1.0 GROUND IMPROVEMENT Ground Improvement Subcommittee.

INTRODUCTION During the past decade (1987-1997), soil improvement has come of age, and reached a new level of acceptance in the geotechnical community. t is now routinely considered on most pro!ects where poor or unsta"le soils are encountered, especially on sites underlain "y suspect or uncontrolled fills. #or sites underlain "y deep layers of fill or soft or loose soils, conventional practice was to either remove and replace the unsuita"le soils, or "ypass them with e$pensive deep foundations. %oday, in-situ improvement is a via"le alternative, and in most instances proves to "e the most economical means to mitigate an undesira"le situation. Dynamic compaction is "ecoming one of the more routinely used ground improvement techni&ues "ecause of its relatively low cost, especially when improving large areas. %he dynamic compaction mar'et is "ecoming a mature mar'et, with steady growth e$pected "ecause of the num"er of old fills site that were previously "ypassed when "eing considered for development %he vi"ro-compaction mar'et, in con!unction with stone columns, has also achieved universal professional acceptance, and has seen a steady growth "ecause of more concerns a"out li&uefaction, and repairing areas damaged "y the two recent (alifornia earth&ua'es %he vi"ro-compaction industry now uses more powerful vi"rators, that allow for wider pro"e spacings, and more economical improvement %he compaction grouting mar'et is also in a mature mar'etplace, with many different applications availa"le other than the more routine fi$es for soft ground tunneling and settlement related pro"lems, "oth to remediate failures and in advance of new construction. %he use of prefa"ricated vertical drains (new terminology for wic' drains) have also witnessed phenomenal growth during the past decade, especially on transportation pro!ects and civil pro!ects underlain "y thic' compressi"le deposits )ore efficient e&uipment has made *+ drains more economical to install in 1997 than in 198,. -last-densification, "ecause of the small num"er of sites suited for the techni&ue, has not "een used as much in the .nited /tates as other ground improvement techni&ues, however pro!ects completed this decade in )assachusetts and 0ashington /tate indicate that "last-densification is effective in improving granular deposits to at least 12 m (122 ft) or more. %he following sections present the fundamental design and installation concepts of these densification techni&ues, how the techni&ues have developed "etween 1987 and 1997, and recent and current research conducted to advance our understanding of their design and performance.
1.1 DYNAMIC COMPACTION

INTRODUCTION

Due to its success in o"taining significant engineering property improvements, as well as the economics of the process, dynamic compaction has evolved into one of the more commonly used ground improvement methods. -ased on dropping a heavy weight from a large distance, dynamic compaction was introduced to the .nited /tates in 19,9 "y the late #renchman, 3ouis )enard. %he 19724s saw development of the techni&ue, particularly in the (hicago area, "y a national geotechnical engineering firm,and nationwide, "y two specialty contractors. %he 19824s saw the startup of several other specialty contractors, with the techni&ue going through ma!or refinements and gaining widespread professional acceptance throughout the geotechnical community .%he ro"ust economy of the mid to late 19824s resulted in pro"a"ly 522 pro!ects completed during that time. %he recession of the late 19824s reduced the num"er of pro!ects dramatically, and it was not until 1995 that the dynamic compaction mar'et recovered. %he 19924s have witne6sed wide spread use of dynamic compaction throughout the entire ../., with an estimated 722 pro!ects completed nationwide to date. %he strong economy of the mid 19924s, coupled with the reali8ation that most of the good "uilding sites have already "een used, has resulted in larger and more diversified types of dynamic compaction pro!ects. (hanges in retail shopping ha"its in the 19924s have resulted in the need for large home improvement stores, super stores, supermar'ets, and discount shopping malls re&uiring large flat areas /ince large undistur"ed areas are sometimes difficult to find in populated areas, dynamic compaction is "eing used routinely to improve old fill sites that will "e used as large retail centers. t is estimated that dynamic compaction has "een used at least 57 times for shopping centers such as 9ome Depots, 0 :3-):;% stores, and <-)arts. %hese companies have stringent settlement criteria, re&uiring either complete removal of undesira"le material, or a ground improvement program designed to enhance the engineering properties of the fill mass to provide an ade&uate foundation. FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPT Dynamic compaction is a procedure of compacting marginal materials in-place without the need for removal. t is used to improve the engineering properties of inplace soils at depth, "oth a"ove and "elow the groundwater level /oil strength is increased, and compressi"ility and settlements are decreased as a result of the densification. %he primary goal of dynamic compaction is to change a heterogeneous soil into one that has more uniform, stronger engineering properties. -asically, dynamic compaction consists of providing high energy impacts at the ground surface "y repeatedly dropping steel or concrete tampers, 7 to 15 tonnes (, -17 tons) in weight from heights ranging from 15 to 11= m (=2- 152 ft), as shown in #ig 1 1-1.

#ig 1.1-1. %ypical dynamic compaction e&uipment. n addition to strengthening and compacting the e$isting fill materials, dynamic compaction, li'e proofrolling, e$poses poc'ets of soft material or materials which are unsuita"le for compaction. %hese areas, when identified during compaction, either need additional treatment or re&uire undercutting and replacement with compacted fill. %he degree of soil improvement depends to a large degree upon the total amount of energy applied to the soil, i.e., the more energy input to the soil, the greater the degree of improvement. %he results of treatment "y dynamic compaction are dramatic and immediate. /urface settlement is typically five to ten percent of the thic'ness of the material "eing treated and is noticed immediately *ore pressure increase is instantaneous, and dissipation usually occurs rapidly> often accompanied "y arising groundwater level or locali8ed "oiling at the surface /trength and compressi"ility, as measured "y in situ tests, are typically improved "y a factor of two to four %he depth of improvement is related to the tamper weight and drop height, with improvement depths of1 to 9 m (12 to 12 ft) "eing common. %he depth of influence is a s&uare-root function of the tamper weight times the drop height, times an empirical factor. %he empirical factor ranges from 2.1 to 2.7, "ut averages a"out 2.7. t is somewhat less (2.=) in landfills and cohesive soils. t is dependant on a num"er of factors including the soil type and stratigraphic features, efficiency or energy loss of lifting?tamping e&uipment, the contact pressure of the tamper, and the method of application of energy : schematic of the process is shown in #ig. 1.1-5. #ig. 1.1-5. %he dynamic (ompaction process (3ucas 1997)

Dynamic compaction is typically performed over a pre-determined grid pattern, with multiple passes over the grid on an offset grid common. /ince grid spacing, num"er of drops per impact point, applied energy and num"er of passes depend upon soil conditions, ground response, and the dissipation of pore water pressure> comprehensive field monitoring and engineering !udgement of ground response is imperative -:/ ( *;@(AD.;A Dynamic compaction is applied in a systematically controlled pattern of drops %he initial impacts are spaced at a distance dictated "y the layer, depth to groundwater, and grain si8e distri"ution on a coordinate grid layout. depth of the compressi"le. nitial grid spacing generally appro$imates the thic'ness of the compressi"le layer. %ypically, 7 to 17 "lows per grid point are applied. nitial grid spacing generally appro$imates the thic'ness of the compressi"le layer. %ypically, 7 to 17 "lows per grid point are applied. nitial grid spacing generally appro$imates the thic'ness of the compressi"le layer. %ypically, 7 to 17 "lows per grid point are applied. @ften, the pro$imity of groundwater or e$cessive crater depth limits the num"er of "lows applied to each

grid to avoid getting the tamper stuc', or to allow for pore water pressure dissipation. /tandard practice is to curtail energy application when crater depth e$ceeds one and a half to two times the height of the tamper, or when the groundwater surface rises into the crater. 0hen this occurs, additional passes after ground leveling, or "ac'filling the crater are re&uired to complete the re&uired num"er of drops. %his first phase of treatment is designed to improve the deeper layers. ncorrect spacing and energy level at this stage could create a dense upper layer ma'ing it difficult or impossi"le to treat loose material "elow. %he initial phase is also called the Bhigh energy phaseB, "ecause the compactive energy is concentrated on a wider grid. (ompletion of the high energy phase is usually followed "y a low energy phase, called Bironing,B to densify the surficial layers in the upper 1.7 m (7 ft). 9ere, the tamper is only raised from 7 to , m (17 to 52 ft), and is dropped on an overlapping grid. :fter each pass, the in1prints are either "ac'filled with the surrounding materials or with off-site material. f the sides of the craters are pushed in, the wor'ing surface is gradually lowered "y an amount proportionate to the densification achieved during each pass n some circumstances, it is necessary to maintain the wor'ing platform at a constant level throughout the wor'. #or instance, in a situation where groundwater is shallow, the craters should "e "ac'filled with imported materials to insure staying a"ove the water ta"le. :t least 1.7 m (7 ft) is generally re&uired "etween the tamping surface and groundwater. f the e$isting ground contains poor "ac'fill materials, as with most landfills, it is desira"le to use imported gravel or crushed stone materials to drive into the trash, essentially producing large diameter columns of compacted stone at the surface. n saturated fine-grained soils, the process is complicated "y the creation of e$cess pore water pressures during compaction, a phenomenon which reduces the effectiveness of the su"se&uent compactive passes unless the pore pressure is ade&uately dissipated .nless there are large voids within a clayey mass, dynamic compaction is not recommended unless the craters are "ac'filled with crushed stone and repounded, creating large diameter columns of compacted stone (dynamic replacement). -ecause of large voids generally associated with landfills, pore pressures dissipate rapidly, and pore pressure "uildup is generally not a pro"lem. ;A3A+:C% /%.D A/ and %A(9C (:3 *:*A;/ %he most widely &uoted and referenced document in dynamic compaction is generally considered to "e the 198, #90: pu"lication "y ;o"ert 3u'as entitled BDynamic (ompaction for 9ighway (onstruction, +ol.1. Design and (onstruction DuidelinesB. : more recent follow up pu"lication to the 198, manual was released in 199, as #90: Deotechnical Angineering (ircular Co.1. %his manual is also "y 3u'as, and provides a more Bcoo'"oo'B approach for use "y the various state D@%s. %he decade following the first %en Eear .pdate has seen several other specialty conferences and several nota"le papers on the state of practice of dynamic compaction in the .nited /tates. %he "i"liographic and reference sections list most of the papers relevant to dynamic compaction presented since 1987. %he main specialty conferences or :/(A :nnual meetings that included papers on dynamic compaction were. Soil Improvement for Earthquake Mitigation, :/(A :nnual (onvention, /an Diego, Cov. 1997, :/(A Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication Co =9. In-Situ Deep Soil Improvement, :/(A :nnual (onvention, :tlanta, Cov. 199=, :/(A Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication Co.=7. Grouting, Soil Improvement and Geosynthetics, :/(A /pecialty (onference, Cew @rleans, #e". 1995, :/(A Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication Co.12. :/(A :nnual (onvention, Cew Eor', #all 1991 In-Situ Soil Improvement Techniques, %as' #orce 57, %ransportation ;esearch -oard?::/9%@, 1992 %here have also "een numerous sectional :/(A meetings that sponsored mini symposiums on ground improvement, most nota"ly Cew Eor', 0ashington, (hicago, Detroit, )adison, 01, and several @;+./ (@hio ;iver +alley) meetings.

APPLICATIONS

%he significant developments in dynamic compaction over the past decade are the e$pansion of the applications, uses, and purposes of dynamic compaction. %he list of applications continues to grow, "ut dynamic compaction has "een used in the following applications. F;educe settlement under new loading F ncrease "earing capacity allowing higher load supporting capacity ;educe need for grade "eams in sla"s-on-grade F:llow use of spread footings in lieu of piles F;educe li&uefaction potential for structures, landfill liners, dams, and em"an'ments F;educe voids in old fills and collapsi"le soils F mprove su"grade for liner applications

FDain air space in sanitary landfills F(ollapse soil voids in limestone terrain and 'arst topography (ollapse old mining features (deep shafts and drifts) FDensify and consolidate landfills for construction of highways or em"an'ments FDensify landfill cells prior to fmal cap to reduce ris' of cap crac'ing (has "een used for conventional landfill cells, as well as for low level radioactive landfill cells) FDensify collapsi"le soils underlying highway right-of-ways in order to reduce pavement distress F;educe the ris' of encountering voids underlying future column locations FDensify dredge material in-situ FDecrease post-placement consolidation time of recently placed deep controlled fills F*rovide level of assurance for certification purposes that structural fill was placed properly if field density test results are inade&uate or missing F ncrease lateral support for future pile foundations for a large shopping mall over a sanitary landfill F;educe ris' of pavement and infrastructure failure over landfills or undesira"le soils F:llow for wet weather fill placement in wet su"grades "y pounding in gravel F3ower a municipal landfill final elevation to permitted limits F ncrease slope sta"ility of future water par' constructed on old la'e "ed F%reat environmentally &uestiona"le sites "y not uncovering or e$posing potentially ha8ardous materials F ncrease point-to-point contact of "oulders in de"ris fills F;ender old mining pits as "uilda"le sites F/ave money "y eliminating conventional undercut and replacement when fills are deeper than a"out 7 ft. F*repare par'ing or product storage su"grade in coal mine spoil. -ecause of the increase in marginal sites within the country, the main application of dynamic compaction, however, is still to minimi8e settlement of compressi"le deposits under new loading. %his primarily .means treatment of old fills, whether they "e granular, slightly cohesive, ru""le, de"ris, or municipal solid waste. %he intent of improving fills is to ma'e a heterogeneous mass, either manmade or natural, a homogeneous mass that has a lower void ratio, a higher shear strength, and therefore a higher "earing capacity. TYPES OF SOIL IMPROVED %he single most determinative factor in the suita"ility of a soil type to "e improved "y dynamic compaction is its a"ility for e$cess pore pressure to dissipate. During dynamic compaction, soil particles are displaced into a tighter configuration or a tighter state of pac'ing. f water is present in the soil voids, an instant rise in pore water pressure occurs. t is necessary for this pressure to dissipate "efore additional densification can occur under repeated high energy drops. f this isn4t allowed to happen, then repeated drops from the tamper only causes displacement of the ground, and not densification :s with the increase in applications of dynamic compaction over the last decade, the types of materials treated "y dynamic compaction have also increased dramatically. @riginally, the predominant soil types considered for dynamic compaction included only granular natural or fill soils. -ut "ecause of the inherent economic advantages involved with the use of dynamic compaction, a multitude of materials have "een improved. %hey include. .ncontrolled fills. /oil types within old fills can include the entire spectrum of natural soils, manmade de"ris, "yproducts, and any com"ination of the three. Dynamic compaction wor's "est, however, on dry granular fills, including sand, gravel, ash, "ric'"ats, roc', shot roc', and steel slag. Dynamic compaction in granular fills is similar to a *roctor compaction test, in that there is a physical displacement of particles into a denser configuration Dynamic compaction produces a low fre&uency vi"ration, in the range of four to ten cycles per second, and it is this low fre&uency e$citation along with this input of energy that reduces void ratio and increases relative density resulting in improved "earing capacity and enhanced settlement characteristics. #or deposits "elow the water ta"le, the vi"rations cause an increase in pore pressure, and after a sufficient num"er of surface impacts, causes a sufficient rise in pore pressure as to induce li&uefaction, very similar to what occurs during earth&ua'es, @nce this occurs, additional energy application is ineffective until the pore pressure dissipates, :dditional pounding following pore pressure dissipation produces more low fre&uency vi"rations that reorgani8es the particles into a denser configuration,

Dynamic compaction has "een used more routinely to improve fine grained fills as well, %hese fills are much more difficult to improve, and re&uire much tighter field control and e$perience, (lays and silts tend to BheaveB after repeated pounding, and if additional pounding continues, can have a detrimental effect on compaction, f heaving occurs, pounding at that point should stop, and the num"er of passes should "e increased with either a reduced drop height or fewer drops per point, : more common techni&ue employed in the ../ over the past decade to improve fine grained sites is to use a dynamic BreplacementB techni&ue. %his techni&ue starts out "y producing a crater "y conventional heavy tamping, "ut instead of either pushing in the craters or "y adding additional imported "ac'fill, the craters are "ac'filled with a B"oneyB or granular "ac'fill. %his "oney material can "e gravel, shotroc', "ric' "ats, reprocessed concrete, or anything that will loc' together under additional heavy tamping. -ecause of the higher permea"ility of this "ac'fill, pore water pressure from the underlying and ad!acent fine grained soils will dissipate more &uic'ly. %his process is repeated until a noticea"le decrease in crater formation occurs. %his techni&ue essentially results in large diameter columns of compacted stone underlying a site or individual column locations. Dynamic compaction is often used in con!unction with other ground improvement techni&ues. : retail site in Cew Gersey was constructed over an old fill which was underlain "y organic soils is an e$ample. 9ere, a vi"roflot was used to install stone columns at each interior footing location, and then the surface deposits at each of these column locations was dynamically compacted (-ayu' and 0al'er 199=).

%here have "een several old steel mill sites that have "een underlain "y steel slag (%roy, CE> Eoungstown, @9> %renton, CG, /t, 3ouis, Aast (hicago, C), /teel slag is generally &uite granular, and responds very well to dynamic compaction. )unicipal /olid 0aste ()/0)H *ost-construction settlements of sanitary and ru""le landfills under em"an'ments are difficult to predict 0ithout site improvement, settlements can sometimes range from 1.7 -=., m (7 -17 ft). %he main causes of settlement in landfill deposits are due toH F)echanical compression due to distortion, "ending, crushing, and reorientation of the materials under self weight, .F-iological decomposition of organic wastes, F*hysio-chemical change such as o$idation, corrosion, and com"ustion, F;avelling of fines into larger voids. Dynamic compaction has "een used e$tensively on )/0 to correct the a"ove causes and for a multitude of reasons !Igain, e$perience is essential in improving )/0, in that grid spacing, weight contact pressure, and num"er of passes are crucial in achieving the desired results 9ighway em"an'ments, roadways, par'ing lots, and even retail structures have all "een constructed on dynamically compacted )/0. n sanitary landfills, settlements are caused either "y compression of the voids or decaying of the trash material over time. Dynamic compaction is effective in reducing the void ratio, and therefore reduces the amount of immediate and long-term settlements after construction. t is also effective in reducing the decaying pro"lem, since collapse of voids means less availa"le o$ygen for decaying process. #uture settlements, however, can still "e e$pected due to a secondary consolidation process, and future decaying of the trash material @f the 12 or so highway dynamic> compaction pro!ects (Drumheller 1995), completed in the ../., over half were underlain "y landfills> either ru""le or sanitary. %hey include pro!ects located in. )anchester, +% )iramar, f3 %inton *alls, CG /pringdale, :; Avansville, C 3afoursche, 3: (oc'eysville, )D Avansville, C #t 3auderdale, #3 %ulsa, @< Davie, #3 Denver, (@ %ampa, #3 @range (ity, (: @'lahoma (ity, @< %renton, CG ;aleigh, C( ;u""le landfills generally have lesser amounts of organics than the sanitary landfills, and are more suita"le to dynamic compaction "ecause of the lower ris' for long-term organic decomposition. : distinction must "e made "etween older landfills and more recent landfills when considering the long-term settlement of the landfill after improvement with dynamic compaction @rganic decomposition has generally already ta'en place in older landfills, and the landfill usually consists of a dar'-colored soil matri$ containing varying amounts of "ottles, metal fragments, wood, and de"ris Decomposition generally ta'es more than 57 to 12 years to occur

#or deposits where "iological decol1l*osition is complete, dynamic compaction has its greatest "enefit. Densification results in a higher unit weight and a reduction in compressi"ility under load with little long-term su"sidence under load. #or recent landfills where organic decomposition is still underway, dynamic compaction increases the unit weight of the soil mass "y collapsing voids and decreasing the void ratio. t will not, however, stop the "iological decomposition, which may result in a loosening of the soil structure followed "y long-term settlements. t is desira"le in highway landfill pro!ects to place a 2. , to 1.7 m (5 -7 ft ) stone or granular "lan'et on the landfill surface prior to the densification process. *lacing a crushed stone "lan'et over a landfill and "ac'filling the resulting craters with additional stone performs several functions. t provides a safe, sta"le wor'ing platform for the crane, it prevents e$posure of the landfill, and acts as a reinforcing mat to "ridge or reduce differential settlement that might occur due to future decomposition within the landfill. %he tamper also drives columns of stone into the gar"age. %hese Bstone columnsB or Bdrive plugsB, although short in length, help to confine the gar"age, forcing it to compress rather than move laterally. (oal )ine /poilH Drumheller and /haffer ( 1997) discuss 19 coal spoil sites in the .. / . that have "een improved "y dynamic compaction. %hey include. %russ Goist *lant Gac'son, <E 1997 /tate *rison *ound, + : 199, /pec 0arehouse 9a8ard, <E 199, /am4s (lu" /cranton, *: 199, (oal 0ash #acility 0ashington, C 1997 (oal *rep *lant *ardee, + : 1997 @ffice -uilding *i'eville, <E 1997 /pec 0arehouse 0ise, +: 1997 /hop (omple$ Aarlington, <E 199= *rep *lant?(onveyor (a"in (ree', 0+199= *ower *lant 3iner *rep (onesville, @9 1991 (oal )ine /hops 0arncliffe, 0+ 1991 A$pressway %ulsa, @< 1987 9igh /chool *i'eville, <E 1988 )cDonald4s 0ise, + : 1988 (oal /ilo )eta, <E 1988 0al-)art 0illiamson, 0+ 1987 nterstatc 1-,7 -irmingham, :3 1981 )ine /hops?Darages )o"erly, )@ 1982 Dynamic compaction methodology in coal spoils varies with the consistency of the coal spoil. /ome spoils are predominantly shotroc' with minor amounts of cohesive material, whereas some spoils are e$actly the opposite, and have much a higher concentration of fines (ontact pressure of the tamper, si8e of weight, and grid spacing are generally considered important factor in coal spoils. Depending upon the nature of the proposed structure, dynamic BreplacementB is sometimes used following the area pass (or passes) at column locations to further reduce the ris' of intolera"le settlements. %he intent of dynamic compaction in coal spoils is to create a raft of densified material = to , m ( 17 52 ft) thic', that should "ridge, or float over deeper pro"lem or wea'er areas. : half million s&uare foot prison in southwest +irginia was constructed over dynamically compacted mine spoil, and then surcharged. /ettlements under the surcharge were well within tolera"le limits, and the pro!ect was allowed to proceed. (ollapsi"le /oilsH ;ollins and <im (199=), Drumheller and /haffer (199,), and Davis (199,) discuss eleven sites in five western states (#ig. 1.1-1) where dynamic compaction was used to improve collapsi"le soils.

#ig.1.1-1. /ome dynamic compaction pro!ects involving collapsi"le silts

(ollapsi"le soils are stiff and strong in their dry natural state, "ut lose strength and undergo significant settlement when they "ecome wet /ettlements associated with collapsi"le soils can lead to e$pensive repairs, either in highway or structure construction. n 1985, the Cew )e$ico 9ighway Department conducted an e$tensive field trial program of various ground improvement techni&ues to improve collapsi"le soils. %he various methods included vi"roflotation, deep mi$ing and compaction, pre-wetting, and dynamic compaction. Dynamic compaction was found to "e the most cost effective, and "ecame the "asis for production wor' to improve three separate sections of - 57 and 1-=2 around :l"u&uer&ue. %a"le 1.1-1 summari8es soil conditions and dynamic compaction parameters of si$ pro!ects involving collapsi"le soils (;ollins and <im 199=)

3i&uefia"le /oils. -ecause dynamic compaction increases relative density, as well as the lateral earth pressure coefficient, it is a useful ground improvement tool to reduce li&uefaction potential. n addition, since it creates partial to full li&uefaction of the soil, the previous strain history of the soil is improved. Dise, et al. (199=), with ../. -ureau of ;eclamation, discuss three large pro!ects where dynamic compaction was used to remediate li&uefia"le soils and improve the seismic sta"ility of several em"an'ment dams. t was used e$tensively at Gac'son 3a'e, 0E Dam (1987), )ormon sland, (: :u$iliary Dam (1992), and /teina'er, (: Dam (199=). Aighteen to 57 tonnes (52 to 12-ton) tampers were employed at all of these dams, and with the e$ception

of initial wor' at Gac'son Dam, all were done with specifically designed 3ampson thumper 3D(-1 72 lifting devices. 0ic' drains and surface drainage trenches were installed in con!unction with dynamic compaction at several sites, and noticea"le enhancement of the results was noted when pore pressures had a chance to dissipate. %he results of the -ureau of ;eclamation4s wor's can "e summari8ed as. .F0ic' drains in con!unction with dynamic compaction enhanced results if installed to full depth re&uiring treatment. ;esults were considered to "e site specific since only small enhancement was noted at Gac'son Dam, whereas considera"le and undenia"le "enefits were noted at /teina'er Dam. .F/urface drainage trenches not only enhanced results, "ut provided e$ploratory and construction o"servation tools. .F-etter results were o"tained when applied energy applied in numerous phases. .F;educe energy-per-drop (applied energy) re&uirements in shallow or confined areas .F%he greatest improvement depth for reducing li&uefaction potential was from the surface to 9 m (58 ft). .F:dditional energy can increase depth of influence to 17 m (=9 ft). .FCoticea"le increases in shear wave velocities and penetration resistances were noted with time. #iner-grained material increases less with time than coarser grained materials. )aterials e$hi"iting plasticity increased less with time than non-plastic materials. Dynamic compaction was used at numerous other locations to reduce li&uefaction in the west, as well as the midwest and east. ;epresentative pro!ects included .F0ater treatment plant at the )e$ican "order !ust south of /an Diego .F*erimeter sand di'e around a "usiness par' in :lameda ()itchell and 0ent8 1991) .F:dult Detention (enter, /anta (ru8, (: (<aldveer 1978) F:irport *erimeter Di'e, *rovo, .% (Drumheller and /haffer 199,) .#t. 3ewis, 0 : :rmy 9ospital (Drumheller 198,) .F#ish 9atchery, Cisa&ually, 0 : (Drumheller 1989) .F(asino ;iver -oat Doc', /t. 3ouis (Drurnheller 199,) . F3andfill 3iner preparation, -oston (Drumheller 1997) During "oth the 199= Corthridge and 1989 3oma *rieta, (alifornia earth&ua'es, the three documented structures on dynamically compacted soils performed well ()itchell and 0ent8 1991) DA@D;:*9 ( 3 ) %/ -asically, dynamic compaction has "een used throughout the entire ../. %he metropolitan areas where dynamic compaction is routinely performed include (hicago, the -altimore-0ashington area> tidewater +irginia> metropolitan Cew Gersey> south #lorida> :l"any, CE> (olum"us, @9> and /t 3ouis. Aach of these areas has had at least five dynamic compaction pro!ects completed, with (hicago, metropolitan Cew Gersey, south #lorida, and the -altimore-0ashington area each having more than forty pro!ects completed over the past 52 years #ig 1.1-= shows representative locations of at least 122 'nown pro!ects (Drumheller 1997) .

#ig. 1.1-= 3ocations of some dynamic compaction *ro!ects

%he ma!ority of the dynamic compaction wor' in the east and )idwest involves improvement of some form of man-placed fill. %he fill sites pro"a"ly outnum"er loose natural soil sites four to one %he wor' in the western ../. generally involves collapsi"le soils or earth&ua'e mitigation to reduce li&uefaction potential. -ecause of scale, the larger pro!ects generally occur in the west, however there have "een several million s&uare foot pro!ects in the east )A%9@D@3@D A/ :CD AJ. *)AC% %he ma!or changes in e&uipment during the past decade are in lifting devices. %he 3ampson3D(-172 thumpers were introduced in the mid 19824s, and have "een used on 17 to 52 !o"s re&uiring heavier tampers. %hey routinely lift tampers heavier than 18 tonnes (52 tons), and have "een used e$clusively on the -ureau of ;eclamation pro!ects since the -ureau usually specifies heavier tampers than are normally used throughout the ../. %ampers heavier than 18 tonnes (52 tons) cannot "e lifted "y conventional cranes since 17 to 17 tonnes (1, to 18 tons) is generally considered to "e "eyond the safe rated single line pull capacity of conventional ../. cranes. (onsultants should consider this during their evaluation, and not specify weights heavier than 17 tonnes ( 1, tons) to ma'e the dynamic compaction method cost-effective. *ounders?tampers in the ../., particularly ones used "y the geotechnical specialty contractors, are generally constructed of steel. /pecifications for tampers in the east and )idwest are generally in the 7 to 11 tonnes (8 to 17 ton) range, with higher tampers specified as su"surface conditions warrant %he ma!ority of the tampers specified in ur"an areas are generally in the 7 to 9 tonne (, to 12 ton) range so as to reduce off-site vi"rations. %he heavier tampers are generally used in the western ../., where deeper and greater improvements are re&uired, and there are no ad!acent "uildings or vi"ration sensitive facilities. CONTRACTING PRACTICES %he contracted wor' in the ../. is split somewhat "y performance specifications and method specifications. /everal engineering firms 'nowledgea"le in dynamic compaction occasionally specify wor' on a method spec "asis where they specify the weight, drop height, num"er of drops, grid spacing, num"er of passes. In these instances, general contractors, demolition contractors, and crane vendors may "id on the wor' with the @wner and engineer sharing in the ris' of the outcome of the wor'. )ethod specs are generally used when state and government agencies are involved. %he ma!ority of the wor', however is still "id on a performance "asis where the specialty contractor agrees to meet a specified acceptance criteria, either a tolera"le settlement criteria, or a specified testing re&uirement %here are a"out five to eight specialty contractors in the ../. that routinely perform dynamic compaction. %hey offer the advantage of e$perience, as well as the availa"ility of different si8e ("oth contact pressure and tonnage) tampers. %hey are generally involved "y the geoteehnical consultant during the engineering investigation ?evaluation regarding the applica"ility of dynamic compaction on a particular pro!ect. /pecialty contractors are responsi"le for the design of the program, which includes energy amounts, tamper?weight selection, grid spacing, drop patterns, and drop se&uencing, and control testing. +erification testing generally is still the responsi"ility 4the owner or engineer. Deneral contractors occasionally underta'e dynamic compaction, "ut generally under the supervision of an e$perienced engineer or agent to the owner, n this manner, ey perform in a true BcontractorB sense, in that they drop the tamper the specified num"er of times from the predetermined drop height, "ut are not responsi"le for the degree of improvement achieved. +A; # (:% @C %A/% CD -ecause )enard introduced Dynamic compaction, as well as the pressuremeter, the ../, in the early 19724s, much of the early verification testing involved the pressuremeter, %he use of the pressuremeter over the past decade has dropped off somewhat, with the most common test "eing the conventional /tandard *enetration %est *%). (one *enetration %ests ((*%) and -ec'er *enetration %ests (-*%) are also fairly common.

*lacement of a static load test is also used, particularly in evaluations of landfills. Drumheller and /haffer (199,) and Drumheller and /haffer (1997) report results of surcharge loads used as static load test in coal spoils in southwest +irginia and a ru""le 1 in )inneapolis, -oth indicate settlements of less than one inch. /tevens et al. (1991) discusses -ureau of ;eclamation4s testing at three western ms, where they supplemented the conventional testing with the following specialty testing techni&ues. .F-orehole /hear %est(-/%) .F)enard pressuremeter test ()*%) .;oc' dilatometers .F/tepped "lade test (/-%) .F/elf"oring pressuremeter test (/-)*%) .#lat plate dilatometer (D)%) .F/pectral analysis of surface waves (/:/0) .Cuclear "orehole geophysics F/eismic topography .F-orehole sonic logging .F/tress captors )onitoring of ground response, however, is pro"a"ly the most important control test during production wor'. f crater depth continues to increase, if unusual ground heave occurs, or if vi"rations increase with drops are all useful tools to determine if the desired achievement is occurring and in modifying a field program. /%;ACD%9 D: C @+A; % )A 3ucas (1997) discusses several case histories of strength gain of dynamically compacted soils over time. %his increase in strength has "een o"served "oth in the la"oratory and in the field, and can "e measured not !ust over wee's or months, "ut over years. %his improvement follows completion of primary consolidation either in natural soils or in deposits that have "een newly stressed such as "y dynamic compaction or other forms of site improvement. %he strength gain and reduction in compressi"ility occurs after e$cess pore pressures dissipate, and it does not seem to "e related to primary compression under an effective stress. 3ucas (1997) discusses dramatic strength gains in "oth granular and cohesive soils in Gac'sonville, #3> (hicago> Angland> 0yoming> and .tah. /trength gains ranging from 17K to 522K have "een o"served, and Dise et al. (199=) indicates that more improvement was o"served in non-cohesive soils rather than fine grained cohesive materials. Cumerous researchers have discussed the strength gain phenomenon. t has "een o"served in other newly stressed soils, and it is not limited to !ust dynamically compacted soils. /econdary consolidation coupled with cementation in granular deposits certainly contri"utes to strength gain> however, the improvements appear to "e much more than can "e attri"uted to these factors /chmertmann (1991) hypothesi8es that the transfer of load from the pore fluid to the soil fa"ric s'eleton "y arching without hydrodynamic water flow appears to "e a realistic e$planation for the "eneficial aging effects. #or conventional dynamic compaction pro!ects where soil improvement is measured immediately or only a short period of time after ground improvement, consideration should "e given to the long term increase in soil properties with time. mprovements of 72 to 122 percent appear reasona"le. #or pro!ects where dynamic compaction is used to reduce li&uefaction and where the earth&ua'e event may not occur for decades, improvements could "e greater than l@@ to 522 percent, depending upon the soil type. n the case of "uildings or em"an'ments to "e constructed shortly after dynamic compaction, only a proportion of the eventual long term "eneficial effects will "e reali8ed prior to construction with the magnitude of the increase in soil properties depending upon the time frame "etween site improvement and the new construction. 3 ) %:% @C/ :CD @##/ %A ;A/%; (% @C/ -ecause of the inherent characteristics of a tamper hitting the ground, dynamic compaction does produce vi"ration concerns. 0ith close monitoring, vi"rations can "e maintained well "elow vi"rations that would cause any cosmetic or structural damage> however, pu"lic awareness of the vi"rations, particularly in residential areas often precludes use of dynamic compaction. - -3 @D;:*9E n addition to those pu"lications referenced in the preceding sections, the following pu"lications on dynamic compaction are recommended. :tu'orala, ..D., 0i!ewic'reme, D., and -utler, ;. (1991). BDround mprovement and %esting of ;andom Dranular #ills and :lluvial /oils.B %ransportation ;esearch -oard> 0ashington, D(. -riaud, G.3., 3iu, ).3., and 3epert, *.9. (1992). B%he 0 :< %est to (hec' the ncrease in /oil /tiffi1ess Due to Dynamic (ompaction.B :/%) /%* 1272, Deotechnic.s. of 0aste #ills -%heory and *ractice, pp. 127155. -utler, ;(. (1991 ). BDround mprovement .sing Dynamic (ompaction.B Deotechnical Cews, pp. 51-57, Gune. (astro, D. +., <eller, %.D., and ;ogers, G.9. (1987). BDround )odification %est

*rogram for /teel (ree' Dam.B /oil mprovement -12-year .pdate, :/(A Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication Co.15, pp. 11,-1,,. (how, E.<., Eong, D.)., Eong, <.E., and 3ee, /.3. (199=) BDynamic (ompaction of 3oose Dranular /oils. Affect of *rint /pacing.B Gournal of Deotechnical Angineering, :/(A, +ol. 152, Co.7, pp. 1117-1111 (how, E.<., Eong, D.)., Eong, <.E., and 3ee, /.3. (1995). BDynamic (ompaction of 3oose /and Deposits.B Gapanese /ociety of /oil )echanics and #oundation Angineering, +ol. 15, Co.=, pp. 91-12,. (how, E.<., Eong, D.)., Eong, <. E., and 3ee, /.3. (1992). B)onitoring ofDynamic (ompaction "y Deceleration )easurements.B (omputer Deotechnology, +ol 12, Co.1, pp. 189-529. Drumheller, G.(. (1991) BDynamic (ompaction .sed in 9ighway (onstruction @ver 3andfills and (ollapsi"le /oils.B :/(A Cational )eeting, Cew Eor' Dumas, G.(., )orel, G.#., and -eaton, C.#. (1991). BDynamic (ompaction .sing /elect #ill Displacement )ethods.B *roceedings of the %hird nternational (onference on (ase 9istories in Deotechnical Angineering, /t. 3ouis, )@, *aper 7.11. Dumas, G.(., -eaton, C#., and )orel, G.#. (199=). BDynamic (ompaction of a /aturated /ilt and /ilty /and : (ase 9istory.B n-/itu Deep /oil mprovement, :/(A Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication Co.=7, pp. 8289. Durrani, )., and +ara'sin, /. (1988). B:pplication of Dynamic Densification %echni&ues in :reas with (ompleted nfrastructure.B nternational Gournal of 9ousing /cience :pplications, +ol. 15, Co.1, pp. 18952=. Difford, D.*., 3andva, :.@., and 9offman, +.(. (1995). B mprovement of a Demolition De"ris 3andfill "y (ompaction.B Anvironmental Deotechnology, -al'ema, ;otterdam, pp. 191-199. 9oleyman, :., and +anneste, D. (1987). B: Cew :pproach to the A$ecution and (ontrol ofDynamic (ompaction.B (ompaction %echnology, %homas %elford, 3ondon. 9ussin, G.D., and :li, /./. (1987). B/oil Densification at the %rident /u"marine #acility.B /oil mprovement -12year .pdate, :/(A Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication Co.15, pp 517-511 <ramer, /.3., and 9olt8, ;.D. (1991). /oil mprovement and #oundation ;emediation with Amphasis on /eismic 9a8ards, .niversity of0ashington, :ugust 1991. 3o, <., Doi, * .3., and 3ee, /.3. (1992). B.nified :pproach to Dround mprovement "y 9eavy %amping.B Gournal of Deotechnical Angineering, :/(A, +ol. 11,, Co.1, pp. 71=-757. 3u'as, ;.D., (1982). BDensification of 3oose Deposits "y *ounding.B Gournalofthe Deotechnical Angineering Division, :/(A, +ol. 12,, Co. D%=, pp. =17-==,. 3u'as, ;. D., (1987). BDensification of a Decomposed 3andfill Deposit.B *roceedings of the Aleventh nternational /oil )echanics and #oundation Angineering (onference, /an #rancisco, pp. 1757-1758. 3u'as, ;.D., (198,). Dynamic (ompaction for 9ighway (onstruction. +olume 1H Design L (onstruction Duidelines, #ederal 9ighway :dministration ;eport #90 :?;D-8,?111, Guly. 3u'as, ;.D., (1995). BDynamic (ompaction for %ransportation *ro!ects.B :/(A lllinois /ection. 3u'as, ;.D. and /eiler, C.9. (1995). BDynamic (ompaction -Angineering (onsiderationsB Drouting, /oil mprovement and Deosynthetics, :/(A Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication, Co.12, pp. 9=2-971. 3u'as, ;D. and /eiler, C.9 (199=). B/ettlement of Dynamically (ompacted Deposits.B +ertical and 9ori8ontal Deformations of #oundations and Am"an'ments, :/(A Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication Co.=2 3u'as, ;.D., and /che$nayder, (. (1995). B%he .se of Dynamic (ompaction to (onsolidate Cuclear 0aste.B Drouting, /oil mprovement and Deosynthetics, :/(A Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication 6o 12, pp. 1111-1151 3u'as, ;.D., and /che$nayder, (. (1995). BDynamic (ompaction of Cuclear 0aste.B (ivil Angineering, :/(A, +ol. ,5, Co.1, pp ,=-,7, )arch 1995. 3u'as, ;.D, and /che$nayder, (. (1991). BCuclear 0aste Densification "y Dynamic (ompaction.B ./A*: (onference on Design and (onstruction ssues at 9a8ardous 0aste /ites, Dallas, pp. 1185-M=28, )ay, 1991. 3u'as, ;.D., and /che$nayder, (. (1992). BDynamic (ompaction of Cuclear 0aste Deposits. B /ta"ili8ation and /olidification of 9a8ardous, ;adioactive and )i$ed 0astes, :/%) /%* 1151, :merican /ociety for %esting and )aterials, *hiladelphia, *:, pp. ==2-==7.

3u'as, ;D, and /tein"erg, /- (198=) BDensifying a 3andfill for (ommercial Development.B *roceedings of the nternational (onference on (ase 9istories in Deotechnical Angineering, .niversityof)issouri-;olla, +ol 1, pp. 11971199. 3uongo, +., (1991). BDynamic (ompaction. *redicting Depth of mprovement.B Drouting, /oil mprovement, and DeosyG>thetics, :/(A Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication 12. 3utenegger, :G. (198,) BDynamic (ompacticn in #ria"le 3oess.B Gournal of Deotechnical Angineering, :/(A, +ol115, Co.,, pp. ,,1-,,7. )arinescu, <., (198,). B)odified )ethod for ntensive Dynamic (ompaction of0ea' /oilsB /oi )echanics and #oundation Angineering, +ol51,Co. 5, pp. 71-78, -ucharest, ;omania, )arch-:pril198, )ayne, *.0., Gones, G./ and Dumas, G.(. (1984N) BDround ;esponse to Dynamic (ompaction.B Gournal of Deotechnical A.1gineering, :/(A, +oll12, Co.,, pp 777-77=. )ayne, *.0. (1987). BDround +i"rations During Dynamic (ompaction.B +i"ration *ro"lems in Deotechnical Angineering, *roceedings, :/(A (onvention, Detroit, :/(A, pp. 5=7-5,7. )enard, 3. (1977). B%heoretical and *ractical :spects of Dynamic (onsolidation.BDeotechni&ue, +ol. 57, Co.1, pp. 1-17. )itchell, G.<., and Ooltan, +./. (198=). B%ime-Dependent /trength Dain in #reshly Deposited or Densified /oil. B Gournal of Deotechnical Angineering, :/(A,+ol. 112, Co.11 , pp. 1779-177,. )itchell, G.<., and 0elsh, G.*. (1989). B/oil mprovement "y (om"ining )ethods.B*roceedings of the 15th nternational (onference on /oil )echanics and #oundation Angineering, ;io De Ganeiro, pp. 1191119,. *oran, (.G., 9eh, <./., and ;odrigue8, G.:. (1995) B: Cew %echni&ue for Juality (ontrol of Dynamic (ompaction. B Drouting, /oil mprovement and Deosynthetics, :/(A Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication Co 12, pp. 917-95, *oran, (.G., and ;odrigue8, G.:. (1995). BDesign ofDynamic (ompaction.B (anadian Deotechnical Gournal, +ol. 59, pp. 79,-825. ;ec'ard, ).<., (198,). BDynamic (ompaction of ;oadways,B /tate of :las'a Department of %ransportation and *u"lic #acilities, ;eport #90:-:<-;D-87 27, #air"an's, :< ;ollins, <.)., and ;ogers, D.0., (1991). B/ta"ili8ation of (ollapsi"le :lluvial /oil .sing Dynamic (ompaction.B Deotechnical Angineering (ongress 1991,Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication Co.57 , :/(A, Cew Eor', CE. ;ollins, <.)., and ;ogers, D.0. (199=). B)itigation )easures for /mall /tructures on (ollapsi"le :lluvial /oils. B Gournal of Deotechnical Angineering, :/(A, +ol. 152, Co 9, pp. 1711-1771. ;ollins, <.)., Gorgenson, /.G. and ;oss, %. (199=) B@ptimum )oisture (ontent Avaluation for Dynamic (ompaction of (ollapsi"le /oil. B, tth nt . (ongress, nt . :ssoc. of Angr. Deology, 3is"on, *ortugal. /chmertmann, G., -a'er, 0., Dupta, ;, and <essler, < (198,). B(*%?D)% J( of Dround )odification at a *ower *lant.B .se of n /itu %ests in Deotechnical Angineering, :/(A Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication Co.,, -lac's"urg + :, pp. 987-1221. /is'ind, D.A. et al, (1982). /tructure ;esponse and Damage *roduced "y Dround +i"rations #rom /urface )ine -lasting, -ureau of )ines, Department of nvestigation, ; 8727 /'aggs, ;.3. (1987). Dynamic (ompactionH : ;eview 0ith ;ecent (ase /tudies in the /an Goa&uin +alley, /u"mitted for )./. %hesis, .niversity of (alifornia, Davis, #e"ruary 1987. /locom"e, -( (1991) BDynamic (ompaction,B (hapter 5 of Dround mprovement, (;( *ress, nc., -oca ;aton, #3. /mits, G.9. (1989) BA!ect of Dynamic (ompaction on Dry Dranular /oils.B *roceedings of the 15th nternational (onference on /oil )echanics and #oundation Angineering, ;io De Ganeiro, -ra8il. /nethen, D.;. and 9oman, ).9. (1991). BDynamic (ompaction *rogram at Dilgrest A$pressway, %ulsa, @<.B Deep #oundations mprovements, :/%) /%* 1289, :merican /ociety for %esting and )aterials, *hiladelphia, 1991. +on %hun, G.3. (1988). B*reliminary ;esults ofDynamic (ompaction /tage and /tage %reatment of Gac'son 3a'e Dam #oundatioJB ./ (oldCews, Denver, (@. 0elsh, G.*., Aditor. (1987). /oil mprovement -: %en-Eear .pdate, :/(A Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication Co.15, :pri11987. 0elsh, G.*. (1988). mprovement of9ydraulic #ills "y Dround)odification, 9ydraulic #ill /tructures /pecialty (onference, D% Dv?:/(A, #ort (ollins, (@, pp. ,,1-,77. 0elsh, G.*. (198,). B n /itu %esting #or Dround )odification %echni&ues.B .se of n /itu %ests in Deotechnical Angineering, :/(A Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication Co.,, -lac's"urg, +:, pp. 155-117. ;A#A;AC(A/ ::/9%@-:D(-:;%-: Goint (ommittee. (1992). /u"committee on Cew 9ighway )aterials, %as' #orce 57

;eport, n-/itu /oil mprovement %echni&ues, pp. 71-17=. -ayu', :.:., and 0al'er, :.D. (199=). BDynamic (ompaction. %wo (ase 9istories .tili8ing nnovative %echni&ues.B n-/itu Deep /oil mprovement, :/(A Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication Co.=7. -orden, ;. 9., 9olt8, ; D. and Guran, ., Aditors. (1995). Drouting, /oil mprovement and Deosynthetics. :/(A Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication Co.12, 1=88 pp. Davis, /. (199,) <leinfelder, nc. ;eport on Dynamic (ompaction *rogram at ;iverview :partments, /alt 3a'e (ity, .%. Dise, <., /tevens, ).D., and +on %hun, G.3. (199=). BDynamic (ompaction to ;emediate 3i&uefia"le Am"an'ment #oundation /oils.B n-/itu Deep /oil mprovement, :/(A Deotecllllical /pecial *u"lication Co.=7, pp. 1-57. Drumheller, G.(. (198,). Deo/ystems, nc. ;eport to (orps of Angineers, Dynamic (ompaction *rogram at )adigan :rmy 9ospital, #t. 3ewis, 0 :. Drumheller, G.(. (1989). Deo/ystems, nc. ;eport to DeoAngineers, Dynamic (ompaction *rogram at Cis&ually #ish 9atchery, *ierce (ounty, 0 : Drumheller, G.(. (1995). BDynamic (ompaction and 9ighway (onstruction, (ase 9istories?/ummaries of Dynamic (ompaction *ro!ects for 9ighway (onstruction in the ../. 1972-1991.B %ransportation ;esearch -oaraH #e"ruary. Drumheller, G.(. (1997). Densification, nc. ;eport to Deo%esting A$press, Dynamic (ompaction *rogram at 9udson, ): 3andfill. Drumheller, G.(. (1997). *ersonal (ommunicatioJ Drumheller, G.(. and /haffer, ;.:. (199,). Densification, nc. ;eport to D)A Angineering, Dynamic (ompaction at %he Juarry ;etail (enter, )inneapolis, )C. Drumheller, G.(. and /haffer, ;.:. (199,). Densification, nc. /ummary ;eport to ;AD Angineering, Dynamic (ompaction *rogram at *rovo, .% :irport *erimeter Di'e. Drumheller, G.(. and /haffer, ;.:. (1997). BDynamic (ompaction to ;emediate (oal /poil.B %his +olume. 9ryciw, ;. D., Aditor. (1997) /oil mprovementfor Aarth&ua'e 9a8ard)itigation. :/(A Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication Co =9, 175 pp. <aldveer and :ssociates. (1978). Avaluation ofDynamic (onsolidation %est /ection, /anta (ru8 (ounty, (: Detention #acility. 3u'as, ;.D., (1997). BDynamic (ompactioJB #90: Deotechnical Angineering (ircular Co. 1, #90:;eportCo. #90:-/:-97-217, 127 pages. 3u'as, ;.D., (1997). BDelayed /oil mprovement :fter Dynamic (ompactioJB %his+olume. )itchell, G.<. and 0ent8, #.G. (1991) B*erformance of mproved Dround During the 3oma *rieta Aarth&ua'eB .niversity of (alifornia Aarth&ua'e Angineering ;esearch (enter ;eport Co. .(-?AA;(- 91?15. ;ollins, <.).,Aditor. (199=). n-/itu Deep /oil mprovement, :/(A Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication Co.=7, :tlanta, @cto"er, 199= ;ollins, <.). and <im, G.9. (199=). B../. A$perience 0ith Dynamic (ompaction of (ollapsi"lc /oils.B n-/itu Deep /oil mprovement, :/(A Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication Co.=7, pp. 5,-=1. /chmertmann, G. 9. (1991).B%he )echanical :ging of /oils.B Gournal of Deotechnical Angineering, :/(A, +o1117, Co.9, pp. 1588-1112. /tevens, ).D, :llen, ).D. and #arrar, G.:. (1991). B(onstruction and +erification of Dround mprovements at )ormon sland :u$iliary DamB Deotechnical *ractice in Dam ;eha"ilitation, :/(A Deotechnical /pecial *u"lication Co.71.