Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Nuclear density gauge compaction testing alternatives: synthesis and critical analysis

Nuclear density gauge compaction testing alternatives: synthesis and critical analysis The costs of training, licensing and security for agencies using the nuclear density gauge (NDG) have become increasingly onerous for public engineering agencies, leading them to seek less expensive alternatives to conduct compaction testing. The study focused on three comparators: difference in approaches between tested devices and methods, the setting of targets for modulus stiffness devices and the examination of reported accuracy and reliability. This paper’s objective is to summarize the reported results for each alternative and provide the details of the findings. The paper finds that previous research has been almost exclusively focused on laboratory testing and is nearly devoid of authoritative information on field test performance parameters such as repeatability and time to complete a field test. It concludes that research is needed that includes a broad set of testing methods and equipment on the same set of soil conditions. The paper’s primary contribution is to consolidate and critically analyze the results of the current compaction testing research and benchmark the state-of-the-practice in field compaction testing. This paper does provide comparisons without intent to identify a “best” alternative because each device is adapted to specific soil conditions. Testing agencies may require differing devices based on budget, manpower and training. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Structural Integrity and Maintenance Taylor & Francis

Nuclear density gauge compaction testing alternatives: synthesis and critical analysis

Download PDF

Nuclear density gauge compaction testing alternatives: synthesis and critical analysis

Abstract

The costs of training, licensing and security for agencies using the nuclear density gauge (NDG) have become increasingly onerous for public engineering agencies, leading them to seek less expensive alternatives to conduct compaction testing. The study focused on three comparators: difference in approaches between tested devices and methods, the setting of targets for modulus stiffness devices and the examination of reported accuracy and reliability. This paper’s objective is to...
Loading next page...
 
/lp/taylor-francis/nuclear-density-gauge-compaction-testing-alternatives-synthesis-and-b2gnlz55kr
Publisher
Taylor & Francis
Copyright
© 2019 Korea Institute for Structural Maintenance and Inspection
ISSN
2470-5322
eISSN
2470-5314
DOI
10.1080/24705314.2019.1603192
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The costs of training, licensing and security for agencies using the nuclear density gauge (NDG) have become increasingly onerous for public engineering agencies, leading them to seek less expensive alternatives to conduct compaction testing. The study focused on three comparators: difference in approaches between tested devices and methods, the setting of targets for modulus stiffness devices and the examination of reported accuracy and reliability. This paper’s objective is to summarize the reported results for each alternative and provide the details of the findings. The paper finds that previous research has been almost exclusively focused on laboratory testing and is nearly devoid of authoritative information on field test performance parameters such as repeatability and time to complete a field test. It concludes that research is needed that includes a broad set of testing methods and equipment on the same set of soil conditions. The paper’s primary contribution is to consolidate and critically analyze the results of the current compaction testing research and benchmark the state-of-the-practice in field compaction testing. This paper does provide comparisons without intent to identify a “best” alternative because each device is adapted to specific soil conditions. Testing agencies may require differing devices based on budget, manpower and training.

Journal

Journal of Structural Integrity and Maintenance – Taylor & Francis

Published: Apr 3, 2019

Keywords: Compaction; nuclear density gauge; density; stiffness

References

  • Evaluation of nonnuclear soil moisture and density devices for field quality control
  • Field testing a wireless sensor network for reactive environmental monitoring [soil moisture measurement]
  • Laboratory evaluation of GeoGauge for compaction control
  • Optimizing the value of soil compaction testing quality assurance and control using stochastic life cycle cost comparative and statistical analysis
  • Using a complex-impedance measuring instrument to determine in situ soil unit weight and moisture content
  • A comparison of density-based and modulus-based in situ test measurement for compaction control
  • Improving quality assurance of MSE wall and bridge approach earthwork compaction
  • Use of stiffness for evaluating compactness of cohesive pavement geomaterials
  • An experimental and theoretical investigation of the Clegg Hammer
  • Comparison of light weight deflectometer measurements for pavement foundation materials
  • Assessing soil stiffness of stabilized pavement foundations