t soils f o r w h i c h
t h e p l a s t i c i t y i n d e x is less t h a n 1 0 , o r o t h e r a p p r o v e d s u b g r a d e
tampers" having tamping faces not ex-
material w h i c h displays pronounced elasticity or d e f o r m a t i o n
u n d e r c o n s t r u c t i o n e q u i p m e n t shall n o t exceed o p t i m u m
ceeding 25 sq. in. in area. Nine states
specify mechanical tamping only. Six-
TABLE 3-S
teen states provide for either mechanical
or hand tamping methods.
M i n i m u m field c o m - For hand tamping equipment: nine
M a x i m u m laboratory dry weight
paction requirements
(percent of l a b o r a t o r y states require heavy iron tampers with
( p o u n d s per c u f t ) determined d r y
weight)
tamping faces not exceeding 25 sq. in.
in area. One state requires tampers
8 9 9 a n d less 100 weighing not less than 12 lb. and having
90 0 t o 99 9
100 0 t o 109 9
100
100
a tamping face of not more than 50 sq. in.
1 1 0 0 t o 119 9 100 One state requires tampers weighing
95
120 0 t o 129 9
130 0 a n d over 95 not less than 15 lb. and having a tamping
face area 6 in. by 6 in. One state re-
quires tampers weighing not less than 20
Specifications on Compaction of Back- lb. and having a tamping face area not
fill of Trenches and around Pipe Cul- larger than 6 in. by 6 iiL One state re-
verts and Sewers" (36). That was done quires tampers weighing not less than 50
as a result of the increasing quantity of lb. and having a face not exceeding 100
work being done in urban areas. That sq. in. in area. Three states give no
summary of practices in compaction of requirements for hand tamping equipment.
trench backfill is included in this overall
review of current practices. Lift Thickness. All states in this
Compaction requirements can beplaced group of 41 states specify some require-
into two broad groups: those requiring ment for depth of lift Of this group)35
compaction of backfill but not specifying state clearly the depth of lift either as
density requirements and those controlling loose thickness or state that the material
compaction of backfill by specifying com- shall be placed in layers of some given
paction to some minimum required thickness and compacted. They are tab-
density. ulated according to depth of lift as follows:
 59

20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90
Gallons
Given- A density of 99 lbs. percu.ft with required moisture of 10% locate point A.
Reading vertically It Is found that 32 gal percayd will be needed

Figure 44. Chart for determining gallons of water required per

cubic yard of embankment ( a f t e r "Kansas Highway Manual").

Depth of Lift States Specifying or clods, stones, rock, sod, roots, frozen
(inches loose) lumps, etc. Three states provide for the
3 5 use of granular materials. Five states
6 29 provide for acceptable selected materials
8 1 or when specified, granular materials.
9 1 Provision for Saturating, Flooding, or
12 1 Puddling. One state permits thorough sat-
In addition, one state provides for a uration of granular materials meeting
4-in. depth for hand tamping and a 6-in. certain grading requirements. One state
depth (loose) for mechanical tamping, permits flooding and tamping of special
another specified layer not exceeding 8 granular materials meeting certain grad-
in. for mechanical tamping and that for ing requirements. One state permits
hand tamping layers shall not be more than puddling around pipe only. One state
4 in. Four additional states specified 6- permits water puddling up to the natural
in. depths of lift but it was not clear ground line as an alternate to hand tamp-
whether the depth was loose depth or ing.
compacted depth.
Moisture Control. Nineteen states Group B - Compaction with Density Control
provide for the addition of water, if nec-
essary to facilitate compaction. A major Density Requirements. Eight highway
portion of those states specify, "Each departments control compaction of back-
layer, if dry, shall be moistened and then fill (within the scope of this review) by
compacted." One state provides, (in specifying some minimum density re-
addition to moistening) for saturation of quirements: Three require not less than
sandy and granular soils. The remaining 90 percent of maximum density as deter-
states in this group do not provide for mined by Method of Test AASHO Designa-
addition of water to facilitate compaction. tion: T 99. One requires not less than
Materials Requirements. Thirty-four 95 percent of maximum density as deter-
of this group of states specify that the mined by Method of Test AASHO Designa-
material shall be approved or shall be tion: T 99. Two require not less than
selected material free from large lumps 90 percent relative density as determined
 o

TABLE 22

CONTROL OF COMPACTION OF GRANULAR BASES

/
COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS
REGION A N D STATE Compart<^on w i t h R e q u i r e m e n t s f o r E m b a n k m e n t s o r S u b g r a d e s

NORTHEAST

Connecticut R o l l i n g t o g i v e s a t i s f a c t o r y c o m p a c t i o n i n l a y e r s n o t t o exceed 6 i n d e p t h ( c o m p a c t e d )
Maine U s e 8 - i n c h l o o s e l i f t s c o m p a r e d t o 12 f o r e m b a n k m e n t s
Massachusetts U s e 1 2 - t o n p o w e r r o l l e r o n bases c o m p a r e d t o 1 0 - t o n f o r e m b a n k m e n t s
Michigan Subbate—Same as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s ( 9 5 % o f M i c h i g a n C o n e M e t h o d ) ' Base—(Processed gravel) Satisfactory compaction
New Hampshire Use m i n 10-ton I l - w h c e l roller and roll t o satisfaction of engineer
New York R e q u i r e rolling w i t h 10-ton rollers i n separate layers of max 6 i n d e p t h T a m p i n g rollers i n some areas w h e r e roller c a n n o t be used
Rhode Island S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s
Vermont S a m e e x c e p t 3 - w h e e l p o w e r r o l l e r is u s e d o n b a s e s
Wisconsin P r o v i s i o n is m a d e t o r e q u i r e p o w e r rollers i f desired c o m p a c t i o n is n o t a t t a i n e d b y h a u l i n g e q u i p m e n t C o m p a c t i o n is 3 t o 5 i n l a y e r s

M I D D L E EAST

Delaware S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s
District of Columbia S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s 9 0 - 1 0 0 % A A S H O T 99
Illinois C o m p a c t e d t o satisfaction of engineer
Indiana D e n s i t y and m o i s t u r e c o n t e n t satisfactory t o engineer.
Kentucky M u s t be w i t h i n 5 l b o f P r o c t o r D e n s i t y Also pneumatic tire roller required w i t h other rollers
Maryland N o density requirements stated Rolled w i t h lO-ton power roller
N e w Jersey 1 0 0 % A A S H O T 99 f o r subbase " T y p e A " Provision for moisture control
Ohio N o density requirements C o m p a c t i o n w i t h a 3 - w h e e l r o l l e r w e i g h i n g 10 t o n s o r m o r e o r a n a p p r o v e d p n e u m a t i c t i r e r o l l e r t o satis-
faction of Engineer
Pennsylvania Same except pneumatic tire and sheepsfoot rollers are p e r m i t t e d
Tennessee R o l l i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s are m o r e r i g i d t h a n f o r e m b a n k m e n t s T h i c k n e s s of c o m p a c t e d l a y e r is set b e t w e e n 2 5 a n d 4 i n c h e s .
Virginia N o density requirements C o m p a c t i o n as r e q u i r e d b y E n g i n e e r
West Virginia C o m p a c t i o n t o t h e satisfaction of the engineer.

SOUTHEAST

Alabama D e n s i t y 100 p e r c e n t A A S H O T 9 9 M o i s t u r e content o p t i m u m ± 2 percent

Florida S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s
Georgia B a s e s r e q u i r e 100 p e r c e n t o f A A S H O T 9 9 . ( E m b a n k m e n t s require 95 p e r c e n t )
Mississippi B a s e s r e q u i r e 100 p e r c e n t o f A A S H O T 9 9 (Embankments 90-95 percent) C o n t r a c t o r m a i n t a i n s f o r 10 d a y s I f contractor
o b t a i n s 1 0 5 % t h e n m a i n t e n a n c e c l a u s e is w a i v e d
N o r t h Carolina Bases o r subbases are t h o r o u g h l y c o m p a c t e d b y r o l l i n g s a t i s f a c t o r y t o engineer
South Carolina D e n s i t y 95 p e r c e n t A A S H O T 99 r e q u i r e d .

SOUTH CENTRAL
Arkansas D i f f e r e n t layer thickness used Compaction under traffic
Louisiana S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s
Oklahoma 9 5 % of S t a n d a r d P r o c t o r D e n s i t y f o r s t a b i l i z e d aggregate base course Provision for moisture control
Texas D e n s i t y requirements based o n c o m p a c t i o n of i n d i v i d u a l samples consisting of t o t a l m a t e n a l u p t o 2 i n t o p sizes

NORTH CENTRAL

Iowa D e n s i t y 100 p e r c e n t A A S H O T 9 9 . M o i s t u r e content t h a t which will insure m a x i m u m compaction

Kansas M i n . 1 0 0 % A A S H O T 99 A g g r e g a t e b i n d e r bases m i n 4 i n c o m p a c t e d l i f t s a n d n o t less t h a n 125 p c f .
Minnesota P l a c e d i n 3 i n l a y e r s a n d c o m p a c t e d t o 98 p e r c e n t A A S H O T 99
Missouri D e n s i t y 9 0 - 9 5 % A A S H O T 99 except w h e n otherwise covered b y special provisions C o m p a c t e d g r a n u l a r base 9 0 % Stabilized
a e e r e g a t e o r r o l l e d s t o n e bases 9 5 %
Nebraska D e n s i t y 9 0 % A A S H O T 99 ( f o r concrete pavements) M o i s t u r e c o n t e n t 1 0 0 % o p t i m u m db 3
D e n s i t y 9 5 - 1 0 0 % A A S H O T 99 ( f o r f l e x i b l e p a v e m e n t s ) . N o m o i s t u r e r e q u i r e m e n t e x c e p t as n e c e s s a r y f o r c o n s t r u c t i o n
North Dakota S u b b a s e — s a m e as s t a n d a r d c o m p a c t i o n f o r e m b a n k m e n t s
B a s e — 1 3 3 t i m e s d r y l o o s e w e i g h t o f m a t e r i a l b u t n o t t o e x c e e d 140 p c f d r y w e i g h t i n p l a c e f o r m a t e r i a l w e i g h i n g 1 0 0 p c f o r m o r e
loose w e i g h t
South Dakota B a s e c o u r s e d e n s i t y s h a l l b e 1 3 3 t i m e s l o o s e d r y w t o f a g g r e g a t e o r 140 l b . m a x r e q u i r e d Subbases rolled w i t h p n e u m a t i c t i r e roller
(250 l b per i n w i d t h of roller) t o an u n y i e l d i n g c o n d i t i o n

MOUNTAIN f
Arizona S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s
Colorado N o density tests m a d e R o l l i n g t o satisfaction of engineer M i n i m u m o f 4 passes w i t h s u i t a b l e r o l l i n g e q u i p m e n t .
Idaho N o density requirements Compaction controlled b y layer thickness
Montana W a t e r i n g and rolling required G r e a t e r a t t e n t i o n i s g i v e n p r o j e c t s w h e r e w a t e r i n g a n d r o l l i n g a r e p a i d f o r as s e p a r a t e i t e m s
Nevada R o l l e d w i t h p o w e r r o l l e r w e i g h i n g a t l e a s t 8 t o n s u n t i l m a x i m u m c o m p a c t i o n is o b t a i n e d Placed m thinner layers I f more than
4 i n . place i n t w o or m o r e layers
New Mexico N o d e n s i t y r e q u i r e d as n o t e s t d e e m e d s a t i s f a c t o r y C o m p a c t i o n t o satisfaction of engineer
Utah R o l l i n g u n t i l m a x i m u m feasible c o m p a c t i o n has been o b t a i n e d
Wyoming N o density requirement W a t e r i n g , processing a n d rolling t o satisfaction of engineer

PACIFIC

California M i n i m u m r e l a t i v e c o m p a c t i o n n o t specified b u t m i n i m u m a m o u n t a n d t y p e of r o l l i n g e q u i p m e n t is s p e c i f i e d .
Oregon As required b y engineer
Washington Thinner lifts R o l l i n g w i t h 3-wheel or p n e u m a t i c t i r e rollers u n t i l m a t e r i a l does n o t creep u n d e r r o l l e r .

1 T h e M i c h i g a n C o n e M e t h o d consists of c o m p a c t i n g g r a n u l a r soils i n t o a f u n n e l - s h a p e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y 4 inches a n d s t n k i n g i t s h a r p l y d o w n o n a concrete or h e a v y t i m b e r base

m o l d h a v i n g a solid b o t t o m i n the large end and equipped w i t h a stopper for the small end A f t e r t h e t h i r d l a y e r has been placed t h e b l o w s s h a l l be c o n t i n u e d w i t h t h e w o o d stopper
T h e b o t t o m s h a l l b e so s h a p e d t h a t t h e r e w i l l b e n o s h a r p c o r n e r s m s i d e t h e m o l d The reversed and held f i r m l y over t h e opening. S a n d shall be a d d e d a t i n t e r v a l s t o keep t h e
base o r large e n d of t h e m o l d s h a l l be a p p r o x i m a t e l y 5 ' i inches i n d i a m e t e r a n d t h e s m a l l m o l d f u l l , a n d operations c o n t i n u e d u n t i l n o f u r t h e r consolidation occurs T h e compacted
e n d s h a l l b e n o t less t h a n 2 ?4 i n c h e s T h e m o l d s h a l l b e a p p r o x i m a t e l y 8 > -i i n c h e s m s o i l s h a l l be c a r e f u l l y l e v e l e d o f f t o t h e t o p o f t h e m o l d a n d w e i g h e d , a n d t h e w e t a n d d r y
h e i g h t a n d s h a l l h a v e a v o l u m e o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1,300 c u b i c c e n t i m e t e r s o r 0 0 4 5 9 c u b i c volume weighte determined For complete test procedure and description of equipment
feet T h e sample shall be t h o r o u g h l y m i x e d , t h e n c o m p a c t e d i n t h e m o l d i n three e q u a l see " T h e U s e a n d T r e a t m e n t o f G r a n u l a r B a c k f i l l " b y R L G r e e n m a n , M i c h i g a n E n g i n e e r -
layers, each layer receiving 25 b l o w s T h e b l o w s shall be d e l i v e r e d b y raising t h e m o l d i n g E x p e r i m e n t S t a t i o n , B u l l e t i n 107, 1948
62

by the California method. Two have min- specify mechanical tamping. The remain-
imum density requirements similar to ing two specify mechanical tampers or
those specified in Standard Specifications hand tampers, havmg a tamping face not
for Materials for Embankments and Sub- exceeding 25 sq. in. in area.
grades AASHO Designation: M 57. Lift Thickness. Highway Departments
Four of the eight departments which specifying the density method of control
specify minimum density requirements of compaction of backfill provide the
make no reference to method of compac- following requirements for maximum
tion or equipment Two departments thickness of l^t during compaction.

TABLE 23
HIGHWAY DEPAfflWEM RiXJUIBEMENTS FOR TRiWCH BACXnLLING
No. of States
Group Bequirementa and D-C.
Specifications lequire confjaction but do not specify density . . . . 41
TanpinR Provisions:
Mechanical tamping only specified 9
Hand oi mechanical tamping allowed 16
Hand tonping moitioned only 5
Tamping method not mentioned 11
Depth of Layer or Lift:
Depth placed before compaction, in.
4 3
6 29
8 1
9 1
12 1
Depths 4 to 8 i n . , but with particular requirements for hand
tamping 2
Depth 6 i n . , but not clear as to loose or canpacted .4
Moisture Control
Some provision 19
No provision ; 22
Materials Requirements.
Provision for select or approved materials 34
Pennissim to Saturate. Flood or Riddle 4
Specifications require density control 8
Tanping Provisions
Mechanical tamping specified 2
Hand or mechanical tamping alloved 2
Temping method not mentioned 4
Ccpipaction Requirements
Not less than 95% max. density (AASIO 1 99) 1
Not less than 90% max. density (AA310 T 99) 3
Not less than 9(^ rel. density (California Method) 2
Depth of Layer or Lift:
Not to exceed Basis
4 in. loose 2
6 in. loose 2
6 in. coTipacted 2
4 to 6 in. loose 1
8 in. loose 1
Moisture Control, provision made 8
Materials Requirements-
Granular backfill specified 2
Select or approved backfill specified 6
Provision for puddling 1
 63

No. of nate to tamping to obtain the required

Dept Depth of Lift Requirements density, but that method must be used on
—2 Not to exceed 6 in. compacted material from deposits indicated on plans
depth or on material meeting specified grading
2 Not to exceed 6 in. loose depth requirements.
2 Not to exceed 4 in. loose depth
1 Not to exceed 8 in. loose depth
1 Not to exceed 4 and 6 in. loose Statement of Requirements for Backfilling
depth depending on construc- Sewers
tion method.
Twelve States have specification items
Moisture ControL All of the eight covering sewers, storm sewers, sanitary
highway departments specifying the density sewers, or storm and sanitary sewers.
method have provisionf or control of mois- Because these specifications do differ in
ture content during compaction. some states from those given for pipe
Materials Requirements. Two of the culverts and trench backfill, data on
eight departments specify granular back- specifications for sewers are given sep-
fill and give grading requirements, and arately in the following summary:
one department specifies granular back - State 1. Sanitary sewer. Suitable
fill around pipe and selected material for materials are tamped around pipe and
the remaining part of the trench. The re- to a depth of 2 f t above the pipe. Re-
mainingfive departments call for selected mainder thorou^ly settled and compacted
or approved material free from large or by tamping and flooding. No moisture
frozen lumps, rocks, roots and similar control given.
extraneous material. State 2. Sewer, Suitable materials
Provision for Saturating, Flooding or are hand tamped to 1 f t above sewer.
Puddling. One highway department in Balance filled to within Va ft. of top and
this group provided puddling as an alter- flooded.

u. 90

80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120

Probable Rolled Density

F i g u r e 45. Chart f o r determining shrinkage from cut to fill

( a f t e r 'Kansas Highway Manual").
 TABLE 24

CURRENT STATE HIGHWAY STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR COMPACTION OF BACKFILL FOR STRUCTURAL EXCAVATION

Region and State Depth of L i f t Compaction Moisture Control T a m p i n g E q u i p m e n t and Methods

NORTHEAST

Connecticut 12 i n m a x . loose Mm 9 5 % A A S H O T 99 Puddling permitted P o w e r rollers, m o t o n z e d e q u i p m e n t o r h a n d e q u i p m e n t of

type (b). and vibratory equipment
Maine 9 in max loose Thoroughly compacted N o t specified T a m p i n g o r flushing w i t h w a t e r
Massachusetts 6 in max loose Thoroughly compacted N o t specified Tamped E q u i p m e n t not shown under excavation for struc-
t u r e b u t t y p e (a) e q u i p m e n t s h o w n u n d e r b a c k f i l l m g of pipe
culverts P u d d l i n g o f clean g r a n u l a r m a t e n a l p e r m i t t e d
Michigan 9 in max loose S a m e as E m b c o n t r o l l e d d e n - S a m e as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s Power and hand equipment. Details on tamping equipment
sity method for granular not given V i b r a t o r y e q u i p m e n t used e x t e n s i v e l y Flood-
m a t e r i a l (95% c o n e i n g p e r m i t t e d o n permission of engineer
method)
New Hampshire 8 m . max loose T h o r o u g h l y consolidated N o t specifiGd A p p r o v e d p o w e r t a m p i n g devices
New York 4 i n max loose M i n 9 6 % A A S H O T 99 As required to o b t a i n density Mechanical rolling or t a m p i n g Mechanical tampers shall
be e q u a l i n w e i g h t a n d power t o I n g e r s o l l - R a n d N o . C C 4 5
w i t h a t a m p i n g f o o t a r e a n o t t o exceed 50 s q i n .
Rhode Island 12 i n m a x loose Well compacted N o t specified E q u i p m e n t n o t specified under structure excavation a n d b a c k -
fill b u t m e c h a n i c a l t a m p e r s o r h a n d t a m p e r s t y p e ( a ) s h o w n
under bedding and backfill for pipe culverts
Vermont 12 i n m a x loose Thoroughly compacted N o t specified Mechanical or hand tampers. Details on tamping equipment
not given.
Wisconsin 12 i n m a x loose Thoroughly compacted N o t specified E q u i p m e n t n o t specified under excavation f o r structures

MIDDLE EAST

Delaware 6 i n m a x loose ( p o w e r e q u i p - Min 95% Modified A A S H O Optimum ± 10 p e r c e n t Mechanical tampers Details on tamping equipment not
ment) given
4 i n m a x I oose ( h a n d e q u i p )
D i s t n c t of C o l u m b i a S a m e as e m b a n k m e n t s A t least e q u a l t o o p t i m u m Power rollers or mechanical tampers Mechanical tampers
6 in max loose ( 9 0 - 1 0 0 % A A S H O T 99) capable of e x e r t i n g a b l o w e q u a l t o 250 l b per sq f t of
t a m p i n g a r e a a n d h a v e a d e a d w e i g h t i n excess o f 4 0 l b
Illinois 6 in max Thoroughly tamped N o t specified M e c h a n i c a l t a m p e r s of a p p r o v e d design
Indiana G r a d e B special b o r r o w m a x Thoroughly compacted N o t specified M e c h a n i c a l t a m p s ( p r e f e r a b l y ) . F o r s m a l l areas h a n d t a m p s ,
6 i n loose rain w e i g h t 15 l b h a v i n g a f a c e a r e a 6 b y 6 i n
S p e c i a l filling m a t e n a l Thoroughly saturated
12 m m a x loose
Kentucky 6 i n m a x loose Thoroughly compacted S u f f i c i e n t t o insure desired A p p r o v e d mechanical t a m p i n g devices
compaction and density
Maryland 6 in max loose S a m e as e m b a n k m e n t s Sufficient to insure proper Mechanical tampers
( 9 0 - 1 0 0 % A A S H O T 99) compaction
N e w Jersey 6 i n m a x (subsurface struc- Satisfactory N o t specified Mechanical tampers P u d d l i n g of f o u n d a t i o n e x c a v a t i o n a n d
ture excavation) subsurface structure excavation Details on equipment not
specified
Ohio 4 i n . max loose S a m e as e m b a n k m e n t s Sufficient t o insure density Pneumatic U m p e r s
( 9 0 - 1 0 2 % A A S H O T 99)
Pennsylvania 4 i n m a x loose T h o r o u g h l y t a m p e d or rolled N o t specified Mechanical tampers
Tennessee 6 i n m a x loose f o r t a m p i n g T h o r o u g h l y c o m p a c t i n g each Compacted a t o p t i m u m mois- T a m p i n g rollers a n d mechanical t a m p a are used
roller 3 " m a x loose f o r layer t u r e c o n t e n t as d e t e r m i n e d
mechanical t a m p . b y l a b o r a t o r y tests on b a c k -
fill m a t e n a l
Virginia 6 in max loose Thoroughly tamped N o t specified M e c h a n i c a l t a m p e r capable of e x e r t i n g a b l o w equal t o 250
p s r of t a m p i n g area
West Virginia 6 i n m a x loose f o r r o l l i n f c Thoroughly compacted N o t specified R o l l e r m i n i m u m w e i g h t 10 t o n s Pneumatic backfill tamper
4 i n m a x loose f o r t a m p i n g (25 t o 35 l b ) h a v i n g a p i s t o n b l o w r a t h e r t h a n a h a m m e r
blow
SOUTHEAST

Alabama 6 i n m a x . loose S a m e as e m b a n k m e n t s Provision for a d d i n g water or Mechanical tamping and/or rolling

.'95% A A S H O T 99) drying
Florida 8 m max loose Thoroughly compacted Provision for a d d i n g water or A p p r o v e d mechanical equipment
drying
4 in max loose Thoroughly compacted Provision for a d d i n g water or Approved hand tampers weighing not less t h a n 5 0 l b a n d
d r j ing h a v i n g a f a c e a r e a n o t e x c e e d i n g 100 sq in
Georgia 6 in max compacted Well tamped N o t specified (Foundations excavation for bndges) Power d n v e n tamper
6 in max loose M m 9 5 % A A S H O T 99 Sufficient to allow speafied ( E m b a n k m e n t adjacent to structures ) Roller or power d n v e n
 compaction mechanical tamper
Mississippi 6 in max compacted Thoroughly compacted N o t specified (Backfilling for structure) Mechanical or h a n d t a m p i n g
Details on t a m p i n g equipment not given
6 in max compacted 9 0 - 9 5 % A A S H O T 99 Satisfactory ( E m b a n k m e n t adjacent t o structures) Pneumatic tired or
sheepsfoot rollers
N o r t h Carolina 6 in m a x . loose S a m e d e n s i t y as a d j a c e n t p o r - N o t specified A p p r o v e d m e c h a n i c a l t a m p e r w h i c h w i l l d e l i v e r a t l e a s t 185
t i o n of e m b a n k m e n t p s f of t a m p i n g area
South Carolina 6 in max loose Thoroughly compacted N o t specified E q u i p m e n t n o t specified under excavation f o r structure

SOUTH CENTRAL

Arkansas 6 in max loose (Spec Satisfactorily compacted N o t specified H a n d or mechanical tampers

Liouisiana 6 in max loose Satisfactorily compacted Provision for moistening—
If too wet dned in borrow M e c h a n i c a l r a m m e r s o r h a n d t a m p e r s o f t y p e (a)
Oklahoma 6 in m a x loose S a m e as e m b ( 9 0 % A A S H O Provision for moistening
T 99) E q u i p m e n t n o t specified under excavation f o r structures
Texas 10 m m a x loose S a m e as f o r e m b 90-100% As required t o obtain density
A A S H O T 99 E q u i p m e n t n o t specified under s t r u c t u r a l e x c a v a t i o n .

NORTH CENTRAL

Iowa 6 in max loose Compacted Satisfactory to N o t specified A p p r o v e d roller or mechanical t a m p e r . Pneumatic tamper
Engineer s h a l l be s u p p l i e d w i t h a i r a t a p r e s s u r e o f n o t less t n a i
100 p 3 I
Kansas 6 in max compacted Mm 9 0 % A A S H O T 99 Sufficient for thorough bonu- R o l l i n g , m e c h a n i c a l t a m p e r s or h a n d t a m p e r s o f t y p e (a)
ing and density
Minnesota 6 in max compacted Thoroughly compacted N o t specified A p p r o v e d rollers or mechanical tampers
Missouri 6 in max loose S a m e as e m b a n k m e n t s Provision for moistening Rollers, mechanical tampers or h a n d tampers of t y p e (a).
( 9 0 % A A S H O T 99)
Nebraska 6 in max loose M i n 9 0 % A A S H O T 99 S a m e as e m b a n k m e n t s Rollers, mechanical tampers
North Dakota 8 in max loose Extra Comp M m 95% Provision for moistening
A A S H O T 99 Rollers, mechanical tampers or h a n d tampers of t y p e (a)
South Dakota 4 in m a x loose Satisfactorily compacted N o t specified
Mechanical tampers

MOUNTAIN

Arizona 5 i n . m a x loose ( 6 i n . m a x T o a density satisfactory to Provision for moistening Rollers, mechanical tampers or hand tampers of t y p e ( a ) .
alongside pipe) engineer
Colorado 6 i n m a x loose Thoroughly compacted Provision for moistening Mechanical tamper, IngersoU-Rand Model 34 Backfill
t a m p e d or acceptable equivalent w i t h 6 i n diameter b u t t
m i n o p e r a t i n g air pressure 80 p s i
Idaho^ 6 in loose S a m e as e m b a n k m e n t s A s a p p r o v e d b y engineer A p p r o v e d a i r . gasoline or electric d r i v e n t a m p e r
( 9 0 - 1 0 0 % A A S H O T 99)
Montana 8 in max loose Thoroughly compacted N o t specified Mechanical or hand tampers (excavation f o r structures)
8 m max loose S a m e as e m b a n k m e n t s Provision for wettmg or T a m p i n g , p n e u m a t i c or power rollers ( E m b a n k m e n t s placed
( 9 0 - 1 0 0 % A A S H O T 99) drying around structures)
Nevada 4 in max loose S a m e as e m b a n k m e n t s Provision for moistenmg T a m p e d , puddled or rolled ( N o t e t h i s refers t o selected
( M m 9 0 % modified A A S H O ) granular matenal) Pneumatic or hand tampers
New Mexico 4 in max loose S a m e as e m b a n k m e n t s Provision for moistening or Pneumatic or mechanical t a m p i n g units T a m p e r head area
(Min 95% AASHO T 99) non-use of w e t maten&J 1 9 - 2 9 s q i n a n d d e l i v e r a b l o w o f n o t less t h a n 175 p s i
of t a m p e r head area
Utah 8 in max loose Thoroughly compacted N o t specified E q u i p m e n t n o t specified under e x c a v a t i o n f o r structures
Wyommg 5 in max loose T o a density satisfactory to Provision for moistening Pro- M e c h a n i c a l t a m p e r — T h o r m o d e l 60 B F T Tamper with
engineer h i b i t use o f w e t m a t e r i a l 6 i n diameter t a m p e r head or acceptable e q u i v a l e n t T a m p e r
m u s t o p e r a t e a t a b o u t 750 s t r o k e s p e r m i n u t e u n d e r a i r p r e s -
sure of 7 0 - 8 0 p s 1 Also p n e u m a t i c , sheepsfoot or s m o o t h
PACIFIC steel roller

California 4 in max loose P o n d i n g of sandy or granular Provision for moistening T a m p e d or rolled E q u i p m e n t n o t specified
material Same as em-
bankments (90% California
method )
Oregon 6 in m a x loose 9 5 % A A S H O T 99 Provision for drying Same A s a p p r o v e d b y engineer
as f o r e m b a n k m e n t s
Washington 6 in max loose S a m e as e m b a n k m e n t s Optimum ± 3 percentage A i r d r i v e n t a m p e r s w i t h t a m p i n g f o o t area of 3 6 - 6 4 sq i n m m
( 9 5 % A A S H O T 99) points (Method C) a i r p r e s s u r e 75 p s i
Gasoline d r i v e n tampers Barco or equal w i t h t a m p i n g f o o t
area 36-64 sq i n
B u r e a u o( Public Roads 12 i n m a x loose Satisfactonly compacted Provision for moistening M e c h a n i c a l r a m m e r s o r h a n d t a m p e r s of t y p e (a)

N O T E — T y p e (a) r e q u i r e s t a m p e r s ( u s u a l l y h e a v y , i r o n t a m p e r s ) h a v m g t a m p i n g f a c e s n o t e x c e e d i n g 2 5 s q i n i n a r e a
T y p e ( b ) r e q u i r e s t a m p e r s w e i g h i n g n o t less t h a n 12 l b a n d h a v i n g a t a m p i n g f a c e n o t e x c e e d i n g 50 s q i n
66

State 3. Storm sewers. Suitable tamped. Provision is made for adding

materials are placed in 4-in. layers and water to dry soils.
thoroughly tamped to a depth of 1 f t state 10. Sewers. Suitable materials
above the pipe. Materials for the re- passing a 1-in. ring are compacted to the
maining depth are placed in 6-in. layers level of the top of the pipe. Water settling
and each layer tamped. No moisture con- may be used above top of pipe when
trol given. specially permitted by the engineer. No
State 4. Storm sewers. Suitable ma- moisture control specified.
terials are placed and compacted in ac- state 11. storm sewers. Selected soil,
cordance with one of three methods. sand, or rock dust is thoroughly tamped.
Method 1. Placed in layers of 6 inch No specified depth of lift nor moisture
loose depth and tamped. control are given. Puddling is recom-
Method 2. Use Method 1 to 12 in. above mended for sandy or gravelly materials.
the pipe. Remaining materials are placed State 12. Storm sewers. Approved
in lifts of 12 in. and each lift inundated. materials shall be used. If stone gravel
Method 3. Same as Method 2 except that or slag is specified for backfilling, the
the trench is filled and jetted to within two sewer pipe shall be covered with clean
feet of the pipe. gravel or broken stone or slag placed
No moisture control specified for Methods around and above it to a height of not less
1 and 2. than 4 in. above the surface of the pipe.
State 5. Storm sewers - If under pave- Material shall be deposited simultaneously
ment Selected granular materials are on both sides of the pipe in uniform layers
used. If crushed stone is used it is tamp- not to exceed 4 in. in thickness, solidly
ed in layers not exceeding 6 in. If sand tamped or rammed with proper tools so as
or gravel is used it is placed in 12 -in. not to injure pipe. No moisture control
layers, each layer is thoroughly saturated specified.
to secure maximum compaction. The foregoing statement of require-
If not under pavement. Selected granular ments for backfilling over sewer pipe can
and ordinary materials are used. Selected be summarized more briefly as follows:
granular materials are placed in 4-in. Six of the twelve states provide only for
layers to a height of 1 ft. above the pipe. compaction, with no provision for pud-
Ordinary materials are thoroughly tamped dhng, flooding, or jetting. Two states
in 6-in. layers for the remainder of the provide for compaction and indicate that
depth. No moisture control specified. flooding or puddling may be permitted,
State 6. storm and sanitary sewers. one stating specifically that puddling is
Ordinary materials are carefully hand recommended only for sandy soils and
tamped in 4-in. layers up to a height of gravelly soils. One state specified that
6-in. above the pipe. Remainder tamped the material shall be thoroughly settled
in 6-in. lifts. No moisture control spec- by tamping and flooding. One state has
ified. provisions for use of compaction, flood-
State 7. Pipe sewers. Ordinary ma- ing and jetting. One state provides for
terials are used if satisfactory. If not compaction of ordinary and angular
satisfactory, pit-run sand with 100 per- (crushed rock) granular materials, per-
cent passing a 3-in. sieve is placed in mitting flooding only on rounded granu-
layers not exceeding 6-in. and each layer lar materials. Only one state provides
thoroughly compacted. No moisture con- simply for "flooding" without any qual-
trol specified. ifications or reservations.
state 8. storm sewers. Ordinary suit-
able materials are placed in layers not Backfilling Structural Excavation
exceeding 4 in. loose measure and com-
pacted to density requirements given for The 1951-52 survey included a review
roadway(AASHO T-99 table of densities). of Current State Highway Standard Spec-
Moisture control required but no limits ifications to summarize compaction and
given. moisture control requirements for back-
state 9. Sewers. Suitable materials filling of structural excavation (see Table
are placed in 6-in. layers and solidly 24).
 67
Lift Thickness. The specifications scribed as weighing not less than 12 lb.
show a wide range of variation in thick- and having a tamping face not exceeding
ness of lift Four states specify a 6-in. 50 sq. in.
compacted thickness. Two do not specify
layer thickness. The remainder (two
specifications are shown for some states)
are divided in specifying thickness of lift COMPACTION EQUIPMENT
(loose measurement):
Because of the important part of equip-
ment in obtaining compaction, a summary
Loose Depth Number of Organizations has been made of State Highway Depart-
in. Spec^ying ment Standard Specifications for rolling
i
and tamping equipment. Data on various
5 items wMch are mentioned in specifica-
6 24" tions are given in Table 25.
8 5
9 2 Sheepsfoot-Type Rollers
10
12 Contact Area of Tamping Feet. Most
4-6 organizations allow a wide range of size
4-8 of tamping-foot contact area. This may
6-12 be seen from the summary of specification
Not specified requirements:
a
Five states required a 6-in. compacted
depth. Range in Contact Area No. of
(sq. in.) Organizations
Uo8
Compaction. Thirty organizations 4 to 9 2
stated their requirements for backfill 4 to 10 2
compaction simply in terms of being 4 to 12 8
thoroughly or satisfactorily compacted 4 to 13 2
or well tamped or in similar terms. 4 to 18 1
Seventeen states which required compac- 5 min. 2
tion in terms of some percent of a maxi- 5 approx. 1
mum density showed identical require- 5 to 8 3
ments for embankments and structural 5 to 10 I
backfilL Four specified 90 percent of 5% min. 1
AASHO T 99, seven specified 95 percent, 6 to 8 2
one specified 90-95 percent, 5 specified 8 to 12 1
90-100, one specified 90-102, two re- 13 max. 1
qmred 90 percent and one required 95 (Note: Two states provide for two ranges
percent of a modified method. There are of sizes. They are incorporated in the
16 organizations which specify density above tabulation.)
control of backfill compared to 39 which
specify density control of embankments.

Nearly all organizations provided for An analysis of the specifications on a

the use of mechanical tamping equipment; ' regional basis shows no difference in
32 required mechanical tampers; several specifications for contact area for any
states provided for hand-tamping equip- specific region.
ment The hand equipment referred to Contact Pressure. An analysis of
was of two types. Type A was usually standard specifications covering pressures
referred to as heavy iron tampers hav- of sheepsfoot-type rollers also showed a
ing tamping faces not exceeding 25 sq. wide range in minimum contact pressure
in. in area. Type B tampers were de- requirements. The range is:
68

n
II
I
IJ i l l I
III! mm !i
J If-

2 as:: filf-lil Ml
i s e A z

.11

"a

•s-s J J
II

I I I
II

3 ^
IP 11 s
S
^ g
z
cq
S
a
S
III
s
O
iPjll

^•3 a

iltl

§2 =

IJ
Jill llljl | i Il£I a l l
& M ;Saz J
 69

1^ HI
So
^21 i i p i i i
is
' ss i-^ i s s
s 6 3.1
1^ 1!^

ill A £ AS.

S o S

III
SB III I I

iaae aes
asaaa
il

M O C4 M

1^
i i 11
s s s
.2

^5
I

ill i
aaa 2az
a
2 4
70

if
•SOS"

it
•si
II
lil.il ^^11^
00.SI&3
zz ^ I Z a

11 §^

=1

•5^

I
i a i f iS I I I
if
a I I I Ig^iii
I "
! i
 71

Is Is
II
^ C3
•S8

g
mil
too .—

11
o o o
5 si ZZ-S Z

>i 11 Bd
D9C4 coos «co

.5
e

SS-< 5<

m
^.1 •5 6

ill •35
Ills
o,

H H
Z Z
I
H H
O O

H a
i IJil « i lie I d
Z!

<SUS Zm
o
z llllzJ
i l l J is ll 35^ n
•«!0S S Z Z
72

jlj.
1 I

55? o
ZZ« Z

m
S
H
OS
«^
> .a
g
8 a
o^ MIS

i 14%
o:
1 -I
I
a <soo J!
g
o
s
2g
^s
z
H

s
j s s ssssa
3 3 saa aiaaa
z
o a ooooooooo

1
i
Q
III
Q
Z

II
n
o

1
I
n
I g 2
o I
3 z
1/
s » ^SSSM s a g >
llllll III • l l | | g | l l g l f
I
 73

111 1

oo o oo
ZZ Z Z Z

-I

I I I

C4 § ai a N

S w
I s^
s I
-3
'Si

I
it

fit
IflO
HO
^ SgiNP
l l l s l l l ill lEsI I
S « S S Z Z 5 < o S SZZ& ^ PQU
 TABLE 28
CURRENT STATE m C H W A Y STANDARD SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENTS ' FOR PNEUMATIC T I R E ROLLERS A N D SMOOTH WHEEL POWER ROLLERS
FOR COMPACTION OF GRANULAR BASES •

Paeumatio Tire RoUers Tandem tjrpe 3-wheel type

Capacity
(max. cu.
CoinpressioD Com- Com- Operat- yd or
Region and State Operating Capacity pression pression mg tons or Remarks
Type Rolliiui Gross weight Operating (max. ciL Weight (Lb An Weight (Lb/m speed sg yds.
width wei^t per tire (Lb/in Oh An Inflation speed yd. per (tons) of (tons) of width (m.p h.) per unit
Cinches) (tons) (pounds) width of t j rolhng presBore (QLph.) unit per width of of drive per hour)
tire) width (pj.1) hour) roU) roU)

NORTHEAOT

CflODecticat 10 DUD (a) RoDed gravel base—bottom

150 BO yd.
(a) coarse
Mune 10 (a) An approved pneumatic
tired roller may be osad
ManBcbusetts 12 mm (a) 12 mm (a) (a) Requires a s>'lf-propelled
roller
MiehigBO (a) (a) Reqmred but no specifira-
tions covermg pneomatie tire
New Hampahtre roller
10 DUD
New York .\pproved roller weighing Dot
10 mm less than 10 tons
Rhode Tifhtnd
Vermont 10 mm
Wtseonsio M m 2S0 10 DUD M m 250 (a) Max 68% of gross weight on
(a> fb) drmng rolb. (b) Max. 72%
of groes weight on d r m n g rods.
Haubng Equipment Eogmeer
may reqmre. special roDing
eqmpment i f not attained dor-
tng contract Rubber tirvd
roUers are used.
M I D D L E EAST

Delaware 10 mm (a) (a) For W B MaeadaiD. No

requirement for gravel.
DiBtnet of Cohimbu »-10 (a) 200-280 8-12 (a) 200-380 (a) Weight an>rov«l for job
nbnou 6- iO 200-32S 6- 10 200-^25 (a) Qravel or crushed stone sur-
face coarse Type A
Indiana 2-aile. 9-wheel. Upto200 10 nun 10 mm Permit use of crawler tread trac-
min tors having a bearmg of at
least 6 lb per sq m of tread.
Vary l i f t thickniea t o obtau
desired density
Eentqcky 7- 10 7- 10
Maryland 10 (s) 10 (a) (fk) Reamres a K^ton "power
New Jersey roller'*
8 nun 225 DUO 8 nun (a) Min 330 (a) OD a tire not more than 24 m.
Ohio (a) wide.
10 mm M m 300 2 (a) Wfligbtt dimeosiaDS of roDer
and number and spacing of
tires shall be such that spea-
fod^mpsetion may be ob-
Pennsyhrama 8 250 10 mm M m 330 Specified for crushed rock.
Tennessee 10 2 500 sq
Virginia yds
10(a) 10(8) (a) For W B Macadam only
Sieepsfoot or other approved
types for stabilised and pit n m
base courses.
West Virgiou Approved type
1
10 nun (a) (a) Reeoostmeted base course.
1 Coarse t o Fine gradmgs.
 325 mm

11
325 mm
10 mm

£
it

S
00
8-10
11 a 5
8-10

ss

2 2 o
aag
5
ea
s

to
a S a

a
S
2
s
as s

1
9

S
325 mm
111

a
Mm 200 Mm 200
(a)

I
225 Mm 8-12

3
(a)

3
g
e
2-5 (a)

a
(a)

9
(a)

B
s

o
10 max

a s
10 max Mm 250

a
1
1 § i
a
a a
Mm 200
5

1400 min ' 8 mm

ill

III
^ i
1000-2000

111
(a)
eo 00
i i

200 mm 8-10
1

160 TP'"
8 mm
IM

200

ii
i

6000 mm 10 mm 300

. Is
SB

04

Mm 250 8-12 (a)

J III I
I I
(Loadid)
3

100O-20O0 10 mm

II
(a)

"J
s

10 imn
3 3

4-11 (a)
8 mm
10 mm

a i
ae
^1
-
s

li
II
1

i
j!

Ill
i s

• a

a
sI

El
f

lis!
75
 76

Minimum Permissible No. of tion-Investigation, Report No. 2 Compac-

Contact Pressure Organizations tion Studies on Silty Clay, Tech. Memo.
by Tamping Feet Specifying No. 3-271, Waterways Experiment Sta-
psi. tion, Vicksburg, Mississippi, July, 1949.
550 (loaded) 1 3. Allen, H. and Johnson, A. W. The
450 1 Results of Tests to Determine the Expan-
325 1 sive Properties of Soils, Proc. Highway
300 2 Research Board, Vol. 16, pp. 220-233,
250 3 1936.
200 14 4. McDowell, C. Progress Report on
200 (loaded) 1 Development and Use of Strength Tests for
150 4 Sul^rade Soils and Flexible Base Mate-
135 1 rials, Proc. Highway Research Board,
125 1 Vol. 26, pp. 484-506, 1946.
110 1 5. Russell, H. W., Worsham, W. B.
100 5 and Andrews, R. K. Influence of Initial
90 1 Moisture and Density on the Volume
85 1 Change and Strength Characteristics of
80 1 Two Typical Illinois Soils, Proc. Highway
50 2 Research Board, Vol. 26, pp. 544-550,
1946.
Other significant specification require- 6. Corps of Engineers. The California
ments for sheepsfoot rollers are given in Bearing Ratio as Applied to the Design of
Table 25, "Current State Highway Standard Flexible Pavements for Airports, U. S.
Specification Requirements for Tamping Waterways Experiment Station, Tech.
(Sheepsfoot) Type Rollers for Embankment Memo. 213-1, July 1945.
Construction. " 7. Benkelman, A. C. and Olmstead,
Pneumatic-Tire Rollers. Twenty- F. R. The Cooperative Project on Struc-
three organizations included some re- tural Design of Non-rigid Pavements,
quirements for the pneumatic-tire roller Proc. Highway Research Board, Vol. 16,
m specifications for compaction of em- pp. 13-25, 1946.
bankments (see Table 26). 8. Turnbull, W. J . and McRae, J . L .
Smooth-Wheeled Power Rollers. Thir- Soil Tests Shown Graphically, Eng. News-
ty-four organizations have specification Rec., Vol. 144, No. 21, pp. 38-39, May
requirements for power rollers for em- 25, 1950.
bankment construction (see Table 27). 9. H. Allen, et al. Report of Com-
Granular-Base Compaction. A sum- mittee on Warping of Concrete Pavements,
mary of specifications for pneumatic- Proc. Highway Research Board, Vol. 25,
tire rollers is given in Table 28, "Cur- pp. 199-250, 1945.
rent State Highway Standard Specification 10. Soil Classification Method AASHO
Requirements for Pneumatic Tire Rollers M 145-49.
. . . for Compaction of Base Courses." 11. Current Road Problems No. 8-R,
Smooth-Wheel Power Rollers. A sum- Thickness of Flexible Pavements, High-
mary of "Current State Highway Stand- way Research Board, November, 1949.
ard Specifications for Smooth Wheel 12. Aaron, H . , Spencer, W. T . , and
Power Rollers" is given in Table 28. Marshall, H. E . , Research on the Con-
struction of Embankments, Public Roads,
REFERENCES Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 1-26, July, August,
September, 1944.
1. Corps of Engineers, Soil Com- 13. Williams, F . H. P . , and Maclean,
paction Investigation, Report No. 1 Com- D. J . The Compaction of Soil, Road Re-
paction Study on Clayey Sand. Tech. search Technical Paper No. 17, Depart-
Memo. No. 3-271, Waterways Experiment ment of Scientific and Industrial Re-
Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi, April, search, Road Research Laboratory,
1949. (London), 1950.
2. Corps of Engineers, Soil Compac- 14. Corps of Engineers, Soil Compac-
 77

tion Investigation, Report No. 1, Com- and Control Procedures Used in Con-
paction Studies on Clayey Sands. Tech. struction of Embankments. Public Roads,
Memo. No. 3-271, Waterways E;q)eri- Vol. 22, No. 12, page 271, February
ment Station, April, 1949. 1942.
15. Corps of Engineers, Soil Compac- 26. The apparatus is described in
tion Investigation, Report No. 2, Com- Public Roads, Vol. 22, No. 12, p. 277,
paction Studies on Silty Clay. Tech. February 1942.
Memo. No. 3-271, Waterways Experi- 27. Bouyoucos, G. J . , The Alcohol
ment Station, July 1949. Method for Determimng the Water Con-
16. Hicks, L . D. , Observations of tent of Soils. Soil Scientist, Vol. 32,
Moisture Contents and Densities of Soil pp. 173-179, 1931.
Type Base Courses and Their Subgrades, 28. ' Bonar, A. J. , A Rapid Method
Proceedings, Highway Research Board, for Determining the Moisture Content of
Vol. 28, pp. 422-432, 1948. Soils. Texas Engineering E}q)eriment
17. Pumping of Concrete Pavements Station, Research Report No. 9, Col-
in Kansas, Highway Research Board Re- lege Station Texas, September, 1949.
search Report No. ID, 1946 Supplement, 29. Shea, J . E . , Novel Type Volu-
Special Papers on the Pumping Action of meter, Highway Research Abstracts,
Concrete Pavements, 1946. Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 4-5, March, 1950.
18. Kersten, M. S., Survey of Sub- 30. Woods, K. B. and Litehiser, R. R.
grade Moisture Conditions, Proceedings, Soil Mechanics Applied to Highway Engi-
H.R.B. Vol. 24, pp. 497-512, 1944. neering in Ohio. Ohio State University
19. Kersten, M. S., Subgrade Mois- Engineering Experiment Station, Bulletin
ture Conditions Beneath Airport Pave- No. 99, July 1938.
ments, Proceedings, Highway Research 31. Wyoming Highway Department,
Board, Vol. 25, pp. 450-463, 1945. Soils Manual, 1949.
20. Allen, H . , Report of Committee 32. Shockley, W. G. Correction of Unit
on Warping of Concrete Pavements, Pro- Weight and Moisture Content for Soils Con-
ceedings, Highway Research Board, Vol. taimngGravel Sizes. Corps of Engineers,
25, pp. 199-250, 1945. Waterways Experiment Station, Soils Di-
21. Allen, H . , Report of Committee vision, Emb. and Found. Branch, Techni-
on Maintenance of Joints in Concrete cal Data Sheet No. 2, June 16, 1948.
Pavements as Related to the Pumping 33. Reagel, F . V. Standard Density of
Action of the Slabs, Proceedings, Highway Bases. Missouri Highway Department,
Research Board, Vol. 25, pp. 180-189, Department of Materials, Division of Ge-
1945. ology and Soils, Instruction Circular 1950-
22. TurnbuU, W. J . , Johnson, S. J . , 2, June 12, 1950.
and Maxwell, A. A. Factors Influencing 34. Communicationto Committee Chair-
Compaction of Soils, Highway Research man L . D. Hicks, December 4, 1951.
Board Bulletin No. 23, 1949. 35. F. C. Walker and W. G. Holtz,
23. Williams, F . H. P. and Maclean, "Comparison Between Laboratory Test
D. J . The Compaction of Soil, Road Re- Results and Behavior of Completed Em-
search Technical Paper No. 17, Depart- bankments and Foundations" presented at
ment of Scientific andlndustrial Research, 1950 Spring Meeting of the American
Road Research Laboratory, London, 1950. Society of Civil Engineers, Los Angeles,
24. TurnbuU, W. J. andMcFadden, G . , California, April 26-29, 1950. Proceed-
Field Compaction Tests, Proc. of Second ings, Separate No. 108.
International Conference on Soil Mechanics 36. Summary of Requirements for
and Foundation Engineering. Vol. 5, Backfilling of Trenches, Pipe Culverts and
pp. 235-239, June 1948. Sewers. Highway Research Correlation
25. Allen, H . , Classification of Soils Service Circular 71, July 1949.
78

Appendix

MANUFACTURERS' SPECIFICATIONS

The 1951-52 survey of current practice includes data on current state highway and
federal specifications for various types and sizes of compacting equipment. In order
to present more nearly complete data on compacting equipment, manufacturers who
were known producers of such equipment were contacted by letter requesting equip-
ment specifications. Tables A through E include data received in reply to those
requests.
The list of manufacturers is not complete but is sufficiently inclusive to indicate
the ranges m types and sizes of equipment and may be of value in preparation of spec-
ifications for compacting equipment. The data are presented in the tables following.
 TABLE A

M A N U F A C T U R E R S SPECIFICATIONS FOR P N E U M A T I C T I R E ROLLERS

Groos operating weight Load per wheel (b) Range of

ground
Rolling Inflation pressure
Manufacturer Type width Tire site fin) pressure Empty Loaded (a) Empty Loaded (Lb per
fin) (p.s 1 ) in of
roller
(Tons) (Pounds) (Tons) rPounds) (Pounds) (Pounds) width

Tampo Manufactunng C o , 5-azle, 9-wbeel 60 7 to X IS 30-36 1 4 2,750 6 03 18,000 305 2,000 47-325
San Antonio, Teiaa 7-axle, 13-wheel 84 7 90 X 15 30-35 1 8 3,700 12 6 26,000 308 2,000 47-325
W m Bros Boiler Manufactur- 2-aile, 7-wheel 46 7 SO X 16 (4-ply) 1 1,080 7 14,000 283 2,000 43-304 Use of 6-ply tires tncmsea
ing C o , Minneapolis, M u m 2-axle. 9-wheel 60 7 SO X 15 (4-ply) 1 3 2,690 0 18,000 284 2,000 43-300 capacities 15% Maxi-
2-axle, 13-wheel 84 7 50 X 15 (4-ply) 1 8 3,600 13 26,000 277 2,000 43-310 mum overloaii cacocity
Single axle, 4-wbeel 106 18 X 24 (24-ply) 50-00 10 20,200 35 70,000 5,050 17,500 189-660 7, 9 ood 13 tons Maxi-
Single axle, 4-wheel 106 13 X 24 (24-ply) 60-90 12 22,600 50 100,000 5,650 25,000 220-042 mum load for 1 to 5
mph rolling 6, 8 and 11
tons Maximum speed
5 mph
M J Dunn Company, St 3-axle, 5-wheel 72 to 78 17 I 16 2 4 000 5-14 10,000 800 800 63-373 W i t h calcium chloride in
Paul, Minn 28,000 6,600 tires add 2,fiOO lbs
Southwest Welding i M f g 6 Independently sprung 90 1100x20 80 3 6 7,290 15 30,000 1,812 7,900 81-333
Company, Albambra, Calif whecb
4 independently sprung 80 14 00 X 20 80 6 25 10,500 25 50,000 2,629 12,600 131-029
wheels
4 independently sprung 118 18 00 x 24 00 15 30,000 60 100,000 7,500 29,000 2S4-847
wheels
4 independently sprung 126 2100 x 24- 80 IS 7 31,600 70 140,000 7,875 35,000 238-1111
wheels
4 independently sprung 140 24 00 X 32 90 24 48,000 100 200,000 12,000 S0,000 343-1428
wheels
4 independently sprung 184 30 00 x 33 160 45 90,000 200 400,000 22,600 100,000 489-2174
wheeb

Willamette Iron and Steel C o , 2 oscilhting axles, 4- 114 ic) 18 00 X 24 (24-ply) Not 13 5 27,000 50 100,000 6,750 29,000 60-220
Portland, Qreg wheel Specified

Supercompactors, I n c , Sacra- 2-axle (dual oscillating 174 30 00 x 33 (60-ply) 30-150 40 80,000 200 400,000 20,000 100,000 460-2299
mento, Cahf 4-wheel box)
2-axle tdual oscillatuig, 112 21 00 1 25 (44-ply) 30-150 18 36,000 100 200,000 9,000 29,000 322-1785
4-wheel box)
Single box, eccentric 04 I6 00 x 21 (36-ply) 30-150 9 5 19,000 60 120,000 4,500 30,000 202-1277
axle, 4-wheel.
Single box, eccentric 8S 16 00 i 2 1 ( 3 6 - p l y ) 30-150 7 5 15,000 60 120,000 45,000 30,000 175-1412
axle, 4-wheel

W E Grace M f g C o , Dallas, 3-axle 66 Front 7 S > 10 1,120 1,120

Tcias Open body type Drive 0 X 24 4,460 1,116
Self-propelled 11-whecl Rear 7 S i IS 6,920 087
roller
3-aile (d) eg Front 7 S X 10 Total 11,500

1 •
Tank body type Drive 0 X 24
Self-propelled ll-wbeel Rear 7 S i IS ' • • 'Approximately same as
roller for open body type

Shovel Supply C o , Dallas, 2-axle (e). oecillating 16 I 21 or 18 X 24 12 29 24,500 50 100,000 6,12S 29,000 In two modeb —one for
Texas. 4-wbeel sand ballast, the other
for cast iron blocks
2-axle dual osclUatms, - 30 X 33 (60-ply) 150 38 5 77,000 200 400,000 19,250 100,000 Cast iron ballast blocks
4-wbeel box
Iowa M f g C o , Cedar Rapids, I -axle, 2-wheel 48 24 00 X 33 (3e-ply) 40-100 IS 0 30,000 30 60,000 7,500 15,000 (Variable from static to
Iowa 1-axle, 2-wheel dual 48 12 00 x 20 (l4-ply) 40-100 6 3 12,500 12 5 25,000 6,250 12,500 ) maximum vibrator i n -
put)

(a) Loaded weioht is product of rolling width and maximum ground pressure in pounds per inch of roller width
(b) Load per wneel ts gross weight divided by number of wheeb
(e) Computed by editor from spacing of IS-inch tires
(d) Tank body has capacity of 1,000 galloos and may be equipped with spray bar
(e) Furnished xa two modeb Model RT 100 for cast iron ballast Model RT lOOS for sand ballast
 00
o

TABLE B

M A N U F A C T U R E R S SPECIFICATIONS FOR T A M P I N G (SHEEPSFOOT) T Y P E R O L L E R S

Dimensions of drums Data on tamping feet Weights Ob) Contact pressure (p,81) *

Tamping
Manufacturer Model and type area Number Loaded Loaded
Number Length i Diam- No per of Length of feet Loaded with Loaded with
(in ) eter 2 drum3 each of foot on Empty with wet Empty with wet
(in ) foot (h) ground * water sand water sand
(sq in )

American Steel Works, KansasCity, M o MS 48, Single 1 48 40 112 55 4 3,220 4,805 6.436 146 222 203
MS 60. Single 1 60 40 140 59 5 3,610 6,000 8.372 131 221 304
MS 72, Single 1 72 40 168 55 6 4,040 7,285 10.283 123 221 311
M D 96, Oscillating 2 40 112 55 8 6,100 0,724 13.242 141 221 301
M D 120, Oscillating 2 60 40 140 59 10 7,100 12,160 16,815 129 221 306

\
M T 144, Oscillating 3 48 40 112 59 12 10,000 14,800 10,048 151 224 302
AS 48, Single 1 48 60 90 7 3 4,100 8,300 12,076 105 306 979
AS 66, PinKlp 1 66 60 120 7 4 5,460 11,060 16,072 195 395 574
A D 96, Oscillating 2 48 60 00 7 6 8,000 16,380 24,000 100 390 671
A D 132, Oscillating 2 66 60 120 7 8 10,640 21,840 31,864 100 390 560

American Steel W o r b , Kansas City, M o *> B3 48, Non-oscilbting 1 48 54 72 7 3 3,750 7,060 10,050 170 336 470
84 48, Non-oscillating 1 48 54 72 7 4 3,750 7,060 10,050 134 252 359
B4 66, Non-nscillating 1 66 54 06 7 4 5,160 8,470 11,460 184 303 410
B6 96. Oscillating 2 48 54 72 7 6 7,000 13,670 10,800 166 325 470
B8 96. Oscillating 2 48 94 72 7 8 7,000 13,670 10,800 125 244 393
B8 132. Oscillating 2 66 54 06 7 8 9,820 16,440 22,420 176 284 401
CS 79, Non-oscillating 1 79 73 136 8 18 4 9,700 111,605 28,015 303 619 004
C D 158, Oscillating 2 79 73 136 8 18 8 19,300 30,209 57,725 302 614 002

Slusser-McLeon Scrapfr Company, Sidney, Ohio Single 1 48 40 112 6 4 3,000 4,036 6.870 125 205 286
Oscillating 2 48 40 112 6 ? 8 6,000 0,870 13.740 125 205 286
Oscillating 3 48 40 112 6 12 0,000 14.809 20,610 125 206 286

Tampo Manufacturing Company, San Antonio, H I , One-drum 1 48 40 112 « 4 3,200 6.134 132 212
Teias H2. Two-drum 2 48 40 112 6 8 6,300 10,168 132 212
501. One-drum 1 60 60 120 6 4 7,200 12,317 16,876 300 912 703
502, Two-drum 2 60 60 120 6 8 14,400 24,634 33,762 300 912 703
501R. One-drum 1 72 60 120 7 8 4 8,400 13.617 18,076 300 483 649
502R. Two-drum 2 72 60 120 7 8 8 16,800 27.034 36,152 300 483 649
Wm Bras Boiler and Manufacturing Company. M l fi<A Single 1 48 40 112 514 7 4 2,925 4.860 6.800 133 221 300
MinDeapolUi MinD M l 7, Single ] 48 40 112 7 7 4 3,035 4.060 6.910 108 178 247
M2 S^jOscilUting 48 40 112 614 7 8 6,850 9.720 13,600 133 221 300
M2 7,it)scilhituig 48 40 112 7 7 8 e,070 9.920 13,820 108 178 247
M3 6 ^ Oscillating 48 40 112 516 7 12 9.180 14.980 20,800 139 227 315
M3 7,t)jcill«ting 48 40 112 7 7 12 9.520 15,320 21,140 113 183 252
0 1 55-8. Single 1 60 60 112 7 8 4 8.300 13.700 19.100 296 490 682
G2 55-8. Oscillating 60 60 112 7 8 8 17i«00 28.100 38.000 310 600 695
G l 55-eV4, Single 1 60 60 120 7 814 4 9.490 14.890 20.290 340 530 725
G2 5 5 - S ^ , Oscillating 60 60 120 7 914 8 19,720 30,520 41.320 353 545 740

R G LeTourneau, I n c , Peoru, I I I X I , Single I 48 4IV6 88 54 8 4 3,610 5,606 7.610 167 260 353
X2, Oscilhiting 2 48 4H4 88 54 8 8 6,590 10,583 14,500 152 245 337
X3, Oscillatmg 3 48 41% 88 54 8 12 9.570 15,560 21,570 147 240 333
X4, Oscillating 4 43 4114 88 54 8 16 12.550 20,537 28.550 145 240 330
120. Tournapacker Oscillating 2 60 60 120 7 07 814 4 17,700 29,360 40.070' 626 1.035 1.420

McCoy Company, Denver, Colo U S U D 65. Oscillating 2 60 72 138 6 to 9 8<4 or 914 4 23,500 36,959 50,500
USUD 66, Oscillating 2 72 72 168 6 to 9 8<4 or e>4 4 26.700 43.186 60,342
USHD 55, Oscillating 2 60 eo 120 6 or 7 8!4 4 15.000 25.075 35,312 535-625 890-1.040 1120-1308

Baker Manufacturmg Company, SprmgficM, I I I B SF S96, Oscillating 1 48 40 96 5 75 7 4 3,210 5.100 6,100 139 221 266
PF D96, Oscillaling 2 48 40 96 6 76 7 4 6.570 10.040 12 040 143 225 263
SF TS6, Oscillating 3 48 40 96 5 75 7 4 9.860 15.600 18 500 141 233 268

Bucynu-ErieCompany. South Milwaukee, Wia a T O O , Oscillating 2 48 40 112 6 7 8 e.225 9.825 11.825 135 210 250

W E GraceManufaetunngCo, Dallas, Texas' RSX 112, Oscillating 2 48 40 112 65 714 8 e,20O 140 224 310
T X 96, Oscillating 2 42 40 96 55 714 4 5.700 130 200 270
X 112, Single 1 48 40 112 55 714 4 3.200 144 228 314
RPX 10«,t)Bcillating 2 48 40 104 55 714 4 7.200 163 248 332
L X X 95, Oscillating 2 48 60 95 7 8 (•) 12.400 230 375 500
L X 5 X I 2 0 , Oscillating 2 eo 60 120 7 8 P) 14,250 259 455 652
LX6X136, Oscillatmg 2 72 60 130 7 8 (•) 16.250 286 525 765

Shovel Supply C o , Dallas, Teiaa Ferguson 112, Oscillatmg 2 48 40 112 55 7 8 6.340 10.200 150 242
Gebhard 22, Oscillating 2 72 60 144 625 8 8 425 685
Oebhard 22, Oscillatmg 2 60 eo 120 55 714 8 14.200 25.920 320 590
Model 112W. Oscillatmg 2 48 40 112 55 7 8 8.020 11.880 180 270 327
Model 112W-48, Oscillatinfi 2 48 48 112 55 8 8 9.700 15,280 21.190 220 347 481
Model 2. Reclamation O s A t i n g 2 60 60 120 706 10 4 28.500 37,860 47.400 1.010 1.340 1.678

1 Length of each drum ' Diameter without feet > Number of feet shown here is standard Manufacturers provide more or fewer feet as may \ » specified Most manufacturers are prepared to furnish specml shapes and sues if desired
' Number in one row times number of drums per unit » Based on one row of feet m contact with ground • Manufacturer! computations ' Loaded w i t h water and boxes loaded with sand » Data from Powers Road and Street Cata-
logue. 1960-61 • Not closer than I I in , not farther than 13 m e e disgonally 3 f t for each 2 sq f t of drum area
 TABLE C 00
MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATIONS FOR S T A N D A R D W E I G H T 3-WHEEL POWER ROLLERS

Dimensions of rolls Roller com-

Transmission speeds pression
Guide roll Drive roll (Lb per bn in ) Roll
Weight overlap Overall rolling width
Manufacturer Model Type group (in each (inches)
(tons) Gmde side)
Diam Width Dmro Width Drive
Low Int 3 4 High roU roU
(m) (m) (io) (m)

Gallon Iron Works and Manufacturing Com- Warrior 3-wheel 6 1 4 2 9 6 0 36 41 55 18 98 224 m 70 with 18" rolls
pany, Gallon, Ohio
Warrior 3-wheel 7 1 2 2 5 4 3 38 41 60 18 114 261 3>A 70 with 18' rolls 20-in width rear raUs
avaibible
Warrior 3-wheel 8 1 2 2 5 4 3 38 41 60 13 130 298 3!4 70 with 18'rolls 20-m width rear rolls
available
Chief 3-wheel 10 2 0 5 0 44 44 69 20 152 336 4 76 with 20" rolls 22- and 24-in width
rear rolls available
Chief 3-whcel 12 2 9 5 0 44 44 69 20 182 403 4 76 with 2 0 ' rolls 22- and 24-in width
rear rolls available
Trench 3-wheel 8% 3 6 60 20

Hubcr Manufacturing Company, Marion, 3-wheel 5 1 7 3 4 34 37 52 18 97 217 3 67 with 18' rolls

Ohio
3-wheel 6 1 7 3 4 34 37 52 18 97 239 3 67 w i t h 18' rolb

3-whecl 8 3 0 4 0 5 2 40 40 60 18 134 308 2V4 71 with i r rolls

3-wheel 10 2 0 4 0 5 2 44 43 69 20 148 348 4 76 with 2 0 ' rolls 24-in width rear rolls
available
3-wheel 12 2 0 4 0 6 2 44 43 69 20 187 416 4 76 with 20" rolls 24-in width rear rolb
available
W A Hiddell Corp, Bucyrus, Ohio 10G64 3-wheel 10 1 OS 3 20 5 38 44 42 68 20 168 364 4 74 with 2 0 ' rolls

12G 54 3-wheel 12 1 oe 3 20 5 38 44 42 68 20 193 405 4 74 with 20* rolb

Auatm-Westem Company, Aurora, I I I Cadet 3-whecl e 1 31 3 59 5 88 36V2 37 52 18 loe 230 3-5/8 66% with 18* rolls Weights for gasoline
motor powered r o l -
er for 6-, 7-, 8-, 10
and 12-ton rollers
Cadet 3-wheel 7 1 31 3 59 6 88 36 37 52 18 124 271 3-6/8 66% with i r rolls

Cadet 3-wbeel 8 I 36 3 70 e 04 37 37 54 18 136 314 3-5/8 66% with 18" rolls Special (8-ton) avail-
able with 22-tn
wheeb
Autocrat 3-wheel 10 1 1 3 0 4 9 43 45 63 20 168 330 fA 22- and 24-in rear
rolb avaibble
Autocrat 3-wheel 12 1 1 3 0 4 9 43 45 68 Vi 20 105 387 4% 22- and 24-in rear
rolls available
i 1
 TABLE D
MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATIONS FOR VARIABLE WEIGHT 3-WHEEL POWER ROLLERS

Dimensions of rolls
Transmission speeds Roller compression
(Miles per hour) (Lb per lin in )
Roll
over-
Weight Up Overall rothog width
Type group On (inches)
(tons) 00
Dum Width D u m Width Mai. each
High Reverae (m) (in) (in) (in) Mai with side)
with wet
water sand

Buffalo - Springfield VM-18 3-wheel 5- 7 6 2 Same 64 With 16* ralb 18 u width rear rolls available
Roller C o , Sprmg-
field, Ohio VM-10 3-wbeel 6- 8 5 2 Same 68 with 18* rolls 20 m width rear rolls available
VM-21 3-wheel 7- 10 3 6 6 2 Same 68 with 18* rolls 20 and 22 in width rear rolls
available
VM-24 3-wheel 8- 11 3 e 6 2 Same 68 w i t h 18- rolls 20, 22, and 24 tn width rear rolb
available
VM-31C 3-wheel 10-1214 3 9 9 0 Same 76 with 20* roUs 23 and 24 m width rear roUs
3-wheel available
VM-32C 12-15 3 6 6 0 Same 76 with 20* rolls 23 and 24 in width rear rolb
available

00
 00
M A N U F A C T U R E R S SPECIFICATIONS FOR V A R I A B L E W E I G H T T A N D E M POWER ROLLERS
(Does n o t include 3-axle t y p e )

Transmission speeds
(Miles per hour) Dimensions of rolb Roller Compression—fLb per lln in )

Weight
Type group Guide roll Drive roll Guide roll •
(tomi)
High Moi Mai
Dmm Width Diam Width with with
(in ) (in ) (in ) (in ) water sand

Gabon Iron Works and Man- Tandem 3-6 I 5 34 30 66 171

ufacturing Company, Tandem 5-8 1 5 34 40 108 144 130 207
Cialion, Ohio Tandcni 8-12 223 465 48 178 184 282
Tandem 10-14 223 465 48 206 217 317

Buifalo-Spriiiglicld. Spritig- KT-7 Tandem 3-5 159 3 02 30

Geld, Ohio 2 12 404
KT-I6C Heavy duty tandem 5- 8 I 75 35 50 40 63 140
KT-17C Heavy duty tandem 6- 9 I 75 35 50 40 63 151 233
KT-240 Heavy duty tandem 8-12 I 75 35 50 48 00 185 285
KT-25C Hravy duty tandem 10-14 I 7^ 35 50 48 60 240 340
VT-48 Heavy duty tandem 15-21 135 2 75 4 I 51'1 71% 330 505

Clyde Iron Works, Duluth, 21 Tandem 1-IU l;pto- 2 14 20 26 47 2| 67 6|

Minn 80 Tandem 3-4 I'p l o - 2 44 36 107 156

Huber Manuructurtng Coni- Tandem 3- 4 26 44 44 64 112 171

patiy, Marion, Ohio Tandem 4- 5 20 44 44 64 68 150 198
Tandem 5- 8 195 3 62 52 97 135 125 203
Tandem 8-10 1 95 3 62 52 111 147 209 266
Tandem 8-12 29 57 114 173 3 207 4| 298 6
Tandem 10-14 57 185 240

Littleford Bros, Cincinnati, 185 Van- Tandem 4-6 100

Ohio Packer

Esaick Manufacturing Com- Tandem 114-2 1-1 8 2 8-3 4 2614 110

pany, Los Angeles. Calif 30O Tandem 2- 3 l-l 2 2 2-4 I 110 148
400 Tandem 3 -4 1-2 114-4 105 160
50O Tandem 1-3 2 1 5-6 36 156
Tandem m-i 23 42 50 136
5-8
Austin-Western ComiKiny, Tandem 5-8 I 0/2 26 2 26/4 63 145 Weights are for gaso-
\iirora. 111 8 1014 I 0/2 20 2 20/4 63 242 I in e -powered
modeb
TaniiK) M f g C o , Kan An-
tonio, Texas

* Where compression for guide roll is not given i t was not shown by manufacturer
The Highway Research Board is
organized under the auspices of
the Division of Engineering and
Industrial Research of the Na-
tional Research Council to pro-
vide a clearinghouse for highway
research activities and informa-
tion. The National Research
Council is the operating agency
of the National Academy of
Sciences, a private organization
of eminent American scientists
chartered in 1863 (under a spe-
cial act of Congress) to "investi-
gate, examine, experiment, and
report on any subject of science
or art."