Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Meissa Fall1, Dthi Sarr1, Makhaly Ba1, Etienne Berbinau2, Jean-Louis Borel2,
Mapath Ndiaye1, Cheikh H. Kane1
Laboratoire de Mcanique et Modlisation, UFR Sciences de lIngnieur, University of Thies, Thies, Senegal
2
RAZEL sa, Christ de Sarclay, 3 rue Ren razel, Orsay cedex, Orsay, France
E-mail: meissa.fall@univ-thies.sn
Received August 8, 2011; revised September 13, 2011; accepted September 22, 2011
Abstract
Gravel lateritic soils are intensively used in road geotechnical engineering. This material is largely representative of engineering soil all around the tropical African Countries [1,2]. Gravel lateritic soils from parts of
Burkina Faso and Senegal (West Africa) are used to determine the evolution of the geotechnical parameters
from one to ten cycles of modified Proctor compaction. This test procedure is non-common for geotechnical
purposes and it was found suitable and finally adopted to describe how these problematic soils behave when
submitted to a multi-cyclic set of Modified Proctor compactions (OPM) [3,4]. On another hand, we propose
a correlation between the traffic and the cycles of compaction considered as the repeated load. From that, this
work shows the generation of active fine particles, the decrease of the CBR index and also the mechanical
characteristics (mainly the Young Modulus, E) that contribute at least to the main deformation of the road
structure.
Keywords: Optimum Moisture Content (OPM), Multi-Cyclic Compaction, CBR, AASHTO, Fines, Lateritic
Soil, Road Structure
1. Introduction
This paper is primarily intended to demonstrate that under
unpredicted traffic and repeated loading, properties of gravel lateritic soils used as pavement layer can significantly
change. According to [5-10], gravel lateritic soils are very
sensitive to an exceptional variation of stresses under which they are subjected in a pavement structural fill. Thus, it
is expected that most of the physical and mechanical properties of gravel lateritic soils evolves during the design life.
It is then important to find an adequate method of
testing that can deal with such behavior already known in
the literature. It is then necessary to perform usual characterization tests on these kinds of materials by studying
the evolution of their main properties under traffic such
as gradation, plasticity, CBR (Californian Bearing ration), Los Angeles loss, Shear strength (UCT), etc.
To do this, tests are conducted so that they can simulate multi-cyclic axial loading generated by traffic loads.
The first cycle of OPM compaction (cycle 1) corresponds
Copyright 2011 SciRes.
M. FALL
60
ET AL.
Table 1. Values of material properties at cycle 0 (raw material), (The main Lateritic Soils used in this paper are sampled from
Burkina Faso between Boromo and Bobo Dioulasso).
(fines) % < 80 m
14
16
15
18
20
Pk 247
Pk 272 + 600
Pk 284
Pk 288
Pk 342
PI (%)
15
17
10
15
12
Table 2a. Summary of the test results depending on the soil provenance and the cycles of compaction.
Soil Tests
Compaction
Other Soil Characteristics
Soil provenance Cycles of Modified Proctor Grain size distribution Atterberg Limits
Compaction
(Pk)
(m)
(f)
LL
LP
PI
VBS CBR Evolution
E
d max. Wopt. (f)
s
(%) (kN/m3)
(%)
(%)
(MPa)
(kN/m3) (%) % < 5 % < 2 % < 0.08 (%) (%)
mm mm
mm
Pk
272+600
Pk
284
Pk
247
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
21.6
22.8
23.3
22.6
23.2
23.2
22.2
21.5
21.2
22.3
8.7
7.7
8.2
10.1
10.3
8.4
9.4
9.8
9.3
7.6
40.4
43.7
60.5
55.4
60.0
58.0
69.5
45.9
42.9
31.9
30.4
14.4
31.4
31.5
24.8
20.0
24.4
22.1
17.2
16.3
17.3
23.1
25.0
27.2
29.9
33.3
37.1
44.1
45.2
46.2
33.5
35.9
39.4
41.4
43.3
46.1
48.0
52.6
56.0
57.1
13.4
14.2
15.4
16.6
17.4
19.4
20.3
21.8
24.7
26.6
20.5
21.7
24.0
24.8
26.0
26.7
27.6
30.8
31.3
30.6
2.75
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
23.5
23.4
23.5
23.9
23.8
24.4
23.1
23.4
22.5
22.3
8.1
9.3
8.6
8.7
8.0
7.8
8.4
8.7
9.8
7.6
23.7
33.8
72.7
51.0
57.7
57.3
59.8
61.0
44.7
34.4
10.0
12.1
34.4
20.0
19.0
21.8
18.8
26.5
22.6
19.6
20.3
23.4
25.5
25.0
29.7
31.5
39.6
40.0
45.2
47.0
43.5
49.5
46.8
49.6
52.3
52.7
53.3
57.0
62.3
64.0
14.2
15.4
16.6
19.1
18.1
18.1
18.9
22.5
21.3
24.0
29.3
34.1
30.2
30.5
34.2
34.6
34.4
34.5
41.0
40.0
2.81
2.47
2.45
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
22,5
22.7
23.3
23.8
23.7
8.7
7.7
7.1
6.7
6.7
63.8
71.4
58.3
40.5
54.7
38.6
28.5
40.0
45.1
47.5
33.9
41.8
52.4
13.4
16.0
22.2
20.5
25.8
30.2
2.87
2.32
2.12
2.15
Rc
(UCT)
(MPa)
88
93
95
101
99
87
54
49
30
29
100
106
108
115
113
99
61
56
34
33
26.90
16.96
59.50
31.50
44.90
61.10
57.56
45.98
34.25
29.06
0.15
0.12
0.35
0.16
0.35
0.34
0.31
0.28
0.15
1.10
2.15
1.95
1.8
1.75
1.7
96
103
110
102
113
76
48
47
35
36
100
107
115
106
118
79
50
49
36
38
19.45
23.43
26.76
45.87
76.98
40.50
15.90
16.98
14.00
14.50
0.23
0.25
0.36
0.39
0.45
0.37
0.22
0.18
0.16
0.16
1.55
1.25
1.1
75
84
54
50.7
56
54
48
100
112
72
68
75
72
64
35.71
54.17
0.15
0.28
1.7
1.65
GM
M. FALL
61
ET AL.
Table 2b. Summary of the test results depending on the soil provenance and the cycles of compaction. * (Empty cells indicate
insufficient quantity of materials for further testing. Multi-cyclic compaction uses a large amount of material per cycle. In this
case, several samples were compacted at the same water content in order to provide enough amount of material for each cycle).
Soil Tests
Pk
288
Pk
342
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Compaction
Modified Proctor
d max.
(kN/m3)
23.0
22.6
23.6
24.2
24.0
22.5
22.2
21.5
21.2
20.4
23.4
23.4
23.3
23.7
23.6
Atterberg Limits
(f)
(m)
Wopt.
(f)
(%) % < 5 % < 2 % < 0.08
mm
mm mm
LL
(%)
LP
(%)
PI
VBS CBR Evolution
E
Rc (UCT)
s
(%) (kN/m3)
(%)
(%)
(MPa) (MPa)
7.1
9.3
8.1
7.6
8.6
11.8
9.4
9.8
9.3
9.3
7.3
7.4
5.5
5.7
6.8
26.2
30.3
31.0
34.7
42.8
43.8
47.4
49.6
11.8
16.4
17.4
18.1
19.4
22.9
26.4
26.5
29.3
30.2
2.73
2.5
2.39
2.25 81
1.9
1.8
1.75
100
28.2
35.3
2.87
2.71
2.33
1
84
1.25 90
0.9 97
105
95
100
107
115
125
113
58.4
43.4
44.5
44.0
60.1
57.0
58.9
44.7
39.7
33.6
43.7
50.7
50.4
15.9
19.7
22.1
21.0
25.4
19.8
18.1
20.4
14.6
18.6
33.7
39.7
38.8
15.60
23.15
15.60
32.30
32.40
28.70
25.32
20.50
22.30
18.15
33.33
25.00
0.18
0.20
0.18
0.38
0.32
0.32
0.35
0.25
0.11
0.12
0.11
0.11
10
3. Interpretation of Results
3.1. Generation of Fine particles and Changing
in Characteristics of Consistency
As shown by figures below, the transition between first
to 10th cycles contributes to a strong generation of fine
particles, as well as a gradual increase of plasticity (Figure 1). The amount of fines particles (% < 80 m) increases from 17% (which is the limit generally accepted
for such materials) for the first cycle and reaches 46%
for the 10th cycle. From the first to the 10th cycle, plasticity of materials also changes from 21% to 31% for the
sample of Pk 247 and from 29% to 40% for the sample
of Pk 272 + 600.
The Figure 2 gives the results of Los Angeles tests
performed on gravel lateritic soils samples. The test was
conducted in a particular procedure that is unconventional. In the case of the strict application of the standard, the test is performed in the fraction 10/14 with a
mass of test sample of 5 kg. For our purposes, we took
care to fill the hollow steel cylinder with the total fraction
Copyright 2011 SciRes.
M. FALL
62
ET AL.
Figure 1. Evolution des fines (% < 80 m) et de la plasti-cit (PI) (Pk 272 + 600).
GM
M. FALL
63
ET AL.
Figure 3. Comparison between results (<0.08 mm et PI (%)) and specification of the WAS.
Figure 4 shows the variation of CBR values with the
cycles of modified Proctor compaction. Table 3 below
reminds technical recommendations contained in current
textbooks approved by the CEBTP, the BCEOM and the
LCPC [11] for the use of gravel lateritic soils as base
courses and in the case of a T1 to T2 traffic level:
PI (%)
% inf. at 80 m (%)
CEBTP
80
<15
4 20
CEBTP-LCPC
80
<15
<15
CEBTP-BCEOM
80
<15
<15
GM
M. FALL
64
ET AL.
GM
M. FALL
ET AL.
65
66
M. FALL
ET AL.
3.5. Conclusions
Taking into account the fact that the measured values of
CBR and likewise those of the moduli decrease significantly after several cycles of compaction, we may well
conclude that thickness of the pavement during its life
will also differ significantly from the initial designed
thickness. The immediate conclusion to this is that:
The design life of the pavement is significantly reduced and lead to premature ruin of the structure,
Initial thicknesses should be higher if the designer
was well aware of these behaviors.
N m g h
Vm
N: number of blows; m: mass of the hammer; g: acceleration due to gravity; h: height of drop of the hammer
and Vm: volume of the Proctor or CBR mold.
GM
M. FALL
67
ET AL.
EC
K gh
K Q TJM
Vm
Et
y log10 x S '
K C 1
K t 1
KC 2
Kt 2
K C 3
K t 3
Kc = 4kt, let
TJM0 = 10 and TJMi (i = 1, 2, 3n)
E0 = 8 761,5
y log10 y S
Q g
10
275
550
825
1100
1375
1650
1925
2200
2475
2750
En (KJ)
2635
5276
7904
10,539
13,174
15,809
18,443
21,078
23,713
26,348
10
TC0
TC1
TC2
TC3
TC4
TC5
14
27
68
164
342
Et (kJ)
51,908
363,354
700,754
1,764,862
4,256,431
8,876,217
Progression factor
13.7
34
82
171
Table 6. Increase in the number of heavy load vehicles and energy of compaction.
TJM
10
54
126
192
kt
5.4
12.6
19.2
Ec (kJ)
8761
203,435
438,073
639,587
kc
23
50
73
GM
M. FALL
68
ET AL.
We can write :
EC i
TJM i
K C 4 Kt 4.
E0
TJM 0
6. Acknowledgements
Hence,
EC i
4 E0
TJM 0
.TJM i
4 E0
10
4.3. Conclusions
We note well that the multi-cyclic compaction simulate
exactly the effect of traffic loading. In this sense, observe
that increase in traffic can be simulated by an increase in
the compacting cycle. At the end of compaction, the traffic reaches very high level (T4 to T5).
The authors would like to acknowledge again the Entreprise Jean Lefebvre sa for their guidance and valuable
input in this research project. The lateritic soils from
Burkina Faso (from Boromo to Bobo Dioulasso) were
collected by the help of the Entreprise Razel and sended
to us by the Razels Team of Bamoko (Mali). By this, we
thank so much all of them for their ability of making the
in situ samplings as well as we desire for the laboratorys
tests. The large amount of materials used for this work
has made the L2M laboratorys technicians as busy as
they never be, the authors would like to thank them for
their important contributions.
7. References
[1]
[2]
[3]
T. Aashto, Standard Method of Test for Moisture- Density Relations of Soils Using a 2.5-kg (5.5-lb) Rammer
and a 305-mm (12-in.) Drop. In Standard Specifications
for Transportation Materials and Methods of Sampling
and Testing, American Association of State Highway
5. Conclusions
Results show clearly that under multi-cyclic compaction,
gravel lateritic soils generate fine particles, which increase their plasticity and drop their CBR value. Similarly, it is clearly shown that multi-cyclic compaction
Copyright 2011 SciRes.
GM
M. FALL
ET AL.
[5]
[6]
[7]
G. Sweere, P. Galjaard and T. Tjong, Engineering Behaviour of Laterites in Road Constructions, International Conference on Geomechn in Tropical Soils, Singapore, Vol. 1, 1988, pp. 421-427.
[8]
69
GM