Evaluation of a Soil in Terms of Resistance to Simple Compression, Tensile Strength for Diametral Compression and Resilience Module, Considering Results of Different Types of Compactation

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Silva, Albaniza Maria da
Data de Publicação: 2016
Outros Autores: Lucena, Lêda Christiane de Figueirêdo Lopes, Lucena, Adriano Elísio de Figueiredo Lopes, Marinho Filho, Paulo Germano Tavares, Costa, Laiana Ferreira da, Ferreira, Josyverton
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Anuário do Instituto de Geociências (Online)
Texto Completo: https://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/aigeo/article/view/7012
Resumo: In Brazil, the laboratory testing of Proctor compaction is regulated by the Brazilian Association of Technical Standards (NBR 7182/1986) and the National Department of Infrastructure and Transport (DNIT - ME 164/2013 and DNIT - ME 162/1994). The standards show various alternatives for performing compaction Proctor, however, it appears that the mechanical behavior of a compacted soil is a function of void content, degree of saturation and especially soil structure directly influenced by the compaction process adopted. This study aimed to compare four different compactation processes (mechanical with reuse, manual with reuse, manual without reuse and manual without reused with wetting of the sample 24 hours prior to compactation) using the intermediate energy, with the intention of assessing their effect on properties of compressive strength, tensile strength and resiliency of a soil. The experimental phase was divided into three (3) stages: Soil characterization tests, Proctor compaction tests and mechanical tests (resistance to simple compression - RCS, Tensile Strength for Diametral Compression - RT and Resilience Module - MR). Through this research, it was found that the type of compactation used exerted a significant influence on the results, because in general the RT values, RCS and MR obtained in manual compactation without reuse 24h were higher than the other compactions. 
id UFRJ-21_72f6bf7b3ba75d465fc042e937ee503a
oai_identifier_str oai:www.revistas.ufrj.br:article/7012
network_acronym_str UFRJ-21
network_name_str Anuário do Instituto de Geociências (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Evaluation of a Soil in Terms of Resistance to Simple Compression, Tensile Strength for Diametral Compression and Resilience Module, Considering Results of Different Types of CompactationAvaliação de um Solo em Termos de Resistência à Compressão Simples, Resistência à Tração por Compressão Diametral e Módulo de Resiliência, Considerando Resultados de Diferentes Tipos de CompactaçãoCompactation Proctor; Types of compactation; Mechanical properties.Compactação Proctor; Tipos de compactação; Propriedades mecânicas.In Brazil, the laboratory testing of Proctor compaction is regulated by the Brazilian Association of Technical Standards (NBR 7182/1986) and the National Department of Infrastructure and Transport (DNIT - ME 164/2013 and DNIT - ME 162/1994). The standards show various alternatives for performing compaction Proctor, however, it appears that the mechanical behavior of a compacted soil is a function of void content, degree of saturation and especially soil structure directly influenced by the compaction process adopted. This study aimed to compare four different compactation processes (mechanical with reuse, manual with reuse, manual without reuse and manual without reused with wetting of the sample 24 hours prior to compactation) using the intermediate energy, with the intention of assessing their effect on properties of compressive strength, tensile strength and resiliency of a soil. The experimental phase was divided into three (3) stages: Soil characterization tests, Proctor compaction tests and mechanical tests (resistance to simple compression - RCS, Tensile Strength for Diametral Compression - RT and Resilience Module - MR). Through this research, it was found that the type of compactation used exerted a significant influence on the results, because in general the RT values, RCS and MR obtained in manual compactation without reuse 24h were higher than the other compactions. No Brasil, o ensaio laboratorial de compactação Proctor é normatizado pela Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas (NBR 7182/1986) e pelo Departamento Nacional de Infraestrutura e Transportes (DNIT -- ME 164/2013 e DNIT -- ME 162/1994). As normas apresentam diferentes alternativas para executar a compactação Proctor, no entanto, verifica-se que o comportamento mecânico de um solo compactado é função do índice de vazios, do grau de saturação e principalmente da estrutura do solo que é diretamente influenciada pelo processo de compactação adotado. Este trabalho teve como objetivo comparar quatro processos distintos de compactação (mecânica com reúso, manual com reúso, manual sem reúso e manual sem reúso com umedecimento da amostra 24 horas antes da compactação), utilizando a energia intermediária, com a pretensão de avaliar os seus efeitos nas propriedades de resistência à compressão, resistência à tração e resiliência de um solo. A fase experimental foi dividida em três (3) etapas: ensaios de caracterização do solo, ensaios de compactação Proctor e ensaios mecânicos (Resistência à Compressão Simples - RCS, Resistência à Tração por Compressão Diametral - RT e Módulo de Resiliência - MR). Por meio dessa pesquisa, constatou-se que o tipo de compactação utilizado exerceu uma influência significativa nos resultados, pois de um modo geral os valores de RT , RCS e MR obtidos na compactação manual sem reúso 24h foram superiores as demais compactações.Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro2016-10-03info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/aigeo/article/view/701210.11137/2016_3_41_47Anuário do Instituto de Geociências; Vol 39, No 3 (2016); 41-47Anuário do Instituto de Geociências; Vol 39, No 3 (2016); 41-471982-39080101-9759reponame:Anuário do Instituto de Geociências (Online)instname:Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ)instacron:UFRJporhttps://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/aigeo/article/view/7012/5579Copyright (c) 2016 Anuário do Instituto de Geociênciashttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSilva, Albaniza Maria daLucena, Lêda Christiane de Figueirêdo LopesLucena, Adriano Elísio de Figueiredo LopesMarinho Filho, Paulo Germano TavaresCosta, Laiana Ferreira daFerreira, Josyverton2017-02-15T18:21:53Zoai:www.revistas.ufrj.br:article/7012Revistahttps://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/aigeo/indexPUBhttps://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/aigeo/oaianuario@igeo.ufrj.br||1982-39080101-9759opendoar:2017-02-15T18:21:53Anuário do Instituto de Geociências (Online) - Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Evaluation of a Soil in Terms of Resistance to Simple Compression, Tensile Strength for Diametral Compression and Resilience Module, Considering Results of Different Types of Compactation
Avaliação de um Solo em Termos de Resistência à Compressão Simples, Resistência à Tração por Compressão Diametral e Módulo de Resiliência, Considerando Resultados de Diferentes Tipos de Compactação
title Evaluation of a Soil in Terms of Resistance to Simple Compression, Tensile Strength for Diametral Compression and Resilience Module, Considering Results of Different Types of Compactation
spellingShingle Evaluation of a Soil in Terms of Resistance to Simple Compression, Tensile Strength for Diametral Compression and Resilience Module, Considering Results of Different Types of Compactation
Silva, Albaniza Maria da
Compactation Proctor; Types of compactation; Mechanical properties.
Compactação Proctor; Tipos de compactação; Propriedades mecânicas.
title_short Evaluation of a Soil in Terms of Resistance to Simple Compression, Tensile Strength for Diametral Compression and Resilience Module, Considering Results of Different Types of Compactation
title_full Evaluation of a Soil in Terms of Resistance to Simple Compression, Tensile Strength for Diametral Compression and Resilience Module, Considering Results of Different Types of Compactation
title_fullStr Evaluation of a Soil in Terms of Resistance to Simple Compression, Tensile Strength for Diametral Compression and Resilience Module, Considering Results of Different Types of Compactation
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of a Soil in Terms of Resistance to Simple Compression, Tensile Strength for Diametral Compression and Resilience Module, Considering Results of Different Types of Compactation
title_sort Evaluation of a Soil in Terms of Resistance to Simple Compression, Tensile Strength for Diametral Compression and Resilience Module, Considering Results of Different Types of Compactation
author Silva, Albaniza Maria da
author_facet Silva, Albaniza Maria da
Lucena, Lêda Christiane de Figueirêdo Lopes
Lucena, Adriano Elísio de Figueiredo Lopes
Marinho Filho, Paulo Germano Tavares
Costa, Laiana Ferreira da
Ferreira, Josyverton
author_role author
author2 Lucena, Lêda Christiane de Figueirêdo Lopes
Lucena, Adriano Elísio de Figueiredo Lopes
Marinho Filho, Paulo Germano Tavares
Costa, Laiana Ferreira da
Ferreira, Josyverton
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Silva, Albaniza Maria da
Lucena, Lêda Christiane de Figueirêdo Lopes
Lucena, Adriano Elísio de Figueiredo Lopes
Marinho Filho, Paulo Germano Tavares
Costa, Laiana Ferreira da
Ferreira, Josyverton
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Compactation Proctor; Types of compactation; Mechanical properties.
Compactação Proctor; Tipos de compactação; Propriedades mecânicas.
topic Compactation Proctor; Types of compactation; Mechanical properties.
Compactação Proctor; Tipos de compactação; Propriedades mecânicas.
description In Brazil, the laboratory testing of Proctor compaction is regulated by the Brazilian Association of Technical Standards (NBR 7182/1986) and the National Department of Infrastructure and Transport (DNIT - ME 164/2013 and DNIT - ME 162/1994). The standards show various alternatives for performing compaction Proctor, however, it appears that the mechanical behavior of a compacted soil is a function of void content, degree of saturation and especially soil structure directly influenced by the compaction process adopted. This study aimed to compare four different compactation processes (mechanical with reuse, manual with reuse, manual without reuse and manual without reused with wetting of the sample 24 hours prior to compactation) using the intermediate energy, with the intention of assessing their effect on properties of compressive strength, tensile strength and resiliency of a soil. The experimental phase was divided into three (3) stages: Soil characterization tests, Proctor compaction tests and mechanical tests (resistance to simple compression - RCS, Tensile Strength for Diametral Compression - RT and Resilience Module - MR). Through this research, it was found that the type of compactation used exerted a significant influence on the results, because in general the RT values, RCS and MR obtained in manual compactation without reuse 24h were higher than the other compactions. 
publishDate 2016
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2016-10-03
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/aigeo/article/view/7012
10.11137/2016_3_41_47
url https://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/aigeo/article/view/7012
identifier_str_mv 10.11137/2016_3_41_47
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/aigeo/article/view/7012/5579
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2016 Anuário do Instituto de Geociências
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2016 Anuário do Instituto de Geociências
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Anuário do Instituto de Geociências; Vol 39, No 3 (2016); 41-47
Anuário do Instituto de Geociências; Vol 39, No 3 (2016); 41-47
1982-3908
0101-9759
reponame:Anuário do Instituto de Geociências (Online)
instname:Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ)
instacron:UFRJ
instname_str Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ)
instacron_str UFRJ
institution UFRJ
reponame_str Anuário do Instituto de Geociências (Online)
collection Anuário do Instituto de Geociências (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Anuário do Instituto de Geociências (Online) - Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv anuario@igeo.ufrj.br||
_version_ 1797053536306987008

Registros relacionados