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

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

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author:	Mat Yusof, Doris Asmani
Format:	Thesis
Language:	English
Published:	2012
Online Access:	http://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/17705/ http://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/17705/2/TM_DORIS%20ASMANI%20MAT%20YUSOF%20EC%2012_5.pdf

id	uitm-17705
recordtype	eprints
spelling	uitm-177052018-11-14T07:55:23Z http://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/17705/ Comparative study on standard static packing pressure (SSPP) and standard proctor laboratory compaction methods / Doris Asmani Mat Yusof Mat Yusof, Doris Asmani The most recognizable development of compaction test is known as the Standard Proctor Test, which is used to estimate the density value of soils. However, the laboratory concept produced by Proctor (1933) has a few imperfections in determining the value of Maximum Dry Density (MDD) and Optimum Moisture Content (OMC). It also has some imperfections in application where the method that is applied in the field and laboratory to measure the density of soil are different. The compaction technique applied on the subgrade road layer for cohesive soil is by using roller compactor machine (static technique) while the technique that is applied in the laboratory is by dynamic compaction method. Thus, a new laboratory compaction method has been developed to determine the density, shear strength, and CBR values by using Standard Static Packing Pressure (SSPP) efforts in order to close the gap between laboratory and field data. In this study seven (7) types of soil based on plasticity chart were tested in several tests to obtain the important engineering parameter such as density (pd), water content (wc), shear strength (Cu), compaction energy (E) and CBR value of soils. Based on the laboratory results, it was found that the SSPP method is more practical and sensible than the dynamic compaction … 2012 Thesis NonPeerReviewed text en http://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/17705/2/TM_DORIS%20ASMANI%20MAT%20YUSOF%20EC%2012_5.pdf Mat Yusof, Doris Asmani (2012) Comparative study on standard static packing pressure (SSPP) and standard proctor laboratory compaction methods / Doris Asmani Mat Yusof. Masters thesis, Universiti Teknologi MARA.
repository_type	Digital Repository
institution_category	Local University
institution	Universiti Teknologi MARA
building	UiTM Institutional Repository
collection	Online Access
language	English
description	The most recognizable development of compaction test is known as the Standard Proctor Test, which is used to estimate the density value of soils. However, the laboratory concept produced by Proctor (1933) has a few imperfections in determining the value of Maximum Dry Density (MDD) and Optimum Moisture Content (OMC). It also has some imperfections in application where the method that is applied in the field and laboratory to measure the density of soil are different. The compaction technique applied on the subgrade road layer for cohesive soil is by using roller compactor machine (static technique) while the technique that is applied in the laboratory is by dynamic compaction method. Thus, a new laboratory compaction method has been developed to determine the density, shear strength, and CBR values by using Standard Static Packing Pressure (SSPP) efforts in order to close the gap between laboratory and field data. In this study seven (7) types of soil based on plasticity chart were tested in several tests to obtain the important engineering parameter such as density (pd), water content (wc), shear strength (Cu), compaction energy (E) and CBR value of soils. Based on the laboratory results, it was found that the SSPP method is more practical and sensible than the dynamic compaction …
format	Thesis
author	Mat Yusof, Doris Asmani
spellingShingle	Mat Yusof, Doris Asmani Comparative study on standard static packing pressure (SSPP) and standard proctor laboratory compaction methods / Doris Asmani Mat Yusof
author_facet	Mat Yusof, Doris Asmani
author_sort	Mat Yusof, Doris Asmani
title	Comparative study on standard static packing pressure (SSPP) and standard proctor laboratory compaction methods / Doris Asmani Mat Yusof
title_short	Comparative study on standard static packing pressure (SSPP) and standard proctor laboratory compaction methods / Doris Asmani Mat Yusof
title_full	Comparative study on standard static packing pressure (SSPP) and standard proctor laboratory compaction methods / Doris Asmani Mat Yusof
title_fullStr	Comparative study on standard static packing pressure (SSPP) and standard proctor laboratory compaction methods / Doris Asmani Mat Yusof
title_full_unstemmed	Comparative study on standard static packing pressure (SSPP) and standard proctor laboratory compaction methods / Doris Asmani Mat Yusof
title_sort	comparative study on standard static packing pressure (sspp) and standard proctor laboratory compaction methods / doris asmani mat yusof
publishDate	2012
url	http://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/17705/ http://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/17705/2/TM_DORIS%20ASMANI%20MAT%20YUSOF%20EC%2012_5.pdf
first_indexed	2023-09-18T22:58:53Z
last_indexed	2023-09-18T22:58:53Z
_version_	1777418039223910400

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

Similar Items