Influencing Factors and Prediction Model for the Antierosion Performance of Cement-Improved Loess Compacted Using Different Compaction Methods

Table 5

Results of ERT and UCS of CIL.

Compaction method	Compaction coefficient	Cement content (%)	UCS (28 d) (MPa)	CEML of CIL (g) under the following eroding time (min)						P (%)	Vt (g/min)
				5	10	15	20	25	30
VVCM	0.92	2	1.13	35.5	57.7	88.6	125.9	162.8	204.3	12.6	6.8
		3	1.47	27.5	53.8	74.5	100.6	132.8	168.6	10.4	5.6
		4	1.62	24.8	44.8	62.5	88.6	111.6	134.5	8.2	4.5
		6	2.29	20.8	34.9	52.2	70.5	82.1	96.4	5.8	3.2
	0.95	2	1.53	22.7	41.1	61.6	81.5	108.4	134.3	8.3	4.5
		3	1.82	18.4	34.4	49.3	69.2	89.1	107.1	6.6	3.6
		4	2.22	14.7	28.7	39.1	54.7	67.0	77.3	4.7	2.6
		6	2.68	10.8	17.2	26.5	36.3	43.5	50.3	3.0	1.7
	0.97	2	2.00	16.7	27.4	44.0	58.7	76.9	100.2	6.1	3.3
		3	2.46	12.6	23.3	31.2	47.2	59.7	69.8	4.2	2.3
		4	2.74	8.7	16.5	22.6	31.5	38.8	45.8	2.7	1.5
		6	3.39	6.0	10.0	15.2	20.8	24.4	31.9	1.9	1.1
QSCM	0.92	2	1.03	38.3	65.2	101.9	137.2	175.8	222.7	14.0	7.4
		3	1.30	31.1	60.3	81.2	115.7	150.1	182.1	11.4	6.1
		4	1.49	27.0	51.1	71.9	99.2	122.8	148.0	9.2	4.9
		6	2.03	22.9	38.0	59.0	76.8	91.1	107.2	6.6	3.6
	0.95	2	1.34	27.9	48.1	74.5	100.2	127.9	162.5	9.9	5.4
		3	1.60	21.9	41.6	57.2	82.4	106.9	126.4	7.6	4.2
		4	1.90	17.4	33.6	46.9	63.4	79.1	94.7	5.7	3.2
		6	2.44	12.6	21.2	32.6	42.5	51.3	61.0	3.6	2.0
	0.97	2	1.65	20.9	35.6	56.3	74.6	95.3	124.3	7.4	4.1
		3	2.03	15.7	30.3	40.6	58.5	76.4	90.7	5.4	3.0
		4	2.26	11.0	20.8	28.7	39.1	48.5	57.4	3.4	1.9
		6	2.80	7.5	12.8	19.2	26.0	31.2	38.9	2.3	1.3