Comparative Analysis of Dynamic Methods for Earthwork Controlling

@inproceedings{35222,
   author = {Vlcek, Jozef and Vondráčková, Terezie and Plachý, Jan and Nývlt, Vladimír and Kučerka, Daniel},
   address = {Netherlands},
   booktitle = {World Multidisciplinary Civil Engineering-Architecture-Urban Planning Symposium 2016 (WMCAUS 2016)},
   editor = {M. Drusa, I. Yilmaz, M. Marschalko, E. Coisson, A. Segalini},
   keywords = {Clegg Impact Soil Tester; compaction; correlation; lightweight deflectometer; Humboldt GeoGauge},
   howpublished = {tištěná verze "print"},
   language = {eng},
   location = {Netherlands},
   isbn = {978-80-86277-83-7},
   pages = {483-488},
   publisher = {Elsevier Ltd.},
   title = {Comparative Analysis of Dynamic Methods for Earthwork Controlling},
   year = {2016}
}

TY  - JOUR
ID  - 35222
AU  - Vlcek, Jozef - Vondráčková, Terezie - Plachý, Jan - Nývlt, Vladimír - Kučerka, Daniel
PY  - 2016
TI  - Comparative Analysis of Dynamic Methods for Earthwork Controlling
PB  - Elsevier Ltd.
CY  - Netherlands
SN  - 9788086277837
KW  - Clegg Impact Soil Tester
KW  - compaction
KW  - correlation
KW  - lightweight deflectometer
KW  - Humboldt GeoGauge
N2  - Dynamic methods are adopted in numerous civil engineering sections. Especially evaluation of the earthwork quality can be speed up using these methods. The results of the parallel measurements of selected testing devices for determining the quality of soil compaction were used for comparative analysis. The correlations between values obtained from various apparatuses were derived to evaluate the usability of the devices for tested type of soil. Test field represented soft subsoil of the road embankment consisted from low plasticity clay. Correlations show that examined apparatuses are suitable for examination of compaction level of fine-grained soils with consideration of limit conditions of used equipment. Applied methods are quick and results can be obtained immediately after measurement, and the methods are thus suitable in cases when construction works have to be performed in a short period of time. Generally, both Humboldt GeoGauge™ and Clegg Impact Soil Tester can substitute the LDD test in terms of the earthworks assessment, however, limit conditions of apparatuses given by the manufacturers need to be taken into account to achieve results with a required accuracy. Mentioned methods are based on the dynamic effect of the testing equipment on the soil layer, so results have to be interpreted carefully considering the type and physical state of tested soil. © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Peer-review under responsibility of organizing committee of the World Multidisciplinary Civil Engineering-Architecture-Urban Planning Symposium – (WMCAUS 2016)
ER  - 

VLCEK, Jozef, Terezie VONDRÁČKOVÁ, Jan PLACHÝ, Vladimír NÝVLT and Daniel KUČERKA. Comparative Analysis of Dynamic Methods for Earthwork Controlling. In M. Drusa, I. Yilmaz, M. Marschalko, E. Coisson, A. Segalini. \textit{World Multidisciplinary Civil Engineering-Architecture-Urban Planning Symposium 2016 (WMCAUS 2016)}. Netherlands: Elsevier Ltd., 2016, p.~483-488. ISBN~978-80-86277-83-7.