Laboratory Compaction of Soils using a Small Mold Procedure
M. Díaz-Zorita*,a,
J. H. Groveb and
E. Perfectc
a EEA INTA General Villegas, CC 153 (B6230 ZBA), General Villegas, Buenos Aires, Argentina
b Dep. of Agronomy, Univ. of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40546-0091
c Dep. of Geological Sciences, Univ. of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996-1410

View larger version (33K):
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1. Schematic of the equipment used for the small mold procedure.
|
|

View larger version (20K):
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2. Examples of laboratory soil compaction curves for Proctor and small mold procedures determined at a compactive effort of 540 kJ m-3 (Proctor mold procedure) or 545 kJ m-3 (Small mold procedure). Data are for site C.
|
|

View larger version (27K):
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3. Effect of four compactive efforts (CE, kJ m-3) on the relationships between Maxb or SWCMax values estimated using the standard Proctor test procedure and the small mold technique.
|
|

View larger version (16K):
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4. Effect of clay content on the maximum bulk density ( Maxb) parameter determined using the standard Proctor test or the small mold procedure at a compactive effort of 545 kJ m-3 and predicted values from Eq. [4] for two sand contents.
|
|

View larger version (19K):
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5. Effect of clay content on water content at maximum bulk density (SWCMax) parameter determined using the standard Proctor test or the small mold procedure at a compactive effort of 545 kJ m-3 and predicted values from Eq. [5] for the two laboratory compaction procedures.
|
|
Copyright © 2001 by the Soil Science Society of America.